Classrooms Not Courtrooms: Virginia’s Approach to Addressing Exclusionary Discipline Jennifer Piver-Renna, PhD Tom Manthey, PhD Virginia Department of Education

Outline Overview of Classrooms not Courtrooms Initiative Data Review Trends in suspensions and expulsions Disproportionality by race and disability Locality analysis Intervention Strategies

Source: Center for Public Integrity. http://www. publicintegrity

Classrooms not Courtrooms Led by the Governor’s Children’s Cabinet Multi-agency, administration-wide push Reduce suspensions, expulsions and student referrals Address disparate impact on minorities and students with disabilities Address emphasis on subjective offenses Initial approach Improve data quality and cross-agency data sharing Expand Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Develop a joint school resource officer (SRO) training program Rewrite the SRO Model MOU and the SRO Program Guide

Declining trend in suspensions and expulsions has stabilized Disciplinary Action All Virginia School Divisions 2014-15 Five-Year Trend Students suspended (short-term) Rate1 53.76 Number 68,802 Students suspended (long-term) Rate 2.20 2,819 Students expelled 0.30 388 1Rate per 1,000 students Source: VDOE Discipline, Crime and Violence Data Collection, 2014-15

Disproportionality persists and is increasing over time Short-term Suspensions All Offenses All Virginia School Divisions 2014-15 Percent Enrollment (B) Gap (B – A) Five-Year Trend Black Students Percent of Suspensions (A) 53.01% 23.02% -29.99% Students Suspended 36,474 Students w/ Disabilities Percent of Suspensions (A) 24.86% 12.26% -12.60% 17,106 Source: VDOE Discipline, Crime and Violence Data Collection, 2014-15

Disproportionality is more pronounced among subjective offenses Short-term Suspensions Disorderly and Disruptive Offenses All Virginia School Divisions 2014-15 Percent Enrollment (B) Gap (B – A) Five-Year Trend Black Students Percent of Suspensions (A) 58.34% 23.02% -35.32% Students Suspended 23,842 Students w/ Disabilities Percent of Suspensions (A) 26.81% 12.26% -14.55% 10,955 Source: VDOE Discipline, Crime and Violence Data Collection, 2014-15

Value of Data Understand scope of problem Are incidents disproportionately occurring at certain times or in certain locations? Are some students disproportionately disciplined or represented in certain types of referrals? Are some students disciplined more harshly than other students for the same infractions? Are some staff disproportionately referring all or groups of students for discipline? Understand whether an intervention is working Are interventions having an effect on the frequency of disciplinary referrals for all students? For groups of students?

Using Data in Practice Examine data frequently: Disaggregated data Number and demographics of students suspended Number of instructional days lost Number of incidents Reason for suspension

High School Data Example Enrollment Students suspended (short-term) Gap Ratio White students 1009 70 -- Black students 868 129 2.145 Students w/o disabilities 1830 163 Students w/ disabilities 334 67 2.247 Calculating disproportionality gap among black students: ((129 / 868) / (70 / 1009)) = 0.148 / 0.069 = 2.145 Black students are 2.1 times more likely to be suspended than white students. Calculating disproportionality gap among students with disabilities: ((67 / 334) / (163 / 1830)) = 0.200 / 0.089 = 2.247 Students with disabilities are 2.2 times more likely to be suspended than students without disabilities. Calculate odds ratio (2x2 table)

High School Data Example Enrollment Students suspended (short-term, disruptive/disorderly) Gap Ratio White students 1009 43 -- Black students 868 95 2.595 Students w/o disabilities 1830 114 Students w/ disabilities 334 49 2.371 Calculating disproportionality gap among black students: ((95 / 868) / (43 / 1009)) = 0.109 / 0.042 = 2.595 Black students are 2.6 times more likely to be suspended for disruptive and disorderly behavior offenses than white students. Calculating disproportionality gap among students with disabilities: ((49 / 334) / (114 / 1830)) = 0.147 / 0.062 = 2.371 Students with disabilities are 2.4 times more likely to be suspended for disruptive and disorderly behavior offenses than students without disabilities. Calculate odds ratio (2x2 table)

Interpretation Data do not necessarily prove that students are being discriminated against, but without data it is difficult to know if all students are being treated fairly. Best practices may be employed without school or division specific data, but without data it will be difficult to know what is working and what needs to be adjusted. It is better to know your own data than to have someone else make it known to you.

