Indicator: Equitable discipline practices
Definition
Schools treat students similarly and appropriately for disciplinary infractions.
RECOMMENDED METRIC(S)
Differences in the rates at which students from key demographic subgroups ever experience different forms of school discipline (office referrals, suspensions, expulsions, restraint, and exclusion) relative to those students’ representation in their school population as a whole
Disproportionalities along the lines of key demographic characteristics in the level of school discipline experienced (for example, number of days suspended).
Type(s) of Data Needed
SurveysWhy it matters
School practices play a key role in determining students’ disciplinary outcomes, and different approaches to discipline, such as restorative justice and positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), may be related to improvements in school culture and climate. Research documents large and persistent disparities in exclusionary discipline—that is, disciplinary actions that remove students from their usual educational setting, such as an in- or out-of-school suspension—along race, socioeconomic background, and disability status. (See the indicator on positive behavior for additional information on patterns of disproportionality in suspension and expulsion rates.) There are also disparities in the types of discipline practices implemented in schools. For instance, schools with more Black students are less likely to use restorative disciplinary practices as an alternative to punitive discipline.
What to know about measurement
Schools regularly collect discipline data as part of their normal operations and report aggregate data by subgroups to the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC). Although suspensions and expulsions generally are defined and tracked comparably, there are opportunities for states to apply more consistent definitions in determining what counts as physical restraint and seclusion by adopting the revised federal definitions proposed by the Office of Civil Rights. (See Arundel for a discussion of challenges in defining and reporting restraint and seclusion in schools.)
We acknowledge that there are multiple methods for determining disproportionality. (See Bollmer et al. for guidance on approaches to measuring disproportionality.) In addition, proportionate outcomes do not imply that effective disciplinary practices are in place, especially in schools where most students are students of color. For instance, it is possible for expulsion rates to be proportionate but high. We encourage systems to closely monitor absolute rates as well as the number of days students experience exclusionary discipline and consider alternative discipline practices such as PBIS and restorative justice.
E-W Case Studies
Source frameworks
Disciplinary measures appeared in nine source frameworks reviewed for this report. Our proposed approach to measuring disciplinary practices at the systems level is consistent with recommendations by the CORE Districts and the National Research Council.
References
The framework's recommendations are based on syntheses of existing research. Please see the framework report for a list of works cited.