This isn't "No Tolerance." It's More Like " Mo Ignorance!"

Half of Texas' Students Suspended, Study Finds

By Nirvi Shah

 Edited by I, Praetorian; MA, PPS, PVC, ATM

Using discipline records of nearly 1 million Texas middle and high school students that cover much of the last decade, researchers found that more than half of them were suspended or expelled at least once between 7th and 12th grades, that the punishments were applied unevenly among students of different races, abilities, and schools, and that students disciplined with these methods were more likely to repeat a grade or drop out of school than students who were not punished in the same way.

The study, unveiled Tuesday by the Council of State Governments Justice Center in Bethesda, Md., and the Public Policy Research Institute at Texas A&M University, involved the discipline and criminal records of all Texas students who were 7th graders in 2000, 2001, and 2002, and tracked all of them through one year past the date when they would have graduated with their original class.

In the study, “Breaking Schools’ Rules: A Statewide Study of How School Discipline Relates to Students’ Success and Juvenile Justice Involvement,” researchers found that of the half a million times students were suspended or expelled, only 3 percent of those suspensions or expulsions were for behavior Texas law requires be punished that way. The rest were at the discretion of school officials.

A newly released report casts doubt on whether increased suspensions and expulsions are getting the right results in Texas public schools.

Although the study involved just one state, the authors argue that it has implications for the rest of the country because Texas has the second-largest public school system in the country and one where almost two-thirds of students are nonwhite.

The goal of the study was to prompt policymakers everywhere to look closely at school discipline.

“We hope other states will follow Texas’ lead and put their systems under similar scrutiny,” said Michael D. Thompson, director of the nonpartisan, nonprofit Justice Center. He raised a key question he said state education leaders should ask themselves: “Is our state’s school discipline system getting the desired results?”

The study found that the average number of days on which students missed at least some class time due to a disciplinary incident was two days for out-of-school suspension, 27 days for a placement at an alternative school, and 73 days if they were placed in a juvenile justice program.

While the numbers gleaned from analyzing student discipline in Texas may be shocking, the state’s rate of expulsions and out-of-school suspensions, at 6.9 percent, is lower than that of some other states, including California, at about 13 percent, and Florida, at about 9 percent.

Repeat Offenders

One statistic uncovered by the analysis of Texas discipline and juvenile justice records was that 15 percent of students were punished by suspension or expulsion 11 or more times. Those repeat actions make the effectiveness of those types of punishments questionable, Mr. Thompson said.

“Seeing how common it is for students to be suspended or expelled ... we probably can do better,” Mr. Thompson said. Also, the study raises concerns about how nearly half the students disciplined 11 or more times also were in contact with the Texas juvenile justice system, raising the specter of the so-called “school-to-prison” pipeline.

In addition, at schools within Texas with similar demographics, the use of the punishments varied widely, “indicating, I think, that it’s possible by relying less on suspensions and expulsions to reduce juvenile justice involvement and improve academic performance,” he said.

The Texas Education Agency, which helped the researchers match students’ school discipline and juvenile justice records, said the report highlighted some important weaknesses in Texas schools.

“It can be painful to look at numbers that aren’t flattering,” said Suzanne Marchman, a spokeswoman for the agency. But whether the report triggers individual schools to look at their discipline systems or drive policy at the legislative level is an open question. “No one wants a drop out,” Ms. Marchman said. “It brings up that dialogue: How can we address this issue at hand?”

In particular, if students’ punishment entails being sent to an alternative setting or juvenile justice setting, school districts need to be sure the teaching at those schools is high quality, she said.

“School districts need to take a closer look at the level of instruction that’s taking place at these alternative settings when [students are] punished so when [students] are released back to districts they’re not behind academically and they’re not frustrated,” she said, triggering a cycle of misbehavior that sends a student back to one of those alternate settings.

However, the agency also wanted to offer one cautionary note about interpreting the study.

“It gives the impression that 60 percent of the students in Texas are criminals or badly behaved,” Ms. Marchman said. But because of discrepancies in how punishment is administered between schools and districts, some students might be suspended for an infraction such as wearing flip flops or tank tops on the first offense while another school might give students several chances first.

In recent years, Texas has taken steps to address the way students are disciplined, and the report’s authors said lawmakers and Gov. Rick Perry were supportive of their work. The Texas Legislative Budget Board recently examined six school districts’ disciplinary practices, and the Texas legislature has changed some state laws pertaining to punishing students. For example, “persistent misbehavior” is no longer a reason for expulsion; school districts are now required to consider mitigating factors such as self-defense and a student’s disability before making a disciplinary decision; and the state education department had to create minimum standards for the disciplinary alternative education programs students are required to attend.

At the same time, other behavior violations have been added to the list of things for which school districts must or can punish students, including sexting and bullying.

