High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or...
Transcript of High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or...
![Page 1: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Gail L. Sunderman Robert Croninger
The Maryland Equity ProjectDepartment of Teaching and Learning, Policy and Leadership
College of Education2311 Benjamin BuildingUniversity of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
October 2018
High Suspending Schools in Maryland: Where are They Located and Who Attends Them?
MARYLAND EQUITY PROJECTADVANCING EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
![Page 2: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
AbouttheMarylandEquityProjectTheMarylandEquityProjectseekstoimproveeducationthroughresearchthatsupportsaninformedpublicpolicydebateonthequalityanddistributionofeducationalopportunities.Itconducts,synthesizes,anddistributesresearchonkeyeducationalquestionsinMarylandandfacilitatescollaborationbetweenresearchersandpolicymakers.Copyright©2018TheMarylandEquityProject,UniversityofMaryland,CollegePark,MD.Thispublicationshouldbecitedas:Sunderman,G.L.&Croninger,R.(2017).HighsuspendingschoolsinMaryland:Wherearetheylocatedandwhoattendsthem?CollegePark,MD:MarylandEquityProject,TheUniversityofMaryland.
AdditionalcopiesofthisreportmaybeobtainedfromourWebsiteat:www.mdequity.orgTheMarylandEquityProjectisaprograminTheDepartmentofTeachingandLearning,PolicyandLeadershipintheCollegeofEducationatTheUniversityofMaryland.
![Page 3: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
1|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
TableofContents
ExecutiveSummary……………………………………………………………………………………….……2
Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………………………….…...3
HighSuspendingSchoolsinMaryland………………………………………………………….………4
School-LevelPredictorsofSuspension…………………………………………………..…….5
Methodology………………………………………………………………………………………….…...6
WhoGetsSuspendedinMarylandPublicSchools?…..……………………...….….…….9
SchoolswithMultipleSuspensions……………………………………………………………12
CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingSchools……………………………….………………14
ConclusionandRecommendations…………………………………...……………………….16
MethodologicalNotes……………………………………………………………………………………….21
Appendix1:CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingElementarySchools…………………23
Appendix2:CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingSecondarySchool…….....……………26
References…………………………………...……………………………………………………………...…..29
![Page 4: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
2|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
ExecutiveSummaryThereare196publicschoolsinMarylandorabout14%thatouranalysisidentifiedas“highsuspending”—thatis,schoolsthatsuspend25%ormoreofatleastonesubgroupoftheirstudentenrollment.Theseschoolsarelocatedinbothruralandurbanareas,insmallandlargedistricts,andinallregionsofthestate.Whiletherearemoresecondaryschoolsthanelementaryschoolsthatsuspendstudentsacrossmultiplesubgroups,wefoundthatBlackstudentsandstudentswithdisabilitiesweredisproportionallysuspendedout-of-schoolacrossallschoollevels.Considerthemajorfindingsofthisreport:
• Closeto60%ofout-of-schoolsuspensions(OSS)areBlackstudents,eventhoughBlackstudentsmakeuponly35%ofpublicschoolenrollmentinMaryland.
• Studentswithdisabilitiesrepresent13%ofenrollmentinMarylandpublicschoolsbut25%ofout-of-schoolsuspensions.
• SchoolOSSratesforBlackstudentsaretwiceashighasOSSratesforWhitestudents.
• Thehighestschoolsuspensionrateisforstudentswithdisabilities,with
schoolssuspendingonaverage9.5%oftheirstudentswithdisabilities.
• SchoolswithhigherenrollmentsofBlackstudents,studentswithdisabilities,andlow-incomestudentsandlowerenrollmentsofWhite,AsianandHispanicstudentssuspendedmorestudentsacrossmultiplesubgroups.
• Highsuspendingschoolswerelesssuccessfulacademically,hadlower
graduationrates,lowerattendance,highermobility,andfewerexperiencedteachers.Inotherwords,thesewerestrugglingschoolsacrossmultipleindictors.
ThisreportshowsthatasubsetofschoolsdrivesthehighsuspensionratesinMaryland.Thehighrateofvariabilityacrossschools—anddistricts—suggeststhattheuseofdisciplinaryconsequencesisrelatedtocontextualvariablesthatgobeyondindividualstudentbehavior.Indeed,itappearsthatboththedistrictandschoolastudentattendsplayaroleinsuspensionrates.Thissuggeststhatdistrictswithlargenumbersofhighsuspendingschoolseitherhaveaculturewhereexclusionarydisciplineiscondonedorarenotprovidingtheleadership,resourcesandtrainingneededtopreventinappropriatebehavior.Thevariabilityinsuspensionsacrossschoolsprovidesevidencethatschoolscandothingsdifferently,butsomeschoolsmayneedmoresupportthantheyarecurrentlyreceiving.
![Page 5: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
3|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
AcknowledgementsTheauthorsaregratefulfortheassistanceandsupporttheyreceivedwhileresearchingandwritingthisreport.MathewHenryhelpedusconceptualizetheprojectandErinJanulisassistedwithconstructingthedatasetsweneededfortheanalysis.WewouldliketothankShilpaBista,PamelaCallahan,KaylaGood,CharlotteHealy,andCierraKahler-Jonesfortheirassistanceinformattingthetablesandfiguresandputtingthisreporttogether.PeterLeoneprovidedinvaluablefeedbackonthereport.WealsothankourcolleaguesattheMarylandEquityProjectfortheirsupportandinsightfulcommentsatvariousstagesofwritingthisreport.Finally,wegratefullyacknowledgethesupportoftheCollegeofEducationandtheDepartmentofTeachingandLearning,PolicyandLeadership.Nonetheless,theviewsandopinionsexpressedinthisreportaresolelythoseoftheauthors.
![Page 6: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
4|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
HighSuspendingSchoolsinMaryland:WhereareTheyLocatedandWhoAttendsThem?
Exclusionarydiscipline—theuseofsuspensionandexpulsiontoremovemisbehavingstudentsfromclassrooms—remainsacommonapproachtoschooldisciplineeventhoughthereisalackofevidenceontheeffectivenessofremovalasameansofreducingmisbehaviororimprovingthelearningenvironment(AmericanPsychologicalAssociationZeroToleranceTaskForce,2008;Skiba,Shure,&Williams,2012).Theuseofexclusionarydisciplinehasbeenlinkedtobothshort-andlong-termnegativeoutcomes,includingloweracademicperformanceattheschoolandindividuallevels,higherdropoutrates,andlowergraduationrates(Barrett,McEachin,Mills,&Valant,2017;Chu&Ready,2018;Fabeloetal.,2011;Gregory,Skiba,&Noguera,2010;Hwang,2018;Losen,2015;Losen&Skiba,2010;Morris&Perry,2016;Noltemeyer,Ward,&Mcloughlin,2015).Exclusionarydisciplinehasalsobeenassociatedwithincreasedriskofinvolvementwiththejusticesystem,bothasstudentsandasadults(Skiba,Arredondo,&Williams,2014;Wolf&Kupchik,2014).Marylandwasanearlyleaderintheoppositiontoexclusionarydiscipline,adoptingnewdisciplinaryguidelinesin2014thatincludedeffortstomakeexclusionarydisciplineatooloflastresort(MarylandStateDepartmentofEducation,2014).However,despitethestate’sefforttoreducetheuseofexclusionarydiscipline,disparitiespersist.WhileinitiallytheoverallsuspensionrateinMarylandfell1,disparities,particularlybetweenBlackandWhitestudents,increasedasschoolscontinuedtosuspendBlackstudentsatsignificantlyhigherratesthanotherstudents(Henry,2015).Eventhoughdisparitiesandthenegativeimpactsofexclusionarydisciplineonstudentsandschoolsarewelldocumented,thereislittleunderstandingofwhichschoolsinMarylandhavehighsuspensionrates,wheretheyarelocated,ortheextenttowhichtheyimpacttheeducationalopportunitiesofdiversestudents.Onereasonforthisisthatwedonothaveaclearunderstandingofwhatconstitutesahighsuspendingschool.Whiletherearewell-acceptedmethodsofcalculatingsuspensionratesanddisproportionality,therearedifferentguidelinesforidentifyinghighsuspendingschools.ComplicatingthepictureisthatdataonschooldisciplineinMaryland,whileavailableisnotwidelyreported.DisciplinedataisnotincludedontheMarylandReportCardandstatedisciplinereportsaredifficulttofindandinterpret.AsaresultthereisnoclearunderstandingoftheextentofthedisciplineprobleminMarylandpublicschools.Thisreportexaminesthecontinuingdisproportionalitiesinsuspensionratesbyidentifyingthecharacteristicsofschoolswithexceptionallyhighsuspensionrates.
1Thepercentofstudentssuspendedorexpelledfellin2014-15,butincreasedinsubsequentyears(MarylandStateDepartmentofEducation,2018).
