exclusionary discipline practices in kentucky and texas

EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE PRACTICES IN KENTUCKY AND TEXAS

William Calderhead (wcalderhead@murraystate.edu)

Eric Umstead (eumstead@murraystate.edu)

C. Michael Nelson (cpdmiken@email.uky.edu)

Overrepresentation of minority youths in juvenile justice statistics

African-American students more likely to be identified w/ MR or EBD

African-American students are 2 – 3 times more likely to be suspended or expelled

Students of color more likely to drop out of school

Overrepresentation of persons of color in correctional system

PBIS changes school culture

Nelson, C. M., Leone, P. E., & Rutherford, R. B. (2004). Youth delinquency: Prevention and intervention. In R. B. Rutherford, M. M. Quinn, & S. R. Mathur (Eds.), Handbook of research in emotional and behavioral disorders (pp. 282-301). New York: Guilford.

KY Safe Schools Data Project

• Defines exclusionary discipline as consequence of “offending”

• Offenders’ violations resulted in one of the following• Suspension • Corporal punishment • Expulsion with services• Expulsion without services

Quantifying the discipline gap

Proportionate representation◦(% of students offending) – (% of students enrolled) = 0

Under-representation:◦(% of students offending) – (% of students enrolled) = -X

Over-representation:◦(% of students offending) – (% of students enrolled) = +X

Kentucky’s Discipline Gap

How can PBIS change disproportionate exclusionary discipline?• Students are not born with “bad” behaviors• Students do not learn when faced with contingent

aversive consequences• Teachers/administrators need to be proactive

rather than reactive.• Positively reinforce occurrences of appropriate

behavior• Teach appropriate behavior directly, giving

positive feedback

Emphasis on Prevention

• Primary• Reduce new cases of problem behavior.

• Secondary• Reduce current cases of problem behavior.

• Tertiary• Reduce complications, intensity, severity of current cases.

Primary Prevention:School-/Classroom-Wide Systems for

All Students,Staff, & Settings

Secondary Prevention:Specialized Group

Systems for Students with At-Risk Behavior

Tertiary Prevention:Specialized

IndividualizedSystems for Students

with High-Risk Behavior

~80% of Students

~15%

~5%

CONTINUUM OFSCHOOL-WIDE

INSTRUCTIONAL & POSITIVE BEHAVIOR

SUPPORT

PBS shrinks disproportionality

• Analyze discipline referral data disaggregated by race• Make teachers more culturally responsive by

emphasizing “contextual fit”• Promote social development of pre-adolescent and

adolescent youth• Maximize opportunities for academic success• Prevent development and occurrence of problem

behavior

KY Safe Schools Data Project (Mike Waford, Kentucky Center for Instructional Discipline)

KY Safe Schools Data Project (Mike Waford, Kentucky Center for Instructional Discipline)

Discipline Gap in Texas• Longitudinal study using data for all students (~ 1 million)

beginning 7th grade in 2000, 2001, 2002• Nearly 6 out of 10 students were suspended or expelled at

least once between 7th and 12th grade• Multivariate analyses revealed that African-American

students were 31% more likely to undergo school discretionary action (in- or out-of-school suspension or expulsion) compared to otherwise identical white and Hispanic students

• Almost 75% of students w/ IEPs were suspended or expelled at least once (especially students coded as EBD)

Exclusion implies juvenile justice involvement• > 1 out of 7 students was in contact w/ juvenile justice

system at least once between 7th and 12th grade• Almost 50% of students disciplined 11 or more times were

in contact w/ juvenile justice system • Controlling for school and individual factors, a student who

was suspended or expelled was 3 times as likely to be in contact w/ juvenile justice system the following year

(Fabelo, T., Thompson, M. D., Plotkin, M., Carmichael, D., Marchbanks, M. P., & Booth, E. A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. New York: Council of State Governments Justice Center.)

Discussion• PBIS appears to have an impact on suspension

• But disparities continue to exist• Why?

• Nobody looks at the data (at least not often)• No accountability (should there be?)• Political climate in US won’t support addressing needs of marginalized citizens