Photo by Anissa Thompson

Photograph by Anissa Thompson

A major legislative push is underway to reform California's laws governing school discipline. A six bills intended to do just that will be heard today in the state Senate and Assembly education committees.

The bills have been introduced against a backdrop of recent research that shows that African American and Latino students are disproportionately suspended or expelled. Some districts have introduced alternative approaches to schoolhouse subject and have reduced suspension rates, but these strategies take not been universally adopted. The flurry of bills is an attempt to make such practices part of California law, every bit well as to analyze aspects of school subject field policies.

In a sign that some reforms might emerge from this legislative session on the issue, two key schoolhouse organizations are now supporting three of the measures they had previously opposed after the bills' authors accepted a range of amendments.

The California School Boards Association (CSBA) and the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) are no longer opposing Associates Bill (AB) 1729, introduced by Assemblymember Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco. The beak had required school officials to utilize suspensions as a final resort. Schools would take had to document alternatives to pause they had implemented before the student was suspended, such as a restorative justice program or a "positive behavioral approach." The purpose of such programs, the beak explains, would be to address the "root causes of the educatee's specific misbehavior."

With the amendments, the bill provides guidance to districts without imposing a mandate. It clarifies electric current law past describing alternative programs instead of simply stating that districts should utilize other means of correction.

In addition, the organizations have now dropped their opposition to AB 2537, introduced by Assemblymember 5. Manuel Perez, D-Coachella, which clarifies which offenses crave suspension and expulsion and when administrators tin can use discretion in using these disciplinary tools. For example, according to Erika Hoffman, a lobbyist for CSBA, there have been incidents of districts punishing students for bringing their prescription medicines or aspirin to school because they were classified as drugs. The neb would clarify that administrators would not take to append or expel students for that reason.

The two organizations have also lifted their opposition to Senate Neb (SB) 1088, introduced by Sen. Curren D. Price, Jr., D-Los Angeles. The bill clarifies existing police force by prohibiting a school from denying enrollment or readmission to a student on the ground that the youth has had contact with the juvenile justice organization. Information technology besides requires that school boards give expelled students more than one opportunity to demonstrate they take completed their rehabilitation plans in gild to exist readmitted to their regular school. As amended, the bill now only requires the board to give the student that extra opportunity if the educatee or his or her parents formally request a re-evaluation of the student's readiness to render to school.

CSBA'due south Hoffman said that 1 of the reasons her organization initially opposed the bills is that in her organization'southward view about of the proposed laws established new requirements for districts just provided no additional funds to implement them.

Laura Faer of Public Counsel, a pro-bono law firm based in Los Angeles and the chief sponsor of several of the bills, took issue with the statement that implementing a more positive and supportive approach in disciplining students would exist costly. She pointed out that schools receive funding from the land based on boilerplate daily attendance (ADA). If some of the changes encouraged past the legislation were implemented, she said, fewer students are likely to be absent-minded, then the school would end upwardly receiving more than funding.

Schools need to create clear and consistent systems for implementing schoolhouse field of study policies, Faer said, arguing that this is non the instance in all districts. "Everybody needs to know what the rules are."

In some cases, amendments take watered down the bills so that they provide guidance to districts in how to discipline students in identify of mandates. Faer said she nonetheless supports these bills considering they clarify the police force and "reframe the dialogue about subject."

"The current education code around subject is entirely about penalty," Faer said. "If we want to recollect of culling means to concur students accountable and go along our schools safe, we have to reframe the dialogue in the code."

Even so, CSBA and ACSA are still opposed to AB 2242, introduced by Assemblymember Roger Dickinson, D-Sacramento.

The beak takes on the largest single reason students are suspended — a loosely divers category known as "willful defiance." More than than forty percentage of suspended students roughshod into this category during the 2010–xi schoolhouse twelvemonth, according to Dickinson.

His nib would bar school districts from giving students an extended out-of-school pause or from expelling them for willful defiance. Instead, students could be sent to a specially supervised classroom in the schoolhouse or "other means of correction including community service during nonschool hours."

Willful disobedience "is overused, I'm not denying that," the CSBA's Hoffman said. But before eliminating the use of this "catch-all" category for out-of-schoolhouse suspensions, she said, teachers demand to be better trained in how to handle defiant students. "Nosotros would dearest to come across that training provided, but the funding isn't at that place to do that."

"We want to piece of work with the authors to chip abroad at these problems so we tin develop a more than advisable and fair arrangement," she said. "But if nosotros take out that definition (of willful disobedience), we take to provide other alternatives."

CSBA and ACSA too oppose SB 1235, introduced past Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, Sen. Price, and Sen. Michael J. Rubio, D-Bakersfield. The bill would require schools to address high rates of suspension. Initially the bill would only have applied to schools that suspended 25 percent or more of their students — virtually three times the state average — or a like percentage of a numerically significant racial or ethnic group in a school. Schools would be expected to reduce that charge per unit past at least 2 percentage each twelvemonth.

"The author sees it as a flexible programme, only we don't," Hoffman said. The bill says schools take to implement at least one of three strategies. "Schools will exist held to reducing the suspension rate by a certain percentage every year whether the strategy works or non. We read that as a mandate."

In her letter of the alphabet to Steinberg in opposition to the neb, Hoffman wrote: "In a perfect world, schools would be able to find and develop programs and resource to institute programs that would proactively improve student behavior and increase school rubber. However, this is not a perfect world, and the resources needed to establish the programs required by the legislation are not provided."

However, despite ACSA's and CSBA'south opposition to the Steinberg pecker, a number of districts are supporting it, Faer said, including Los Angeles Unified, Oakland Unified, and Vallejo City Unified.

Laura Preston, an ACSA lobbyist, said that "very proactive" administrators and teachers are already implementing positive approaches to discipline. Merely doing so is very difficult because of the state'southward budget crunch.

"Morale is down," she said. "Nosotros're losing administrators at a rapid footstep. Nosotros demand to provide training if we want to make comprehensive, systemic change."

Susanna Cooper, spokesperson for Sen. Steinberg, said it was hard to know what impact opposition from CSBA and ACSA will have on the nib'south passage. "We'd similar to come across them support a neb (like Steinberg's) that only impacts schools with excessive rates of pause — those that suspend students at a rate that is more than three times the state average." In general, she said, "there is overwhelming back up for this legislation."

One bill has enjoyed support from all sides from the outset. AB 2145, introduced by Assemblymembers Dickinson and Luis A. Alejo, D-Salinas, requires school districts to provide information on expulsions and suspensions cleaved down by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and other student characteristics.

To go more reports like this one, click here to sign upwardly for EdSource's no-cost daily email on latest developments in teaching.