![Page 7: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
5|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Tocalculatethenumberofhighsuspendingschools,wedefineanyschoolthatsuspends25%ormoreofstudentsinatleastoneofanymajorsubgroupashighsuspending(Losen,Hodson,KeithII,Morrison,&Belway,2015).2Weadoptedthisdefinitionofhighsuspendingschoolsbecauseitreflectsschoolpracticesandarticulatesathresholdthatweconsidertoohigh.Identifyingschoolswithhighsuspensionratescanhelpdistrictstargetsupportsandinterventionstoschoolsthatneedthemmost.
School-LevelPredictorsofSuspensionResearchershaveexaminedarangeoffactorsinseekinganswerstodisparitiesinsuspensionrates.Whilepresumedexplanationshavefocusedondifferencesinstudents’behavioracrossracial/ethnicandothersubgroupsofstudents,thereisvirtuallynosupportintheliteratureforthislineofthinking(Barrettetal.,2017;Skibaetal.,2012;Skiba&Williams,2014).Forexample,Barrettetal.foundthatBlackandpoorstudentsweredisciplinedmoreoftenandharshlythantheirpeersforthesameinfractions.Incontrast,thereissubstantialevidencethatdifferentialselectionattheclassroomlevelanddifferentialprocessingintheadministrationofconsequencescontributestodisparitiesinsuspensionrates(Barrettetal.,2017;Gregoryetal.,2010;Losen&Gillespie,2012;Skibaetal.,2011).Bothprocessespointtotheroleofdiscretionintheinterpretationofbehaviorandadministrationofconsequences.Relativelyfewstudieshavefocusedontheinfluenceofschool-levelcharacteristicsonOSS,althoughthehighrateofvariabilityintheuseofdisciplinaryconsequencesbyschoolssuggeststhatschoolcontextualcharacteristicscontributetosomeofthatvariabilityinsuspensionrates(Skiba,Chung,etal.,2014).ThepercentageofBlackstudentsenrolledinaschoolhasbeenfoundtobeastrongpredictoroftheuseofexclusionaryandpunitivediscipline(Sartainetal.,2015;Welch&Payne,2010).AndersonandRitter(2017)providedevidencethatracialdisparitiesindisciplinearedrivenbydifferencesacrossschoolsthatdifferentgroupsofstudentsattend.Specifically,schoolsservinglargerproportionsofnon-WhitestudentsadministeredlongerpunishmentsthanschoolsservingmostlyWhite,non-poorstudents,suggestingthatracialdisparitiesoccurduetodifferentdisciplinarypracticesusedinschoolsservingdifferentracialcompositionsofstudents(Anderson&Ritter,2017).Thecontributionofpovertytosuspensionratesisinconsistent,withsomestudiesfindingschoolpovertytobepredictorsofsuspensionparticularlyinpoorurbandistricts(Losen&Skiba,2010;Sartainetal.,2015),whileothersfindthatthecontributionofschool-levelpovertywasaninconsistentpredictorofexclusionarydiscipline(RaffaeleMendez,Knoff,&Feron,2002;Skiba,Chung,etal.,2014).
2Losenetal.used“anymajorracial/ethnicgroup”whileweincludedstudentswithdisabilitiesandEnglishlearnersaswell.Inaddition,Losenetal.definedhighsuspendingelementaryschoolsasschoolsthatsuspended10%ormoreofstudentsinanymajorracial/ethnicgroup.Weused25%.
![Page 8: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
6|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Anumberofotherschoollevelvariables,includingprincipals’attitudestowardsdisciplinaryapproaches,havebeenfoundtopredictthelikelihoodofsuspensionandexpulsion.Schoolswithaprincipalfavoringpreventiveapproachesarelesslikelytohavehighsuspensionrates(Skiba,Chung,etal.,2014).Schoolswithlowerattendancerates,pooracademicachievement,andhigherdropoutratestendtohavehighersuspensionrates(Christle,Jolivette,&Nelson,2007;Fabeloetal.,2011;T.Lee,Cornell,Gregory,&Fan,2011).Researchalsohasfoundarelationshipbetweenthestabilityoftheschoolenvironmentandsuspensions.Forexample,thepercentageofnewstaffinaschoolandstudentmobility,orchangingschoolsfrequentlyisassociatedwithhigherratesofschoolsuspension(RaffaeleMendezetal.,2002).Finally,theduplicatedsuspensionrate,thatismultiplesuspensionsforthesamestudent,isasignificantschool-levelpredictorofsuspensions,whichimpliesthatsomeschoolsaremorepunitiveinhowtheyrespondtostudentbehaviorthanothers(Theriot,Craun,&Dupper,2009).Notallschoolswiththesecharacteristicshavehighsuspensionrates.Rather,theysuggestthereareschool-levelvariablesassociatedwithanincreasedriskofsuspension.InthisreportwelookatdisparitiesinOSSratestounderstandwhichschoolsacrossMarylanduseOSSathighratesandanalyzetheschool-levelfactorsthatpredicthighsuspensionrates.Understandingschool-levelfactorsassociatedwithsuspensionsdeserveattentionbecausetheyoffertheopportunitytotargetinterventionsonhighsuspendingschoolsaswellasprovidelarge-scalepreventionefforts.Tothataim,weaddressthefollowingresearchquestions:
1. Dodifferentgroupsofstudentsexperiencehigherout-of-schoolsuspensionratesthanothers?
2. Whichschoolssuspendstudentsathigherratesthanotherschools?3. Whatschool-levelcharacteristicspredictthelikelihoodofhighout-of-
schoolsuspensions?
MethodologyWeanalyzedschool-levelout-of-schoolsuspension(OSS)datafromtheU.S.DepartmentofEducation’sCivilRightsDataCollection(CRDC)asameasureoftheuseofexclusionarydisciplineinMarylandpublicschools.TheCRDCincludesdataonthenumberofOSSforeachschoolinMaryland.Becauseourschool-levelanalysisinvolvesidentifyinghighsuspendingschools,weaverageddatafromtheCRDCacrossthreeyears—2011-12,2013-14,and2015-16.3Thisprovidesaconservativeestimateofthenumberofhighsuspendingschoolssinceaveragesadjustforthevariabilityinsuspensionsacrossdifferentyears.Forschool-levelvariables,weusedCRDCdataonenrollmentaveragedacrossthreeyearsandteacherexperienceforthe2013schoolyear.Otherschool-levelvariablesarefromtheMarylandSchoolReportCardforthe2013schoolyear.Thereportcardsare3TheCRDCsurveysschoolsandschooldistrictseverytwoyears.TheCRDCsfor2011-12,2013-14,and2015-16schoolyearsincludesdatafromeveryschoolandschooldistrictinthecountry.