Make Use of All Available Data Safe Schools Information Resource https://p1pe.doe.virginia.gov/pti/ Virginia Secondary School Climate Survey http://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/vcss/audit/student/ Your own observations, conversations, and reflections!

Virginia Tiered Systems of Supports Prevention first One setting: Multiple levels of support intensity Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III Early intervention Align academic, behavioral, mental health, and social supports Collect and use data Shifts focus from the Student to the System Areas of focus. Followed by…let’s examine these more closely as transition slide

Experimental Research 4/12/2018 Experimental Research Results are experimentally related to: Reduction in problem behavior Increased academic performance Increased attendance Improved perception of safety Improved organizational efficiency Reduction in staff turnover Increased perception of teacher efficacy Reduction in teacher reported bullying behavior and peer rejection Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Thornton, L.A., & Leaf, P.J. (2009). Altering school climate through school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports: Findings from a group-randomized effectiveness trial. Prevention Science, 10(2), 100-115 Bradshaw, C.P., Koth, C.W., Bevans, K.B., Ialongo, N., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). The impact of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (MTSS-B) on the organizational health of elementary schools. School Psychology Quarterly, 23(4), 462-473. Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Examining the effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 12, 133-148. Bradshaw, C.P., Reinke, W. M., Brown, L. D., Bevans, K.B., & Leaf, P.J. (2008). Implementation of school-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (MTSS-B) in elementary schools: Observations from a randomized trial. Education & Treatment of Children, 31, 1-26. Horner, R., Sugai, G., Smolkowski, K., Eber, L., Nakasato, J., Todd, A., & Esperanza, J., (2009). A randomized, wait-list controlled effectiveness trial assessing school-wide positive behavior support in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11, 133-145. Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2010). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptionality, 42(8), 1-14. Bradshaw, C., Waasdorp, T., Leaf. P., (in press). Effects of School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports on child behavior problems and adjustment. Pediatrics. Waasdorp, T., Bradshaw, C., & Leaf , P., (2012) The Impact of Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Bullying and Peer Rejection: A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial. Archive of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. 2012;166(2):149-156 We know this gets results when we implement with fidelity. When school communities are unsure of how MTSS-B will affect their school’s progress, it may be helpful to share these results that many schools have discovered. In fact, there is experimental research that indicates that schools implementing a schoolwide approach to behavior often see reduction in problem behavior, increase academic performance, increased attendance, improved perception of safety, improved organizational efficiency, reduction in staff turnover, increased perception of teacher efficacy and reduction in teacher reported bullying behavior and peer rejection. Need to find academic…similar academic research

TIER I: Core, Universal Implementing well researched programs and practices demonstrated to produce good outcomes for the majority GOAL: 100% achieve at high levels! Tier 1 is effective if at least 80% are meeting expectations 17 17

TIER II: Supplemental, Targeted Tier II is effective if at least 70-80% improve performance GOAL: No more than approximately 20% needing supplemental in addition to the core for achievement. 18 18

TIER III: Intensive, Individualized Tier III: is effective if at least 70-80% improve performance GOAL: 0-5% of needing intensive, individualized support in addition to core and supplemental pre 19 19

Continuum of Support for ALL Universal Targeted Intensive Continuum of Support for ALL Math Spanish Science Lacrosse NOTICE GREEN GOES IS FOR “ALL” Social skills Reading Social Studies Label behavior…not people

SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Supporting Improvements in Behavioral Competence, Academic Achievement and Social-Emotional Wellness SYSTEMS PRACTICES DATA OUTCOMES Supporting Decision Making Supporting Personnel Supporting Youth 21

Questions?