Also recently, the state has begun offering training to districts interested in learning about positive discipline methods, and a pilot program this year is using statewide data to document student achievement and measure the effectiveness of specific professional development programs and activities.

Discipline Disparities Some groups of students were more vulnerable to suspension or expulsion than others, the study found. For example, 75 percent of African-American students were expelled or suspended, compared to 50 percent of white students. Also, 75 percent of students with disabilities were suspended or expelled, compared with 55 percent of students without a disability. Students classified as having an emotional disturbance were more likely to be suspended or expelled, while students with autism or mental retardation were less likely than students without disabilities to be punished the same way.

The report didn’t make specific policy recommendations, but noted the gradual toughening of school discipline policies nationwide, triggered in part by a spate of school shootings in the 1990s. The 1994 Gun-Free Schools Act requires schools that accept federal money to expel students for one year if they bring a weapon to school. A few years later, many school districts started adopting zero-tolerance discipline policies toward drugs, alcohol, and violent behavior. Some 79 percent of schools had these policies in place by 1997. While expulsion for some students means attending an alternative school, as it does in Texas, in some states, students are simply out of school altogether as they serve their punishment term.

An American Psychological Association study in 2006 found that zero-tolerance policies may negatively affect academic outcomes and increase the chances of a student dropping out. While Mr. Thompson said the Texas study isn’t strictly focused on the zero-tolerance discipline, that practice is part of a larger discussion about student discipline policy. “We look forward to launching a national project to identify policy strategies ... to get better outcomes for these kids,” he said.

Vol. 30, Issue 37

School reform won’t help all (Most) struggling students. Though some will succeed, others will continue to fail.

Demonizing teachers for the failures of these students is both easy though misguided and counterproductive in that it misses the target for students with no support from home...
It appears that a  philosophical backlash is gaining momentum, as important empirical evidence and some insightful truths have begun to emerge on the national educational frontline. One of these truths, as AFT President Randi Weingarten noted in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, is that the evidence shows that the market-based reforms, which are so much in vogue today, have not delivered. While self-described education reformers may suggest that we double down on these reforms—such as creating more charter schools, implementing voucher programs, using student test scores to evaluate and compensate teachers, and relying more and more on corporate executives and business practices to run school districts—Weingarten suggests a different path, a path taken by the world’s most successful education systems:

These countries focus on developing great teachers and giving them the autonomy to hone their craft. There is an ethos of working together to continuously improve. They de-emphasize excessive standardized tests and test prep, and each has a well-rounded curriculum that engages students in gaining knowledge by developing critical thinking and problem-solving skills—not by rote memorization. These countries provide a more equitable education for all students, and they offset the effects of poverty through on-site wraparound services such as medical and dental care and counseling.

Another truth is that demonizing teachers is not a good starting point for a school improvement plan. As Dave Eggers and Nínive Clements Calegari write in the New York Times, “No one contemplates blaming the men and women fighting every day in the trenches for little pay and scant recognition. And yet in education we do just that.” The disrespect for teachers extends to salaries, which have declined in real terms over the past 30 years. Today, 62 percent of teachers work a second job, and 46 percent quit before their fifth year. The high turnover rates cost school systems more than $7 billion annually. As Eggers and Calegari write, “There is no silver bullet that will fix every last school in America, but until we solve the problem of teacher turnover, we don’t have a chance.”

All the best evidence shows that leading countries like Finland, Singapore and South Korea respect and revere their teachers. They support and mentor them, and give them the tools and conditions they need to do their jobs. While we are celebrating Teacher Appreciation Week, we should pay close attention to how these nations develop, support and respect their teachers.

It’s also true that teachers’ experience and class size matter. That’s the case in an Orlando, Fla., school highlighted by the New York Times’ Michael Winerip, who focuses on three sisters who live at a homeless shelter and get a terrific education at Fern Creek Elementary School. The school, where 20 percent of the students are homeless, has received an A on the state report card for each of the past five years. The principal credits experienced teachers, small class sizes and strong discipline.

Finally, a piece by Joe Nocera in the New York Times, titled “The Limits of School Reform,” points out some important truths. Nocera revisits a New York Times Magazine article about M.S. 223, a school in the South Bronx whose principal and teachers struggle valiantly to educate homeless children. Sometimes successful, sometimes not, the school offers a lesson for would-be school reformers, Nocera believes:

What needs to be acknowledged, however, is that school reform won’t fix everything. Though some poor students will succeed, others will fail. Demonizing teachers for the failures of poor students, and pretending that reforming the schools is all that is needed, as the reformers tend to do, is both misguided and counterproductive. Over the long term, fixing our schools is going to involve a lot more than, well, just fixing our schools.

The bottom line: Evidence does matter. It should guide us as we seek to transform schools and improve student learning—and it shouldn’t be ignored.