![Page 9: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
7|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
publiclyavailableontheMarylandStateDepartmentofEducation(MSDE)websiteandpresentsummaryinformationonallpublicschoolsinMaryland.Toincludeasmanyschoolsaspossibleandatthesametime,maketheanalysisunderstandable,wegroupedschoolsintoeitherelementaryorsecondaryschools.ElementaryschoolsincludedanyschoolthatservedgradesK-6oranycombinationofthosegrades(i.e.,K-3,3-5,PreK-6,etc.).Secondaryschoolsincludedschoolsthatservedgrades5-12oranycombinationofthoseschools(i.e.,5-7,6-8,6-12,7-12,9-10,10-12).Weuseddescriptivestatisticstodescribetheextentofout-of-schoolsuspensionsandone-wayANOVAstodeterminewhethertherewerestatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenschoolswithdifferentcharacteristicsandschoolswithdifferentcategoriesofsuspensionrates.Thesemethodsareappropriateforcomparingunequalsamplesizes,thatis,whensubgroupenrollmentsarenotequal—inthiscase,schoolscategorizedashavinglowerandhighersuspensionrates.Werefertothepercentageofstudentssuspendedasthe“percentsuspended”andreportdisparitiesinout-of-schoolsuspensionsbysevensubgroups:race/ethnicity(Asian,Hispanic,Black,White,andotherraces),Englishlearners(EL),andstudentswithdisabilities(SWD).Descriptiveresultsarepresentedascompositionindicesandrates(Nishioka,withShigeoka,&Lolich,2017).Weusedthecompositionindextodescribethedistributionofsuspensionsbysubgroupatthestatelevelandtheratetolookatschool-leveldisproportionality.Thedisciplinecompositionindexdescribestheracialcompositionofdisciplinaryevents,thatis,thepercentageofstudentsreceivinganout-of-schoolsuspensionthatarefromaspecificracialgroup.Itisinterpretedbycomparingthegroup’spercentageinadisciplinarycategory,inthiscaseout-of-schoolsuspensions,tothatgroup’spercentageofenrollment.WhencalculatingtheproportionofOSSassociatedwithasubgroup,wedividedthesumofallstudentsinasubgroupinthestatethatweresuspendedbyallincidencesofOSSinthestate.Therateshowsthepercentageofstudentsfromaspecificsubgroupthatreceivedanout-of-schoolsuspension.Itshowstheprobabilityofaspecificsubgroupofstudentsreceivinganout-ofschoolsuspension.Therateisdirectlyrelatedtooveralldisciplinaryratesanddoesnotvarywiththedistrict’sunderlyingracialdistribution.Wecalculatedtherateforeachschoolandthenaveragedthoseratesforschoolsacrossthreeyears.Theresultsincludeschoolsthathadatleasttwoyearsofvalidrates(i.e.,ratesthatdidnotexceed1.0).NextwecalculatedthenumberofhighsuspendingschoolsinMaryland.Wedefinedanyschoolthatsuspended25%ormorestudentsinanyoneofsevensubgroupcategoriesashighsuspending.Wethenaggregatedourcountsofhighsuspendingschoolstothedistrictandstatelevel.Schoolsthatsuspend25%ormorestudents
![Page 10: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
8|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
fromoneormoresubgroupsmeansthattheseschoolsregularlysuspendalargenumberofstudents.Ourgoalinidentifyinghighsuspendingschoolsistounderstandtheconditionsthatcontinuetoexposesomestudents—particularlyBlackstudentsandstudentswithdisabilities—toextraordinarilyhighsuspensionrates.Werecognizethatdedicatedandhard-workingteachersandadministratorsstaffmanyoftheseschools,buttheymaynothavetheresourcesandsupporttheyneedtomovebeyondtheuseofpunitivedisciplinarypractices.Toidentifyfactorsthatmaydifferentiatehighsuspendingfromotherschools,wedividedschoolsintothreegroups:(1)schoolsthathadnosubgroupswithsuspensionratesgreaterthan25%;(2)schoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinonesubgroup;and(3)schoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsintwoormoresubgroups.Wethenusedanalysisofvariancetoexamineanumberofschool-levelvariablesandtheirrelationshipswiththedifferentlevelsofsuspensionrates.Forschooldemographics,weincludedtheracialcompositionofaschool,thepercentageofstudentseligibleforfreeorreducedpricedmeals(FRPM),percentageofstudentswithdisabilities(SWD),andthepercentageofstudentslearningEnglish(EL).ThepercentofstudentswhoscoredproficientoraboveonPARCCmathandreadingtestsingrades3to8,Englishtestsingrades9,10,and11,andAlgebraI/IItestswereourmeasuresofachievement.Proficiencyratesareincludedbecausetheytellussomethingabouttheschool’sacademicprogram.Weincludedameasureofschoolsizeandtype.Attheelementarylevel,schooltypecomparedP-8schoolstoP-6schools.Forsecondaryschooltype,weusedmiddleschool,highschool,ormiddle/highschoolcombinationandalternativeschools.Manyofthevariablesthatmaydifferentiatehighsuspendingschoolsfromotherschoolsaredifficulttomeasuredirectly.Forthosevariablesweusedproxies.Forteacherqualityweusedteacherexperience(teacherswith2orfeweryearsteachingexperience).Forschoolstability,weusedstudentmobility,attendancerates,and,atthesecondarylevel,dropoutrates.Finally,itisimportanttonotethatwearenotusingstudentleveldatabutrathersuspensiondataaggregatedtotheschoollevel.Toanswerthequestionofhowmanystudentsaresuspendedoutofschool,weusetheunduplicatednumberofstudentssuspended,thatis,studentsarecountedonceregardlessofthenumberofsuspensionsthestudentreceived.Inthefollowingsections,wefirstpresentevidenceofdisparitiesinschooldisciplineatthestatelevel,usingthedisciplinecompositionindex.Wethenidentifyschoolswithmultiplesuspensionsratesatthestatelevelandforeachdistrict,followedbyananalysisofschool-levelriskfactorsthatdifferentiatehighfromlowsuspendingschools.
![Page 11: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
9|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
WhoGetsSuspendedinMarylandPublicSchools?Marylandaveraged46,170OSSacrossthreeschoolyears(2011,2013,2015),representing5.2%ofallMarylandpublicschoolstudents.Asshowninfigure1,BlackstudentsrepresentedthelargestshareofOSSbyrace—onaverage,60%ofallOSSwereBlackstudents.Incontrast,Whitestudentsrepresented24%ofsuspendedstudents.Figure1:Averageout-of-schoolsuspensionsbyrace/ethnicity,2011,2013,&2015
Figure2showsthatBlackstudentsaretheonlyracialgroupsuspendedatahigherratethantheirproportionoftheschoolenrollment.Blackstudentsrepresent35%oftotalstudentenrollmentinMarylandbut60%ofstudentssuspendedoutofschool.Incomparison,White,AsianandHispanicstudentsarefarlesslikelytobesuspended.Forexample,Whitestudentsrepresent41%oftheschoolpopulationbut24%ofOSS.Studentswithdisabilitiesarealsodisproportionallysuspended(figure2).Studentswithdisabilitiesrepresent13%ofenrollmentbut25%ofOSSonaverage.BesidesWhitestudents,wealsofoundthatsuspendedstudentswerelesslikelytobeEnglishlearners,HispanicorAsianstudents.
1%
9%
60%
24%
6%
AveragePercentOut-of-schoolSuspensionsbyRace/Ethnicity
Asian Hispanic Black White Other
![Page 12: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
10|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Figure2:Averagepercentofout-ofschoolsuspensionsandenrollmentbysubgroup,2011,2013,&2015
AverageSchoolOut-of-SchoolSuspensionRatesFigure3showstheprobabilitythatastudentfromaparticularsubgroupreceivesanout-of-schoolsuspension.Sincethesuspensionratedoesnotvarywiththedistrict’sunderlyingracialdistribution,therateallowsustocomparetheaverageOSSrateofonesubgrouptoanother.Onaverage,schoolsinMarylandreportedsuspending5.2%oftheirstudentsout-of-school,asshowninfigure4.StudentswithdisabilitieshadthehighestOSSrate,withschoolssuspendinganaverageof9.5%ofstudentswithdisabilities.ThesecondhighestOSSratewasamongBlackstudents,withschoolssuspending7.8%oftheirBlackstudents.Thiswasfollowedbystudentsclassifiedas“other”race/ethnicity,withof6.3%ofstudentssuspendedonaverage.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
AsianHispanicBlackWhiteOther
ELSWD
AveragePercentOut-of-schoolSuspensionRates&EnrollmentsbySubgroup
Enrollments Suspensions
![Page 13: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
11|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Figure3:Averageschoolout-of-schoolsuspensionratesbysubgroup,2011,2013,2015
Averagesuspensionratesarethreetimeshigherinsecondaryschoolsasinelementaryschools,asshowninfigure4.Elementaryschoolssuspended2.8%ofstudentsonaveragewhilesecondaryschoolssuspended10.1%ofstudents.Additionally,thegapinsuspensionratesbetweenracial/ethnicgroups,SWDandELisgreateratthesecondarylevel.StudentswithdisabilitieshadthehighestOSSrate,with6.6%ofelementarystudentsand15.5%ofsecondaryschoolstudentssuspended.ThesecondhighestOSSratewasamongBlackstudents(4.2%inelementary;15.3%insecondaryschools).Figure4:Averageelementaryandsecondaryout-of-schoolsuspensionratesbysubgroup,2011,2013,2015
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
AsianHispanic
BlackWhiteOther
ELSWDAll
AverageOut-of-schoolSuspensionRatesbySubgroup
0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%18%
Asian Hispanic Black White Other EL SWD All
AverageElementaryandSecondaryOut-of-schoolSuspensionRatesbySubgroup
Elementary
Secondary
![Page 14: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
12|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
SchoolswithMultipleSuspensionsOurnexttaskwastoidentifythenumberofschoolswithmultiplesuspensionsratesatthestatelevelandforeachdistrict.Ourcriterionforidentifyingschoolsas“highsuspending”wasschoolswhere25%ormoreofstudentsinanyoneormoreofsevensubgroupswassuspendedoutofschool.Weusedschool-levelsuspensionratesaveragedacrossthreeyears,aconservativeapproachtoidentifyinghighsuspendingschoolssinceaveragesadjustforthevariabilityinsuspensionsacrossdifferentyears.Thatmeansthathighsuspensionratesinoneyearcanbeoffsetbylowerratesinanotheryear.Inaddition,byusingunduplicatedcounts,weundercountthetotalnumberofOSSsincestudentsthatreceivemultiplesuspensionsarecountedonlyonce.AcrossallpublicschoolsinMaryland,14%ofschools(196)suspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormoresubgroup(Table1).Ofthistotal,therewere126schools(9%ofallschools)thatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinatleastonesubgroupandanother37schools(2.6%)thatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsin2subgroups.Anadditional33schools(2.3%)suspended25%ormoreofstudentsacross3to7subgroups.Table1:NumberofSchoolswithOSSRatesGreaterthan25%inOneorMoreSubgroup(0-7),2011,2013,2015#Subgroups>25% Frequency Percent
Valid .00 1210 83.81.00 126 8.72.00 37 2.63.00 16 1.14.00 7 .55.00 6 .46.00 3 .27.00 1 .1Total 1406 97.4
Missing System 38 2.6Total 1444 100.0Twenty-twoofthe24schooldistrictshadoneormoreschoolswithmultiplesuspensions.4Amongelementaryschools,49schools(5.5%)in10districtssuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormoresubgroups.Foroursampleof468secondaryschools,147or31.4%ofschoolsin22districtssuspendedmorethan25%ofstudentsinoneormoresubgroups.TherewerenohighsuspendingschoolsinCarolineandTalbotcounties.
