Addressing and Preventing Disproportionality in Exclusionary Discipline Practices for Students of Color With Disabilities

Abstract

Historically, schools across the nation have struggled to address significant racial or ethnic disproportionality, including overrepresentation in exclusionary discipline practices, special education identification, and restrictive educational placements. The federal government has mandated that local education agencies monitor and address disproportionality but has provided little guidance on how to begin. This current topics column discusses this moral and ethical issue and provides ways schools can begin to address or prevent disproportionality in disciplinary practices.

Exploring the relationship between teachers' perceptions of cultural responsiveness, student risk, and classroom behavior

“…To address disproportionality related to discipline (Vincent et al, 2011) and special education (Kramarczuk Voulgarides et al, 2017), researchers and policymakers have emphasized the need to focus on prevention and have proposed implementing a multi‐tiered system of support (MTSS) framework (Bradshaw et al, 2012; Green et al, 2019). The implementation of MTSS involves educators providing high‐quality, evidence‐based instruction and behavioral supports to all students (Tier 1; Sugai & Horner, 2009).…”

Examining Commitment to Prevention, Equity, and Meaningful Engagement: A Review of School District Discipline Policies

“…This gap mirrors the research indicating difficulty with implementation of evidence-based practices in applied settings (Cook & Odom, 2013; Fixsen et al, 2009). Therefore, efforts to decrease a potential research-to-practice gap related to discipline policies should (a) embed procedures to establish proactive relationships and communication systems with families into school discipline policies (Green et al, 2019); (b) establish procedures for regular review of data to ensure ongoing evaluation of needs and supports related to discipline practices (McIntosh, Girvan, Horner, Smolkowski, & Sugai, 2014); (c) create a system of ongoing training and professional development for staff related to school discipline (e.g., sworn law enforcement officers [SLEOs], school resource officers [SROs], and crisis management team) including teaching preventive strategies and clear alternatives to suspension and expulsion (Losen, 2013); and (d) ensure staff and school leadership are trained in and understand vulnerable decision points (i.e., specific contextual events or elements where implicit bias may yield increased rates of disproportionate disciplinary practices) and implicit bias (i.e., unconscious beliefs about an individual; McIntosh, Girvan, Horner, Smolkowski, & Sugai, 2014).…”

“…This gap mirrors the research indicating difficulty with implementation of evidence-based practices in applied settings (Cook & Odom, 2013;Fixsen et al, 2009). Therefore, efforts to decrease a potential research-to-practice gap related to discipline policies should (a) embed procedures to establish proactive relationships and communication systems with families into school discipline policies (Green et al, 2019) Girvan, Horner, Smolkowski, & Sugai, 2014).…”

Assessing Oral Language When Screening Multilingual Children for Learning Disabilities in Reading

“…From a conceptual standpoint, dynamic assessment may be considered a shorter-term, more immediate form of response to intervention (RTI; also see multi-tiered system of supports or MTSS). At the most basic level, RTI is a structured approach to supporting students in schools that relies on regular progress monitoring and differential support for students based on their responses to instruction (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006; Green et al, 2018). Students who demonstrate educational progress that is below expectations receive supplementary support scaled to their needs.…”