This document discusses the school-to-prison pipeline and the need to reform exclusionary school discipline policies. It notes that suspensions are commonly given for subjective infractions rather than safety issues. Exclusionary discipline disproportionately impacts students of color and low-income students. It also finds that suspended students rarely receive education services and that suspension rates vary significantly between districts with similar demographics. The document advocates for alternative discipline approaches to improve outcomes for students and close the school-to-prison pipeline.

1. TRANSFORMING SCHOOL DISCIPLINE –
CLOSING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON PIPELINE
May 9th 2013

2. Working to improve
public education
in Washington State
from cradle to career
with ample, equitable,
and stable funding

3. WHY WE KICK KIDS OUT
• nail file
• chicken finger
• candy cane
• butter knife
• blow-up doll
• sexy teacher
• pop-tart
• ―disruption‖

4. WHY SCHOOL DISCIPLINE
POLICIES?• The problem is pervasive
– In 2009-2010, across the nation 1 in 9 students were
suspended from school at least once.
– In Washington, 1 in 4 students will not graduate high
school within 4 years of starting.
• Suspension is detrimental to academic success
– Just one suspension freshman year showed a rate of
drop out 2 times higher than those who were not.
– Of all males in state and federal prison, 68% do not
have a high school diploma.
(Data from the Council of State Governments Justice
Center and American Psychological Association)

5. WHY SCHOOL DISCIPLINE
POLICIES?• Suspensions don’t work
– No evidence to suggest suspensions/expulsions
prevent misbehavior.
– Studies show the opposite effect – schools with high
discipline rates have higher drop-out rates.
• Its about equity
– Washington is 1 of 9 states with a persistent
achievement/opportunity gap.
– Exclusionary discipline policies disproportionately
impact students of color, low-income students, and
students with disabilities.
• The data varies with geography—students with disabilities
have the highest rates of disproportionality

6. Widespread cultural and political shift since the
1970’s
Mass incarceration, the ―war on drugs‖
Federal Guns-Free Schools Act in 1994
By 1997: 87% of schools adopted zero-tolerance
for alcohol and 79% had mandatory suspensions
for use of tobacco
Under-resourced schools feel they don’t have the
tools to address behavior problems (i.e. cyber
bullying)
Goal is to create safe schools and objective discipline
policies – but ―safety‖ is not a universal feeling
HOW WE GOT HERE

7. written and unwritten practices that facilitate student drop-
out
Explicit – Policies
• Increase in police presence
on campus
• Policies that mandate
schools engage with the
criminal/juvenile justice
system
• Inappropriate punishments
for age-level of rule breaker
• Indefinite punishments
• No clear path back to
reenrollment
Implicit – School culture
• Increased ―security:‖ video
cameras, metal detectors,
police dogs, restraints
• Zero-tolerance mentality
• Punishments are void of
resolution or meaning to
offender and offended
• Core belief that some kids
are and will always be a
―problem‖
• ―I don’t care where you go
but you can’t stay here…‖
DEFINING THE SCHOOL TO PRISON
PIPELINE

8. WORDS MATTER, PERSPECTIVE
MATTERS
Subjective:
defiance
disrespect
disruption
harassment
tardiness
dress code
Objective:
fighting
weapons
drug use
drug distribution
stealing
vandalism
Despite the aim of objectivity, we see inequities in who gets disciplined,
especially in the examples on the left.
1bi·as noun ˈbī-əs b : an inclination of temperament or outlook;
especially : a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment

9. In one school year, just 5 percent of
suspensions were given due to safety-related
rule offenses.
The other 95 percent of suspensions were for
subjective infractions like disruption and
tardiness.
SUSPENSION HAS BECOME COMMONPLACE

10. A QUIZ ON DISCIPLINE
• How many individual students were suspended last
year in Washington state?
• What percentage of students expelled last year were
Latino?
• How many total days did students spend outside of
class due to suspensions/expulsions?

11. Reclaiming
Students
The Educational And
Economic Costs Of
Exclusionary Discipline
A joint report by
TeamChild and
Washington
Appleseed

12. FINDING ONE
• Exclusionary discipline negatively
impacted academic success and a
student’s relationship with the educational
system
– Higher discipline rates were associated with
higher drop out rates.
– Significant loss of instructional time.

13. FINDING TWO
• The vast majority of disciplined students
did not receive educational services for
the duration of their exclusion.
– Only 7% of students were reported to have
received educational services while excluded
from school.

14. FINDING THREE
• Exclusionary discipline practices
disproportionately impacted students of
color and youth living in poverty.
– More students of color and low income
students were excluded from school.
– Students of color and low income students
were also less likely to receive educational
services during periods of disciplinary
exclusion.

15. FINDING FOUR
• Reliance on exclusionary discipline
practices varied significantly from district
to district, even among districts with
similar demographic characteristics.

16. FINDING FIVE
• Discipline data yielded only a partial
picture of the number of students
impacted by exclusionary discipline
practices each year in Washington public
schools.
– Only 185 of the 295 school districts were able
to submit data for this report, despite that fact
that it is required by law to share this
information with the public

17. WASHINGTON STATE POLICY
• Definitions for minimum length of punishment
– short term suspension is 0-10 days
– long term suspension is 10 or more days
– expulsion lasts indefinitely
• 9 Behavior Codes: Bullying, Tobacco, Alcohol,
Illicit Drug, Fighting without Major Injury, Violence
without Major Injury, Violence with Major Injury,
Possession of Weapon and Other
• Federal guidelines require expulsions for use of
weapons and other safety-related rule infractions

18. LOCAL DISTRICTS
• All 295 districts have:
– authority to establish additional rule
infractions/behavior codes
– flexibility on minimum and maximum number of days
students spend out of school
– Different mechanisms to record/report/analyze data
– Ability to choose prevention/intervention programs
that work best for their student population
• Variation can be a double-edged sword
– classrooms, school buildings, and districts all have
different perceptions
• Many local districts are ahead of the state in
addressing discipline issues

19. students, teachers,
principals, parents,
mentors
(millions)
classrooms, school
buildings, community
organizations
(thousands)
school districts,
state legislature,
funding
(hundreds)
HOW WE MAKE CHANGE
INDIVIDUALS
COMMUNITIE
S
INSTITUTIONS

20. QUESTIONS?