4Informationonwhichschoolswerehighsuspendingisavailablefromtheauthors.
![Page 15: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
13|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Withindistricts,schoolsvaryintheextenttowhichstudentsaresuspendedout-of-school.Table2showsthenumberandpercentofschoolsbydistrictthatarehighsuspending.Forthe10districtswithhighsuspendingelementaryschools,thepercentofadistrict’sschoolsrangedfrom42.9%inDorchesterCountyto2.7%inFrederickCounty.Amongthe22districtswithhighsuspendingsecondaryschools,thepercentofadistrict'ssecondaryschoolsthatwashighsuspendingrangedfrom81.8%inCecilCountyto3.2%inHowardCounty.Therewere12districts,orhalfofalldistricts,where40%ormoreofthedistrict’ssecondaryschoolswerehighsuspendingschools.Table2:NumberandPercentofSchoolsbyDistrictwithOSSRatesGreaterthan25%inOneorMoreSubgroups,2011,2013,2015District
#ofElem
#ElemOSS>25%
OSSasPercentofElem
#ofSec
#SecOSS>25%
OSSasPercentof
SecCaroline 5 0 0.0% 4 0 0.0%Talbot 5 0 0.0% 3 0 0.0%Howard 40 0 0.0% 31 1 3.2%Montgomery 132 0 0.0% 67 5 7.5%StMary's 17 0 0.0% 7 1 14.3%Calvert 14 0 0.0% 11 2 18.2%Frederick 37 1 2.7% 24 5 20.8%Washington 25 0 0.0% 17 4 23.5%BaltimoreCounty 107 0 0.0% 54 13 24.1%Carroll 24 2 8.3% 21 6 28.6%Harford 32 1 3.1% 20 6 30.0%PrinceGeorge's 140 11 7.9% 54 19 35.2%Worcester 7 0 0.0% 5 2 40.0%BaltimoreCity 127 24 18.9% 56 23 41.1%Kent 5 1 20.0% 2 1 50.0%QueenAnne's 8 0 0.0% 6 3 50.0%AnneArundel 79 3 3.8% 33 19 57.6%Allegany 14 1 7.1% 8 5 62.5%Wicomico 17 0 0.0% 8 5 62.5%Charles 21 0 0.0% 15 10 66.7%Somerset 5 0 0.0% 3 2 66.7%Dorchester 7 3 42.9% 4 3 75.0%Garrett 8 0 0.0% 4 3 75.0%Cecil 17 2 11.8% 11 9 81.8%
Thesefindingssuggestthatbothschoolanddistrictlevelpoliciesandpracticescontributetodifferencesinsuspensionrates.First,notallschoolsarehighsuspending,suggestingthatschoolsusedifferentdisciplinarypracticeswhen
![Page 16: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
14|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
respondingtomisbehavior.Thevariabilityacrossdistrictssuggeststhatdifferencesindistrict-levelpoliciesandapproachestoschooldisciplinecontributetothedegreetowhichschoolsadoptalternativestoexclusionarydiscipline.
CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingSchools:SchoolContributionstoOSSGiventhatsome,butnotallschools,hadhighsuspensionrates,thequestionis,arethereschool-levelriskfactorsassociatedwithhighersuspensionrates?Toaddressthisquestion,wecomparedschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinnocategoriestoschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinonecategoryandschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreintwoormorecategories.Wedefinedthefirstcategoryas“lowsuspending”schoolsandthelasttwocategoriesas“highsuspending”schools.Weusedthefollowingschoolcharacteristicsinouranalysis:schooldemographiccomposition(i.e.,race/ethnicity,EL,SWD,socioeconomicstatus);achievement(performanceonPARCC);teacherexperience(percentageofteacherswithfewerthan2yearsexperience);andschoolstability(mobility,attendances,and,atthesecondarylevel,dropoutandgraduationrates).Wealsoincludedameasureofschoolsizeandschooltype.ResultsforelementaryschoolsarepresentedinAppendix1andforsecondaryschoolsinAppendix2andaresummarizedbelow.ElementarySchoolsSchoolDemographicComposition:TheuseofOSSisstronglyrelatedtothedemographiccompositionofaschool.AstheaverageenrollmentofBlackstudents,studentswithdisabilities,andlow-incomestudentsincreasedinelementaryschoolssodidthelikelihoodofoneormorehighOSSrates.ThereisasteadyincreaseinBlackenrollmentinschoolswithgreaternumbersofsuspensionratesexceeding25%.Inlowsuspendingschools,averageBlackstudentenrollmentwas35.1%,whileinhighsuspendingschoolsitwas59.7%forschoolswithonerateexceeding25%and69.9%inschoolswithtwoormoreratesexceeding25%.Incontrast,asWhiteandAsianenrollmentincreased,thelikelihoodofmultiplehighOSSratesinaschooldecreased.Wealsofoundthatschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormoresubgroupshadhigheraverageenrollmentsoflow-incomestudentsandstudentswithdisabilitiesbutlowerenrollmentsofHispanicandELstudents.Lowsuspendingschoolsenrolledonaverage50.4%low-incomestudentscomparedtobetween78.5%and86.8%inhighsuspendingschools.Enrollmentofstudentswithdisabilitiesinschoolswithtwoormoresuspensionratesexceeding25%wastwicethatoflowsuspendingschools(24.9%comparedto12.6%).Achievement:Wefoundthatschool-levelachievementwaspredictiveofwhetheraschoolhadhighsuspensionrates.TheaveragepercentageofstudentsscoringproficientoraboveonthePARCCinmathandreadingwassignificantlylowerinhighsuspendingschoolsingrade3,4,5,and6thaninlowsuspendingschools.At
![Page 17: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
15|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
eachgradelevel,asthenumberofOSSincreased,therewasacorrespondingdecreaseinachievement.However,therewerenostatisticallysignificantdifferencesinthe7thand8thgrademathandreadingscores,althoughthedirectionshoweddecliningachievementassuspensionsincreased.Thelackofsignificancemayberelatedtothesmallnumberofelementaryschoolswith7thand8thgrades.Teacherexperience:Highsuspendingelementaryschoolshadahigherpercentageofteacherswithtwoorfeweryearsofexperiencethanschoolswithlowersuspensionrates.Between21.9%and24.2%ofteachersinhighsuspendingschoolshadtwoorfeweryearsexperiencecomparedto14.4%inschoolswithlowsuspensionrates.Schoolstability—mobilityandattendance:Theschoolcommunityislikelytobelessstableinhighsuspendingelementaryschoolsastheseschoolshadhighermobilityratesandlowerattendance.Mobilityratesinschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormoresubgroupswerebetween30%and39.2%comparedto19.8%inlowsuspendingschools.Therewasalsoasteadydecreaseinthemeanattendancerateinschoolsasthenumbersubgroupswithsuspensionratesexceeding25%increased.Schoolsizeandtype:Smallerelementaryschoolsweremorelikelytohavehighersuspensionratesthanlargerschools,asomewhatsurprisingfindinggivenresearchsuggestingthatsmallschoolsaremoreproductiveandeffectivethanlargeones(Iatarola,Stiefel,&Chellman,2008).Thisfindingmaysuggestthatsmallerschoolsarestruggling,forexample,theymaybeexperiencingdecliningenrollment,highmobility,havehighteacherturnover,orarelocatedinhighpovertyareas(V.E.Lee&Smith,1997).Forschooltype,wedidnotfindthatthegradelevelcompositionofelementaryschools(i.e.,gradesPre-Kto6versusPre-Kto8)differentiatedhighsuspendingfromlowsuspendingschools.SecondarySchoolsSchooldemographiccomposition:Insecondaryschools,wealsofoundthatthelikelihoodofbeingsuspendedincreasedastheenrollmentofBlackstudents,studentswithdisabilities,andlow-incomestudentsincreased.Schoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormoresubgroupshadhigheraverageenrollmentsofBlackstudents(between44.5%and46%)comparedtoschoolswithnosuspensionsratesexceeding25%(33.6%).TherewerefewerHispanicandAsianstudentsenrolledinhighsuspendingschoolsthoughWhitestudentenrollmentswerenotsignificantlydifferentacrosshighandlowsuspendingschools.SchoolsenrollingmoreSWDhadhigherOSSrates(between18.3%and21.7%comparedto15.1%inlowsuspendingschools),whileschoolswithfewerELshadlowerOSSrates.Theenrollmentoflow-incomestudentsinhighsuspendingsecondaryschoolswasalsohigherthaninlowsuspendingschools(between49.5%and58%comparedto37.8%).
