On July 30, 2018, House Bill 1541 allowed OSPI to address equity in student discipline and close opportunity gaps in learning across Washington state.
As educators, we differentiate instruction for students who struggle academically or learn in a different manner. It makes sense that educators use the same process for regulating behavior, as discipline is not a one-size-fits-all model. The new format is a prevention-based approach, schools must attempt to correct behavior before requiring disciplinary action. Following this format ensures fair and equitable practices across the state for all students.
The changes to federal and state laws are this: 1) Limit the use of exclusionary discipline in schools. 2) Minimize the impact of exclusionary discipline on students who are excluded. 3) Reduce disparities in the administration of student discipline.
Many educators have a false perception of the new discipline laws simply because they aren’t well informed. I have heard many educators assume that the new rules mean two things. One, students perceived as “bad” can not be suspended for their behavior. And two, that those same “bad” students will be rewarded in hopes the rewards will change their behavior. This simply isn’t true.
OSPI’s Equity and Civil Rights Office officially advises schools to review the effectiveness of discipline and/or intervention strategies using a four-part model based on their school’s discipline data.
- Plan: Analyze the data and identify root causes
- Do: Decide on a plan and implement
- Study: Evaluate and monitor progress
- Act: Adjust your plan, if necessary
In reviewing discipline policies schools should adjust their discipline rules if data shows little or no progress in student behavior.
The American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force found that previous zero tolerance, punitive, and exclusionary disciplinary methods haven’t been effective in altering educational disruptive behavior. The Task Force did find an increase in racial disparities and referrals to the juvenile justice system often referred to as the school to prison pipeline, negative effects on child development, and unintended consequences for students, families, and communities. Additionally, there is data to support the success of alternative approaches to zero tolerance that were effective in improving school climate.
Framework for Increasing Equity in School Discipline
| Prevention | *Supportive Relationships *Bias-Aware Classrooms/Respectful School Environments *Academic Rigor *Culturally Relevant and Responsive Teaching *Learning and Correcting Behavior Access |
| Intervention | *Data-Based Inquiry *Problem-Solving Approaches to Discipline *Inclusion of Student/Family voice *Reintegration of students after conflict |
| Prevention and Intervention | Multi-Tiered System of Supports |
What are the final steps for school year 2019-2020? OSPI has identified new student discipline rules and best practices.
“By the start of the 2019–20 school year, school district discipline policies
must identify other forms of discipline that school personnel should
administer before or instead of exclusionary discipline actions—which
may involve the use of best practices and strategies in the state menu for
behavior (i.e. restorative justice, behavior monitoring, social skills
instruction, etc.).”
How is your school implementing House Bill 1541? Which framework option for increasing equity in school discipline does your school use for prevention and intervention?
I do have one concern. Of the three–restorative justice, behavior monitoring, social skills instruction–the one we see applied the most consistently is “behavior monitoring.” It’s disconcerting to see multiple adults watching a child scream/run around/break things or tear things off the wall/jump on and off furniture. Finally one adult manages to take the child for a calming walk, and–in less than an hour–that same child is back in the same classroom, supposedly ready to work, with no meaningful apology, no acknowledgment of the need for change, and no plan for change.
Social skills instruction takes time. Restorative justice takes time. They both take resources beyond the classroom. I say “beyond the classroom” because teachers are dedicating more and more instructional time to:
1. managing out-of-control behavior
2. teaching social skills and
3. holding meetings to try to implement restorative justice.
This year I have seen excellent teachers literally weep over struggling students who have lost the equivalent of days of academic time due to the behavior of disruptive students in their classes.
Meanwhile, these same teachers care deeply and are working diligently to get all the help they can for those disruptive students.
I wish we could get more help for the teachers.
This is important for us all. So many people seem to think that we are becoming soft on misbehavior. In fact, we are being asked to understand how it happens and learn ways to prevent and minimize it, in order to help all students learn. I am hopeful for a better system when the understanding spreads and deepens.