John Monfredo: Rethinking School Suspension

Saturday, March 23, 2013

John Monfredo, GoLocalWorcester Education Contributor

School suspensions and expulsions may seem to be an effective discipline method for severe and ongoing school disciplinary problems. However, these methods often create unforeseen problems, especially if they are applied in a zero-tolerance setting.

In a policy statement, “Out-of-School Suspension and Expulsion,” (published this month in the 2013 issue of Pediatrics), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not support zero tolerance policies and recommends that student suspension or expulsion should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Research has demonstrated that students who experience out-of-school suspension and expulsion are 10 times more likely to drop out of high school than those who do not. Also, suspension and expulsion can often place the student back into the environment that led to the behavior problems. To prevent behavior problems from arising and reduce the use of suspensions, the Pediatric group recommends early identification of at risk children, and intervention before the problem occurs.

Many school systems across the nation are revising and reviewing their current policy based on the current data. In Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick in the fall of 2012 signed into law a new school discipline policy. It’s intent is to reduce unnecessary school suspensions and expulsions and to ensure that all students have access to educational services. Many students who are suspended are at risk due to a variety of factors ranging from stress at home, emotional difficulties or a learning disability. Sending these students out of the school in many cases compounds the problem as they are not receiving the help they need either academically or in the form of a school adjustment or guidance counselor.

State Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz of Boston stated “…the bill makes a down payment on the dropout prevention reforms.” The bill aims to curb the overuse of suspension and expulsion for the data has shown that being suspended or expelled is a strong precursor to the student dropping out of school, which leads to far reaching consequences for the student, the community and taxpayers. There is a lot of truth to that statement for if you look at the Worcester Public School statistics of the students receiving a suspension, 34.3% were chronically absent (absent over 10% or over 18 times during the year). The result being that many of those same students ended up dropping out of school.

The bill requires school districts to allow students who are excluded for more than ten consecutive school days to continue making academic progress by means of alternative educational services. Examples of such alternative schooling include tutoring, alternative placement, Saturday school and online or distance learning. Most of the language in the bill for exclusion of students does not apply to the Worcester Public Schools due to the many alternative placements the system has as at their disposal for serious offenses.

The bill does include a few provisions directly related to dropout prevention;
It requires districts to adopt an absence notification policy to parents/guardians in the case of multiple unexcused absences;
It removes the provision of the law that previously allowed young people to not attend school in order to work; and
It requires superintendents (or their designees) to conduct an exit interview with a student and their parents, together with school personnel, prior to a student dropping out of school to discuss the reasons for leaving and to consider alternative educational options. The superintendent must provide information about the detrimental effects of leaving school and a list of the alternative education options available to the student.

In essence, the intent of the bill is to strike a balance of allowing the schools the authority to make decisions protecting the safety of other students and staff, and at the same time making sure that we don’t give up on our students so easily.

Worcester Public Schools, like many other urban systems, does have a high suspension rate and certainly attempts to strike a balance on safety and the needs of the students. In a motion filed by me on the system’s suspension policy, administration is reviewing its current policy and seeing what changes, if any, need to be made. In looking at some of the suspensions that have occurred in Worcester: cell phone use, failure to follow directions, forgery, leaving school without permission, cutting class, truancy, and verbal assault to others, the question is do they merit an out of school suspension or could these infractions have been handled differently?

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights’ had a recent report on suspensions and has long argued that out of school suspensions only exacerbate the achievement gap, contribute to high dropout rates and increase the likelihood of student arrests and referrals to the juvenile justice system. Other studies have shown that long-term suspension or expulsion not only increase the risk that students will fall behind their classmates or drop out altogether but that they are also more likely to commit a crime or be the victim of a crime. And when suspended students come back to school, they may be even more troubled than when they left, because their time out of school was spent among people whose attitudes and activities only reinforced their unacceptable behavior.

The Massachusetts Teachers Association recently released recommendations from teachers about narrowing the achievement gap in Gateway Cities such as Worcester, Fitchburg, and Leominster. The recommendations on suspensions called for school systems to reduce student suspensions to all but the most egregious offenses (violent incidents, possession of a weapon, etc), end zero- tolerance policies, create supervised spaces within the schools where students can refocus rather than being sent to the office and develop programs that reward positive behavior and evaluate disruptive students for special needs. Another suggestion called for all teachers to have the necessary training to teach diverse students and have the autonomy to apply their skills in their classroom. Other suggestions called for a longer school day and more school–community relationships.

Worcester does have a positive behavioral intervention system program called PBIS (a researched based behavioral management program) and its purpose is to encourage and reward good behavior. However, Worcester does need to review its high suspension rate for research continues to demonstrate that so –called zero tolerance policies and out of school suspensions and expulsions that are used too readily are ineffective deterrents to inappropriate behavior and are harmful and counterproductive to the student, the family, the school district and the community as a whole.

Is there a common-sense approach to this difficult dilemma? Could we consider alternatives for the less egregious offenses such as in-school suspension, after-school detention, Saturday detention and out-of-school detention in places where students are still required to show up every day and continue their schoolwork? All these arrangements have the advantage that educators can still keep track of the students and monitor their progress. Simply leaving them up to their own devices only increases the chances they will get into trouble. In addition, let’s not forget the human factor. Let’s encourage a caring relationship between students and teachers and have a mentor, tutor or a buddy to assist those students identified as “at risk.” In so many cases those suspended students have not been successful in school and due to low self-esteem and frustration have been “turned” off to school. Studies have shown that having at least one positive adult role model in a young person’s life is an enormous protective factor. This in turn can help the individual succeed despite other risk factors such as poverty and a stressful home environment.

A positive sign on the reduction of suspensions has occurred at Sullivan Middle School in Worcester. Principal Jason DeFalco specified, “Our school has been able to reduce our suspension rate by being pro-active with the PBIS program by increasing the positive incentives for students that meet our expectations.” The school has created a school-wide student support system to make sure everyone is using a common approach to meeting students’ social and emotional needs. The school also has developed a strategic partnerships to assist meet the individual needs of the students. In addition, Principal DeFalco indicated that the school has thought creatively about consequences to help students meet expectations.

On the high school level in Worcester there are no schools involved in PBIS but there is no reason why administration along with the high school principals can’t look into this program and see if it may meet the needs of their school. In addition, if we are to reduce the suspension rate, we as a community need to consider the many challenges and the number of students in each high school. Many schools have special programs for disruptive students but lack the additional services to meet their needs. Therefore, additional alternative programs and extra personal need to be added to the school staff. We may all agree with the intent of the new law but the challenge is to assist the schools with the needed resources.

The community needs to be part of the solution for we all need to do whatever it takes to meet the needs of each individual student. Teachers can't do much to help any of their students if those students aren't in school, so the goal should be to find ways to keep our students in school.