![Page 18: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
16|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Achievement:TherewasasignificantrelationshipbetweentheaveragepercentageofstudentsscoringproficientonthePARCCandthelikelihoodofsuspension.Secondaryschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsinoneormorecategorieshadloweraveragemathandreadingscores,andlowerhighschoolAlgebraandEnglishscores,comparedtolowsuspendingschools.Thegapbetweenachievementscoresinlowsuspendingschoolsandschoolswithtwoormoreratesexceeding25%widenedbetween6thand8thgrade,from16percentagepointsingrade6,to21.8percentagepointsingrade7,and25percentagepointsingrade8.Teacherexperience:Thepatternofhighsuspendingschoolshavingmoreteacherswithlessexperienceandlowsuspendingschoolshavingmoreexperiencedteacherswasevident,butthedifferencebetweenschoolswasnotlargeenoughtobestatisticallysignificant.Schoolstability—mobility,attendance,anddropoutrates:Highsuspendingschoolsexhibitedhighermobilityrates,lowerattendancerates,andhigherdropoutrates.Mobilityrateswerebetween19.3%and26.9%inhighsuspendingschoolscomparedto15.8%inlowsuspendingschools.Theadjustedfour-yeardropoutrateinsecondaryschoolswithtworatesexceeding25%wasmorethandoublethatinlowsuspendingschools—20.6%comparedto9.5%.Attendanceathighsuspendingsecondaryschoolswaslowerthanattendanceinlowsuspendingschools,averaging94.8%inlowsuspendingschoolscomparedtobetween92.3%and90.3%inhighsuspendingschools.Schoolsizeandtype:Similartoelementaryschools,therewasaninverserelationshipbetweenschoolsizeandtheprobabilityofsuspensionsacrossmultiplesubgroups.Assecondaryschoolenrollmentdecreased,thelikelihoodofmultiplesuspensionsincreased—smallerschoolshadmoresuspensions.Thismayreflecttheinfluenceofalternativeschools,whichtendtobesmallerschoolsandamongtheschoolswiththehighestsuspensionrates.Indeed,alternativeschoolsandmiddle/highschoolcombinationsaremorelikelytosuspend25%ormorestudentsintwoormorecategories.While3%ofhighschoolsarealternativeschools,theyrepresented20%ofhighsuspendinghighschools.Therewere12outof14alternativeschoolsthatwerehighsuspending.Themiddle/highschoolcombinationrepresents7.1%ofsecondaryschoolsbut29.9%ofschoolsthatsuspended25%ormoreofstudentsintwoormorecategories.Neithermiddleschoolsnorhighschoolsweremorelikelytobeamongstlowsuspendingschoolsorthetwocategoriesofhighsuspendingschools.
ConclusionandRecommendationsThereare196publicschoolsinMarylandorabout14%thatsuspend25%ofstudentsinoneormoreofsevensubgroupsoutofschool.Theseschoolsarelocatedin22ofthe24schooldistrictsinMaryland,butthenumberofhighsuspending
![Page 19: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
17|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
schoolsvariesbydistrict.Whiletherearemoresecondaryschoolsthanelementaryschoolsthatsuspendstudentsathighlevelsacrossmultiplesubgroups,wefoundthatBlackstudentsandstudentswithdisabilitiesweredisproportionallysuspendedout-of-schoolacrossallschoollevels.Thehighrateofvariabilityacrossschools—anddistricts—suggeststhattheuseofdisciplinaryconsequencesisrelatedtocontextualvariablesthatgobeyondindividualstudentbehavior.Indeed,itappearsthatboththedistrictandtheschoolthatastudentattendsplayaroleinsuspensionrates.Wedidnotfindthathighsuspendingschoolsarelocatedinanyonedistrictorregionofthestate.Rather,theyarefoundinbothruralandurbanareas,insmallandlargedistricts,andinallregionsofthestate.Thissuggeststhatdistrictswithlargenumbersofhighsuspendingschoolseitherhaveaculturewhereexclusionarydisciplineiscondonedorarenotprovidingtheleadership,resourcesandtrainingstaffneedtopreventinappropriatebehavior.Thevariabilityinsuspensionsacrossschoolsprovidesevidencethatschoolscandothingsdifferently,butsomemayneedmoresupportthantheyarecurrentlyreceiving.Aprimaryconclusionpolicymakersshoulddrawfromthisanalysisistheclearevidenceitprovidesofdisparitiesacrossschools.SchoolswithhigherenrollmentsofBlackstudents,SWDandlow-incomestudentsandlowerenrollmentsofWhite,AsianandHispanicstudentssuspendedmorestudentsacrossmultiplesubgroups.Fortheseschools,reducingsuspensionsrequiresdiscerningwhythesedisparitiesexist.Itmaybethatteachersandadministrators’professionaltrainingindisciplinepracticesisinsufficientsotheylackknowledgeandskillsabouthowbesttomanagestudentbehavior.Itmayalsobethatthedistricthasnotmadeadoptingalternativestosuspensionapriorityorprovidedthetrainingandsupportneeded.ThehighrateofsuspensionsamongBlackandlow-incomestudentsandSWDsuggeststhatstaffmayviewsimilarbehaviorsdifferentlybasedonastudent’srace,incomelevel,ordisabilitystatus.Alternatively,itsuggeststhatschoolswithahigherproportionofBlackandlow-incomestudentsandSWDtendtousemorepunitivedisciplineandmayhavefewersupportiveresourcesandinterventions(Anderson&Ritter,2017;Skiba,Chung,etal.,2014).Wefoundarelationshipbetweenmeasuresofschoolsuccess/failureandthelikelihoodofsuspensionsacrossmultiplesubgroups.Twomeasuresofschoolsuccess—achievementscoresonthePRACCandgraduationrates—differentiatedhighandlowsuspendingschools.Highsuspendingschoolsalsohavehighermobilityrates,lowerattendanceandgraduationrates.Whilewecannotconcludethatattendingaschoolwithhighsuspensionratesisdetrimentaltoallstudentsintheschool,itdoessuggestthatattendinghighsuspendingschoolsincreasesthelikelihoodofacademicfailure.Thefindingthathighsuspendingschoolshaveteacherswithfeweryearsofexperience,atleastattheelementarylevel,againarguesforaneedforgreaterteachertraininginclassroommanagementandotherapproachestoresolvingconflict.
![Page 20: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
18|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Thefindingthatstudentsfromvulnerablepopulationsaremorelikelytobesuspendedandtherelationshipbetweenschoolsuccessandfailureraisesconcernsthatsuspensionsmayexacerbatetheracialachievementgap(Morris&Perry,2016).Thisisobviouslyamulti-prongedissue.Itsuggeststhatapproachestoreducingthesuspensionratewillneedtoadoptstrategiestoaddressdisruptivestudentbehavior,confrontstaffperceptionsofstudentbehaviorthatmaycontributetodisparitiesbutalsocreatelearningenvironmentsthatengageallstudents.Onthepositiveside,thevariabilityacrossschoolsanddistrictssuggeststhatitispossibleforindividualschoolsanddistrictstoaltertheirdisciplinarypracticesinwaysthatreducesuspensions.Whilethisstudydidnotexaminewhattheseschoolsanddistrictsaredoingdifferently,it’sagoodbetthattheyaretakingstepstoimplementalternativeapproachesthatresultindifferentdisciplinaryoutcomes.Recommendations
• Becauseofthevariabilityacrossschoolsanddistrictsindisciplinarypractices,werecommendthatschooldisciplinedatabewidelysharedwitheducationstakeholders,includingteachers,administrators,families,andcommunity.
Thelocaleducationcommunitymaynotbeawareofdisciplinaryproblemsintheirschoolsordistrictwhencomparisondataisnotwidelysharedoravailable.Reportsthatallowforcomparisonsindisciplinarypracticesandconsequencesacrossschoolsanddistrictscanraiseawarenessamongthelocaleducationcommunityandalertdistrictandschoolleaderstopotentialdisciplinaryproblems.Awarenessofpotentialdisciplinaryissuesmaythenserveasacatalystforeducatorstoseekoutalternativestrategiestoaddresstheissuesorgalvanizeparentstoadvocateforbettersolutionstodisciplinaryissues.WespecificallyrecommendthatschoolleveldisciplinedatabereportedontheMarylandSchoolReport,disaggregatedbycommonlyreportedsubgroups.Inaddition,werecommendthattheStateroutinelyprovidedistrict-levelreportsthatcomparedistrictsacrossthestateandschool-levelreportsthatcompareschoolswithinadistrict.Thesereportsshouldbepubliclyavailable.
• MSDEshouldtakeanactiveroleinfunding,supporting,andpersuadingschoolstoadoptapproachesthatfocusonprevention,earlyidentification,andearlyinterventionratherthanmanagingandpunishingbehaviorafteritoccurs.
