Addressing Equity in Discipline and Other Educational Policies Impacting Minorities and Students of Poverty Equal Justice Conference Las Vegas, Nevada

2 “School to Nowhere” (aka Pipeline) Issues Alternative Schools Education Equity for Those Already Pipelined Language Equity

3 Alternative Schools ADA collectors and dead-end tracks for minority & other low-income students Disproportionate enrollment of ethnic/racial/LEP students Failure to address the needs of special subgroups

4 Demography of Alternative Schools in California ( ) All Calif. Schools (Total Enrollment – 6,190,425) Latino – 50%Black – 7% County Community (Total Enrollment – 18,414) Latino – 59%Black – 8% Community Day (Total Enrollment – 8,402) Latino – 56%Black – 17% Continuation (Total Enrollment – 69,120) Latino – 60%Black – 10% (Source: DATAQUEST:

5 Questions to Ask About Alternative Schools  For each student it should be determined:  Why the student was placed there?  How long he or she has been there?  When is the student scheduled to return to a regular school?  If the student has a right to return to a regular school and that has not occurred, why not?

6 Barriers to Re-Entry Need to serve out expulsion term; Failure to accept partial credits; Placement in a group home; Need to make up credits or graduation requirements; Tracking of certain youth by a school district into certain placements. Total disregard for the rights of these students

7 Juvenile Court School Enrollment – Court Schools Latino - 61% Black - 20% Total State Latino - 50% Black - 7%

8 Educational Status of Juvenile Justice Youth Significantly below grade level in basic literacy Chronic academic and behavioral difficulties and grade retention Formal ties to school - typically disrupted by dropping out, being expelled or suspended Disproportionate number are Special Ed. eligible, with estimates ranging from 32 to 90 percent

9 Juvenile Court Schools Who is responsible for administration and operation? What state and federal education laws are applicable? What is the source of funding? Are these schools monitored by the state education entity? Do they participate in the state’s accountability system?

10 Lack of Educational Equity for Youth Already Pipelined Denial of access to education or insufficient instructional time Lack of comprehensive programs Failure to provide equitable academic resources No effort to group by ability or grade level Lack of appropriate assessments No effort to address special needs Over use or under use of substitute teachers Absence of relevant staff development Denial of re-entry to a regular school Failure to give partial credits Lack of adequate library resources

11 “Length of Stay” Issue Does not excuse lack of comprehensive program A month is a significant amount of education time for any student, especially one at risk for academic failure A month can be a significant amount of time in terms of teaching LEP students academic English

12 Juvenile Justice Language Access Issues Do juvenile detention facilities keep accurate data on the LEP status of youth? Do court schools provide appropriate programs to address the language needs of LEP youth? How does a youth’s LEP status impact length of stay, access to programs and placements, etc?

13 Need to Eliminate Language Barriers LEP students are entitled to educational programs to address their language needs Must teach them academic English Must have access to the curriculum and must not incur academic deficits Equal Educational Opportunities Act, 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1703(f)

14 No Accountability or Monitoring “Despite the importance of alternative education, existing K-12 accountability programs do not permit an evaluation of whether participating students are making progress. In fact, the state’s accountability system allows schools and districts to use referrals to alternative schools as a way to avoid responsibility for the progress of low-performing students.” “Improving Alternative Education in California” (Calif. Legislative Analyst Office – Feb. 2007)

15 ADVOCACY CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE

16 Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Hall Sylmar, CA Denial of Access to School Insufficient Instructional Time for Those in School Created new category “refused to attend” No Dedicated Classroom Space No Access to P.E. Denied Parents Access to Educational Records Failed Provide Parental Notice Concerning Educational Progress or Grades Failed Include Parents in State-Mandated Advisory Committees

17 Progress Made Classroom Space Made Available All Units Attend School In New Space Parents to Receive Same Notice as All Other LACOE Parents School Site Councils & ELACS to be Formed with Parents P.E. Schedule Established – Gym Space Made Available

18 No comprehensive education program - subjects limited to Math & English Language Arts Insufficient staffing No effort to group students by achievement or skill level No educational records of any substance No effort to identify LEP students; no effort to address their language needs No formal process to transfer credits No access to GED preparation or exam Outdated computers and other equipment No evaluation system in place Outdated library Wittenberg Reno, Nevada

19 Progress Made Full-time teacher – added Full Plato Lab – added Complete records access Clerk now full-time GED exam access – facilitated IEPs now faxed upon day of enrollment

20 Reno’s LEP Issues Disproportionate representation of Latino youth in the juvenile detention center Latino youth were more likely not to be attending school, to have repeated a grade No clue regarding the number of detained youth who were LEP

21 Progress Made Developed language survey Access to student records to determine if identified as LEP Commitment to provide language assessment ELD computer programming now available Teachers receive training Created Transition Specialist Position

22 Other Impacts In Sept. 2007, 29 out of 72 detained (or 40%) youth were identified as LEP Held Latino Youth Summit to address disproportionality

23 Youth Law Center 200 Pine Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA Deborah Escobedo (415) x 3907