WhileMarylandtookstepstocurtailexclusionarydisciplinarypracticesbyrevisingitsschooldisciplineguidelines,disparitiesinsuspensionratespersist.Theseguidelineslaidoutaprocessforschoolstofollowwhendiscipliningstudents;however,researchshowsthatthereisnoclearrelationshipbetweenthealignmentofdistrictcodesofconducttostateguidelines,out-of-schoolsuspensionrates,orthe
![Page 21: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
19|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Black-Whitedisciplinegap(Curran&Finch,2018).Thesefindingssuggestthathowthedisciplinarycodeisimplementedinschoolsandclassroomsmatters.Thatis,becauseteachersandschooladministratorsretainconsiderablediscretionintheapplicationofdisciplinarypractices,theirdecisionscontributetowhoisreferredformisbehaviorandhowconsequencesareadministered.Shiftingtoapreventativeapproachcandecreasethefrequencyofbehaviorproblemsandreducethedevelopmentofmoreseriousproblemswithstudents.Preventativeapproachesandprogramsaredesignedtopreventmisbehaviorinschoolsandseekpro-activewaystodetermisbehaviorearlybycreatingpositiveandinclusiveschoolcommunitiesandbyfosteringcommunicationamongstudents,teachers,andadministrators.Programssuchaspeermediation,conflictresolution,anti-bullyingprograms,restorativejusticepractices,andtieredapproachestobehaviormanagementrecognizethatschoolbehaviorproblemsarenoteasilyamenabletosimplesolutions.Becauseofthehighrateofracialdisparities,itmayalsobenecessarytoincludetrainingoninterventionsthataddressracialbias(Ispa-Landa,2018).
• Districtsshouldworkwithhighsuspendingschoolstofirstassesswhyaschool
suspendsstudentsathighrates,andthentodesignaplanforaddressingthoseissues.
Districtpoliciesandleadershipcanprovidetheimpetusforschoolstoidentify,adoptandimplementmoreeffectivepractices.Thechallengefordistrictswithhighsuspendingschoolsistwofold.First,thedistrictneedstoassesseachhighsuspendingschooltodeterminewhysuspensionratesarehighandidentifywheretherearedisparities.Second,theschoolneedstoreducetheuseofsuspensionsasadisciplinarypracticeandadoptpreventativemodelsofschooldiscipline.Bothoftheseissuescallforbetterpractices,theadoptionofalternativestosuspension,andmoreeffectivetrainingofschoolpersonnelinbehaviormanagement.Inaddition,professionaldevelopmentthatfocusesonbuildingproductiverelationshipsamongstaff,students,andthecommunitycanincreasestudentengagementinschooling.Formanystudentsthereisarelationshipbetweenactingoutandpooracademicperformance.Thismaybebecausethecurriculumandinstructionarenotengagingortheinstructionalprogramisnotrelevanttostudents’racial,ethnic,culturalandlinguisticdiversityortheirdisabilities.Providingtraininginculturallyrelevantpedagogycanprovideteacherswithskillsforteachingdiversestudents(Osheretal.,2015).
• Schoolsneedadisciplinedatacollectionsystemthattheycanreviewregularly.OneofthefirststepsthatschoolscantaketoreduceOSSistotrackdisciplinaryevents,interventions,andconsequencesandmonitorthedataonaregularbasis.Thisincludecollectinginformationonwhathappenedforeachdisciplinaryevent,
![Page 22: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
20|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
whenandwheretheeventhappened,whichstudent,teacher,staff,orotherswereinvolved,whatinterventionswereattempted,andwhatconsequenceswereadministered.Collectingandreviewingthisdatawillhelpschoolsidentifypatternsindisciplinaryevents,discernifconsequencesaremorepunitiveforsomestudentsbasedontheirraceordisability,andcloselyexaminethereasonsastudentmaymisbehave.Summary:Reducingtheuseofexclusionarydisciplineisnotoftenthoughtofasareformstrategy.However,itmaybeoneofthemostproductiveapproachesadistrictandschoolcantaketobothimprovingtheschoolclimateandstudentoutcomes.
![Page 23: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
21|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
MethodologicalNotes
DataforthispolicybriefcomesfromtheOfficeofCivilRights’(OCR)website(https://ocrdata.ed.gov)andtheMarylandStateDepartmentofEducation(MSDE)website(http://reportcard.msde.maryland.gov).WedownloadedMarylanddatafromOCR’sDisciplineReportfor2011,2013and2015.Thesedataincludeawiderangeofinformation,includingthenumberofunduplicatedout-of-schoolsuspensions(OSS)andenrollmentsforspecificstudentpopulationsreportedbypublicschoolstoOCRinagivenyear.Wemergedthesedatawithschoolinformation,suchasproficiencyratesandattendancerates,thatwedownloadedfromtheMaryland’sReportCardfor2013. WethencalculatedtheOSSratesbyracial/ethnicgroups(Asian,Hispanic,Black,White,andOther),Englishlearners(EL),andstudentswithdisabilities(SWD)foreachschoolfor2011,2013,and2015.Wedividedthenumberofsuspensionsforaspecificgroupofstudentsbythenumberofthatgroupofstudentsenrolledinaschoolandmultipliedtheresultby100.BecauseweusedtheunduplicatedOSScounts,inwhichastudentiscountedonlyonceregardlessofthenumberoftimessuspendedduringtheyear,norateshouldexceed100.However,wefoundasmallnumberofschoolsineachyearhadabnormallyhighratesforoneormoregroupsofstudents(21in2011;3in2013,and10in2015).Weexcludedthesecountsandratesfromouranalyses.WethenaveragedtheschoolOSSratesforeachracial/ethnicgroup,ELstudents,andSWDsacross2011,2013,and2015.WealsoaveragedtheOSScountsforeachgroupofstudentsandstudentenrollmentsacrossthistimeperiod.Schoolswithfewerthantwoyearsofdatawereexcludedfromtheanalyses.UsingthesedataandthedatawedownloadedfromtheMSDEwebsitefor2013,wecreatedthreedatasets:a)adatasetthatincludedallschools;b)adatasetforelementaryschools;andc)adatasetforsecondaryschools.Wedefinedanelementaryschoolasanyschoolwithmostlyelementary-levelgrades;themajorityoftheseschoolswereK-6.Wedefinedasecondaryschoolasanyschoolwithmostlysecondary-levelgrades;themajorityoftheseschoolswereeither5-8or9-12.Thedatasetwithallstudentsincluded1,406schoolsorapproximately97%ofallpublicschoolsinMaryland. Wecalculatedthecompositionindex–thepercentageofOSSassociatedwithspecificracial/ethnicgroups,ELstudents,SWDs–usingthedatasetthatincludedallpublicschoolsinMaryland.WesummedtheaverageOSScountsforeachracial/ethnicgroup(Asian,Hispanic,Blacks,Whites,andOther)andforELstudentsandSWDs.WethendividedthesenumbersbytheaverageincidencesofOSSacrossallschoolsinthestate.TheresultistheaveragepercentageofOSSacrossthestatethatinvolvedstudentsfromeachracial/ethnicgroup,ELstudents,andSWDs.Inthecaseofrace/ethnicity,thesepercentagesaddto100%.WealsocalculatedtheaverageOSSratesacrossallschoolsinthestateandcomparedtheseratestotheaverageschoolenrollmentsforspecificgroupsofstudents.
![Page 24: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
22|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Usingtheelementaryandsecondarydatasets,wenextidentifiedhighsuspendingelementaryandsecondaryschoolsandexaminedthecharacteristicsoftheseschools.Wedefinedahighsuspendingschoolasanyschoolthatsuspends25%ormoreofagivenstudentpopulation.ThisstandardwasusedbyTheCivilRightsProjects’recentanalysisofdisciplinedata,thoughitsetalowerstandardintheiranalysisforelementaryschools(Losenetal.,2015).Wethenexaminedeachschool’saverageOSSratesforeachpopulationofstudents,andwetotaledthenumberofaverageOSSratesequaltoorgreaterthan25%.Wecategorizedaschoolashavinglowsuspensionratesifnoneoftheratesexceededourstandard,highsuspensionratesifonlyonerateexceededthestandard,andhighestsuspensionratesiftwoormoreratesexceededthestandard.WethenlistedalltheelementaryschoolsandsecondaryschoolswithoneormoreaverageOSSratesof25%ormoreofagivenstudentpopulation. Becausewewereinterestedinthecharacteristicsofschoolswithhighsuspensionsrates,wecomparedthecharacteristicsofschoolswithlow,high,andhighestaveragesuspensionrates.WeusedOnewayAnalysisofVariance(ANOVA)todoso,comparingthegroupmeansforaseriesofschoolcharacteristicsforeachcategoryofsuspensionrates.WeusedthepvaluefortheFstatistictodetermineiftherewasastatisticallysignificantrelationshipbetweenaschoolcharacteristicandschoolswithlow,highandhighestaverageOSSrates.Ifthepvaluewaslessthan.05,weconsideredtherelationshiptobestatisticallysignificant.Forexample,inthecaseofachievement,wefoundstatisticallysignificantrelationshipsbetweenthepercentageofstudentswhoscoredproficientorhigherformostgrade-levelstateassessmentsandwhetheraschoolhad0,1or2ormoreaverageOSSratesgreaterthanorequalto25%.Asaresult,weconcludedthatschoolswithhighOSSratesalsotendtobeschoolswithlowerlevelsofachievement,atleastwhencomparedtoschoolswithlowOSSrates.
![Page 25: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
23|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Appendix1:CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingElementarySchoolsTable1.1.ElementarySchoolEnrollmentsbyNoRate,OneRateandTwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentAsianenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 843 5.36 7.55One 37 1.28 1.90TwoorMore 12 0.57 0.83Total(p=.000) 892 5.13 7.41
AveragepercentHispanicenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 843 13.89 16.69One 37 12.64 20.22TwoorMore 12 6.97 7.92Total(p=.337) 892 13.74 16.77
AveragepercentBlackenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 842 35.13 31.89One 37 59.68 38.85TwoorMore 12 69.86 29.00Total(p=.000) 891 36.62 32.74
AveragepercentWhiteenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 842 40.65 32.49One 37 23.78 33.89TwoorMore 12 19.88 27.50Total(p=.001) 891 39.67 32.71
AveragepercentOtherenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 842 4.96 3.11One 37 2.61 2.70TwoorMore 12 2.72 2.75Total(p=.000) 891 4.83 3.13
AveragepercentELenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 843 9.22 13.19One 37 7.99 14.72TwoorMore 12 3.35 5.06Total(p=.270) 892 9.09 13.19
AveragepercentSWDenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 843 12.63 7.50One 37 14.85 5.27TwoorMore 12 24.9 26.33Total(p=.000) 892 12.89 8.06
![Page 26: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
24|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Table1.2.ElementarySchoolSize(TotalEnrollment)&MobilityRatebyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAverageelementarytotalenrollment2011_2013_2015(min2yrs.)
None 843 469.99 170.68One 37 348.41 143.36TwoorMore 12 250.54 128.76Total(p<.000) 892 462.00 172.52
Averagepercentmobility None 781 19.77 10.86One 36 29.99 12.58TwoorMore 11 39.16 16.98Total(p<.000) 828 20.47 11.42
Table1.3.ElementarySchoolAchievementbyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentproficientorbetterfor3rdgrademathandreadingscores
None 794 74.64 16.64One 35 58.53 19.98TwoorMore 10 48.68 10.82Total(p<.000) 839 73.66 17.24
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor4thgrademathandreadingscores
None 806 82.63 13.73One 32 67.54 17.78TwoorMore 8 59.15 19.19Total(p<.000) 846 81.83 14.41
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor5thgrademathandreadingscores
None 810 79.72 14.43One 35 63.10 17.32TwoorMore 11 58.09 18.28Total(p<.000) 856 78.76 15.14
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor6thgrademathandreadingscores
None 106 63.71 17.56One 12 47.61 14.09TwoorMore 3 42.15 11.23Total(p<.002) 121 61.58 17.98
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor7thgrademathandreadingscores
None 46 63.64 20.94One 6 43.93 19.17TwoorMore 1 51.25 --Total(p<.092) 53 61.17 21.36
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor8thgrademathandreadingscores
None 75 50.62 20.41One 13 42.62 17.89TwoorMore 3 34.53 14.87Total(p<.189) 91 48.94 20.13
![Page 27: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
25|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Table1.4.ElementarySchoolAttendance,FARMsRate&TeacherswithTwoorFewerYearsExperiencebyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentfree&reducedpricemealsenrollment
None 843 50.39 28.36One 36 78.51 23.79TwoorMore 11 86.82 10.56Total(p<.000) 890 51.98 28.83
Meanattendancerate None 838 96.68 1.74One 35 94.42 2.30TwoorMore 12 93.37 3.21Total(p<.000) 885 96.54 1.88
Averagepercentofteacherswithtwoorfeweryearsofexperience
None 842 14.37 12.16One 36 21.85 17.56TwoorMore 12 24.16 16.91Total(p<.000) 890 14.81 12.61
Table1.5.ElementarySchoolGrades&FocusbyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationElementarySchoolgradesP-8
None 843 9.49 29.33One 36 36.11 48.71TwoorMore 12 25 45.23Total(p<.000) 891 10.77 31.02
ElementarySchoolgradesP-6
None 843 90.51 29.33One 36 63.89 48.71TwoorMore 12 75 45.23Total(p<.000) 891 89.23 31.02
Alternativeeducationschool?*
None 843 0 0.00One 37 0 0.00TwoorMore 12 8.00 28.90Total(p<.000) 892 0 3.30
*Thereisonlyonealternativeelementaryschool
![Page 28: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
26|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Appendix2:CharacteristicsofHighSuspendingSecondarySchoolTable2.1.SecondarySchoolEnrollmentbyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentAsianenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 6.51 7.37One 89 2.44 3.25TwoorMore 58 1.71 1.80Total(p<.000) 469 5.15 6.62
AveragepercentHispanicenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 11.9 13.50One 89 7.56 9.49TwoorMore 58 7.82 7.17Total(p<.002) 469 10.57 12.33
AveragepercentBlackenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 33.62 30.05One 89 44.48 35.73TwoorMore 58 46 31.89Total(p<.001) 469 37.21 31.81
AveragepercentWhiteenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 43.82 30.82One 89 41.94 35.16TwoorMore 58 40.07 31.23Total(p<.667) 469 43 31.70
AveragepercentOtherenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 4.15 2.25One 89 3.61 2.44TwoorMore 58 4.39 2.57Total(p<.086) 469 4.08 2.33
AveragepercentELenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 3.36 5.27One 89 2.02 3.70TwoorMore 58 2.24 3.13Total(p<.031) 469 2.97 4.82
AveragepercentSWDenrollment,2011,2013&2015
None 322 15.11 10.78One 89 18.34 15.22TwoorMore 58 21.66 16.99Total(p<.000) 469 16.53 12.79
![Page 29: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
27|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Table 2.2. Secondary School Size (Total Enrollment) &Mobility Rate byNo Rate, OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragesecondaryschooltotalenrollment2011_2013_2015(min2yrs.)
None 322 979.95 520.56One 89 834.07 491.36TwoorMore 58 560.69 388.82Total(p<.000) 469 900.42 518.82
Mobilityrate None 268 15.78 10.73One 84 19.32 13.19TwoorMore 45 26.93 19.69Total(p<.000) 397 17.80 13.04
Table2.3.SecondarySchoolAchievementbyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentproficientorbetterfor6thgrademathandreadingscores
None 169 77.06 14.43One 39 70.49 15.75TwoorMore 22 61.07 12.12Total(p<.000) 230 74.42 15.24
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor7thgrademathandreadingscores
None 173 72.95 17.00One 42 62.54 15.74TwoorMore 26 51.13 15.54Total(p<.000) 241 68.78 18.10
Averagepercentproficientorbetterfor8thgrademathandreadingscores
None 172 70.54 16.44One 43 59.62 17.28TwoorMore 30 45.50 19.53Total(p<.000) 245 65.56 18.96
AveragepercentproficientorbetterforhighschoolstudentsinEnglishandAlgebra
None 151 83.32 17.07One 50 75.54 21.49TwoorMore 27 72.97 19.55Total(p<.002) 228 80.39 18.80
Table2.4.SecondarySchoolFARMsRate&TeacherswithTwoorFewerYearsExperiencebyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentofteacherswithtwoorfeweryearsexperience
None 318 13.67 11.96One 89 15.73 13.71TwoorMore 57 16.49 12.01Total(p<.151) 464 14.41 12.34
Averagepercentfreeandreducedpricemealenrollment
None 312 37.76 24.19One 87 49.52 23.30TwoorMore 56 58.04 16.76Total(p<.000) 455 42.51 24.34
![Page 30: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
28|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Table2.5.SecondarySchoolAttendanceRate&FourYearDropoutRatebyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationAveragepercentattendanceNone 320 94.78 6.21
One 89 92.31 8.69TwoorMore 57 90.34 5.93Total(p<.000) 466 93.77 6.89
Numericadjustedfour-yeardropoutrateinpercentages
None 154 9.48 13.71One 51 11.67 13.13TwoorMore 30 20.63 22.47Total(p<.001) 235 11.38 15.35
Table2.6.SecondarySchoolFocus&GradeSpanbyNoRate,OneRate&TwoorMoreOSSRatesGEGreaterthanorEqualto25%
N Mean Std.DeviationCombinedmiddlehighsecondaryschool
None 322 3.73 18.97One 89 8.99 28.76TwoorMore 57 22.81 42.33Total(p<.000) 468 7.05 25.63
Secondarymiddleschool None 322 50.31 50.08One 89 41.57 49.56TwoorMore 57 42.11 49.81Total(p<.232) 468 47.65 50.00
Secondaryhighschool None 322 45.96 49.91One 89 50.56 50.28TwoorMore 57 31.58 46.90Total(p<.068) 468 45.09 49.81
Alternativeeducationschool?*
None 322 1.00 07.90One 89 1.00 10.60TwoorMore 58 9.00 39.50Total(p<.000) 469 3.00 17.00
*Thereare17alternativesecondaryschoolswithdata
![Page 31: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
29|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
ReferencesAmericanPsychologicalAssociationZeroToleranceTaskForce.(2008).Arezero
tolerancepolicieseffectiveintheschools?AmericanPsychologist,63(9),852-862.
Anderson,K.P.,&Ritter,G.W.(2017).Disparateuseofexclusionarydiscipline:EvidenceoninequitiesinschooldisciplinefromaU.S.state.EducationPolicyAnalysisArchives,25(49).
Barrett,N.,McEachin,A.,Mills,J.N.,&Valant,J.(2017).Whatarethesourcesofschooldisciplinedisparitiesbystudentraceandfamilyincome?.RetrievedfromNewOrleans:https://educationresearchalliancenola.org/publications/what-are-the-sources-of-school-discipline-disparities-by-student-race-and-family-income
Christle,C.,Jolivette,K.,&Nelson,C.M.(2007).Schoolcharacteristicsrelatedtohighschooldropoutrate.RemedialandSpecialEducation,28(6),325-339.
Chu,E.M.,&Ready,D.D.(2018).Exclusionandurbanpublichighschools:Short-andlong-termconsequencesofschoolsuspensions.AmericanJournalofEducation,124,479-509.
Curran,R.C.,&Finch,M.A.(2018).Marylandschools'codesofconduct:Comparingdisciplinepolicyacrossdistricts..RetrievedfromBaltimoreCounty,MD:https://edpolicylab.umbc.edu/files/2018/04/Maryland-Schools-Codes-of-Conduct-Comparing-Discipline-Policy-Across-Districts.pdf
Fabelo,T.,Thompson,M.D.,Plotkin,M.,Carmichael,D.,MarchbanksIII,M.P.,&Booth,E.A.(2011).Breakingschools'rules:Astatewidestudyofhowschooldisciplinerelatestostudents'successandjuvenilejusticeinvolvement.RetrievedfromNewYork:https://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Breaking_Schools_Rules_Report_Final.pdf
Gregory,A.,Skiba,R.J.,&Noguera,P.(2010).Theachievementgapandthedisciplinegap:Twosidesofthesamecoin?EducationalResearcher,38(1),59-68.
Hwang,N.(2018).Suspensionsandachievement:Varyinglinksbytype,frequency,andsubgroup.EducationalResearcher,47(6),363-374.
Iatarola,A.E.,Stiefel,A.E.,&Chellman,C.C.(2008).SmallschoolsreformandNewYorkCity'sstudents.TeachersCollegeRecord,110(9),1837-1878.
Ispa-Landa,S.(2018).Persistentlyharshpunishmentsamideffortstoreform:Usingtoolsfromsocialpsychologytocounteractracialbiasinschooldisciplinarydecisions.EducationalResearcher,47(6),384-390.
Lee,T.,Cornell,D.,Gregory,A.,&Fan,X.(2011).Highsuspensionschoolsanddropoutratesforblackandwhitestudents.EducationandTreatmentofChildren,34(2),167-192.
Lee,V.E.,&Smith,J.B.(1997).Highschoolsize:Whichworksbestforwhom?EducationEvaluationandPolicyAnalysis,19,205-227.
Losen,D.J.(Ed.)(2015).Closingtheschooldisciplinegap:Equitableremediesforexcessiveexclusion.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.
![Page 32: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
30|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Losen,D.J.,&Gillespie,J.(2012).Opportunitiessuspended:Thedisparateimpactofdisciplinaryexclusionfromschool.RetrievedfromLosAngeles:
Losen,D.J.,Hodson,C.,KeithII,M.A.,Morrison,K.,&Belway,S.(2015).Areweclosingtheschooldisciplinegap?RetrievedfromLosAngeles:https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/projects/center-for-civil-rights-remedies/school-to-prison-folder/federal-reports/are-we-closing-the-school-discipline-gap
Losen,D.J.,&Skiba,R.J.(2010).Suspendededucation:Urbanmiddleschoolsincrisis.Retrievedfromhttp://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/suspended-education
MarylandStateDepartmentofEducation.(2014).TheMarylandguidelinesforastatecodeofdiscipline.RetrievedfromBaltimore,MD:http://marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DSFSS/SSSP/MDGuidelinesforStateCodeDiscipline08072014.pdf
MarylandStateDepartmentofEducation.(2018).Suspensions,expulsions,andhealthrelatedexclusionsMarylandPublicSchools,2017-2018.RetrievedfromBaltimore,MD:http://www.marylandpublicschools.org/about/Documents/DCAA/SSP/20172018Student/2018SuspExpulHRExc.pdf
Morris,E.W.,&Perry,B.L.(2016).Thepunishmentgap:Schoolsuspensionandracialdisparitiesinachievement.SocialProblems,63(1),68-86.
Nishioka,V.,withShigeoka,S.,&Lolich,E.(2017).Schooldisciplinedataindicators:Aguidefordistrictsandschools(REL2017-240).RetrievedfromWashington,DC:http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs.
Noltemeyer,A.L.,Ward,R.M.,&Mcloughlin,C.(2015).Relationshipbetweenschoolsuspensionandstudentoutcomes:Ameta-analysis.SchoolPsychologyReview,44(2),224-240.
Osher,D.,Fisher,D.,Amos,L.,Katz,J.,Dwyer,K.,Duffey,T.,&Colombi,G.D.(2015).Addressingtherootcausesofdisparitiesinschooldiscipline:Aneducator'sactionplanningguide.RetrievedfromWashington,DC:https://safesupportivelearning.ed.gov/sites/default/files/ActionPlanningGuide508.pdf
RaffaeleMendez,L.M.,Knoff,H.M.,&Feron,J.M.(2002).Schooldemographicvariablesandout-of-schoolsuspensionrates:Aquantitativeandqualitativeanalysisofalarge,ethnicallydiverseschooldistrict.PsychologyintheSchools,39(3),259-277.
Sartain,L.,Allensworth,E.M.,Porter,S.w.,Levenstein,R.,Johnson,D.W.,Huynh,M.H.,...Steinberg,M.P.(2015).SuspendingChicago'sstudents:Differencesindisciplinepracticesacrossschools.RetrievedfromChicago:https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/suspending-chicagos-students-differences-discipline-practices-across-schools
Skiba,R.J.,Arredondo,M.I.,&Williams,N.T.(2014).Morethanametaphor:Thecontributionofexclusionarydisciplinetoaschool-to-prisonpipeline.Equity&ExcellenceinEducation,47(4),546-564.
![Page 33: High Suspending Schools in Maryland · percentage of new staff in a school and student mobility, or changing schools frequently is associated with higher rates of school suspension](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022071004/5fc176784f7c914305378b6c/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
31|C o l l e g e o f E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f M a r y l a n d
Skiba,R.J.,Chung,C.-G.,Trachok,M.,Baker,T.L.,Sheya,A.,&Hughes,R.L.(2014).Parsingdisciplinarydisproportionality:Contributionsofinfraction,student,andschoolcharacteristicstoout-of-schoolsuspensionandexpulsion.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,51(4),640-670.
Skiba,R.J.,Horner,R.H.,Chung,C.-G.,Rausch,M.K.,May,S.L.,&Tobin,T.(2011).Raceisnotneutral:AnationalinvestigationofAfricanAmericanandLatinodisproportionalityinschooldiscipline.SchoolPsychologyReview,40(1),85-107.
Skiba,R.J.,Shure,L.,&Williams,N.(2012).Racialandethnicdisproportionalityinsuspensionandexpulsion.InA.L.Noltemeyer&C.S.McLoughlin(Eds.),Disproportionalityineducationandspecialeducation.Springfield,IL:CharlesC.ThomasPublisher,Ltd.
Skiba,R.J.,&Williams,N.T.(2014).Areblackkidsworse?Mythsandfactsaboutracialdifferencesinbehavior:Asummaryoftheliterature.RetrievedfromBloomington,IN:http://www.indiana.edu/%7Eatlantic/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/African-American-Differential-Behavior_031214.pdf
Theriot,M.T.,Craun,S.W.,&Dupper,D.R.(2009).Multilevelevaluationoffactorspredictingschoolexclusionamongmiddleandhighschoolstudents.ChildrenandYouthServicesReview,32,13-19.
Welch,H.F.,&Payne,A.A.(2010).Racialthreatandpunitiveschooldiscipline.SocialProblems,57,25-48.
Wolf,K.C.,&Kupchik,A.(2014).Schoolsuspensionsandadverseexperiencesinadulthood.JusticeQuarterly,34(4),407-430.