1. History & Overview of Suspensions
Dr. Rosemarie Allen
Institute for Racial Equity & Excellence
History & Overview of Suspensions

2. What is a suspension?
Excluding a child from the learning process for 1 or more days:
In school: student is excluded from the classroom
Out of School: student is excluded from being on the school premises
Student is sent home early
Student is not a “good fit” and asked to leave the school/program

3. Suspension: a “disciplinary action that is administered as a consequence of a student’s inappropriate behavior, requires that a student absent him/herself from the classroom or from the school for a specified period of time” (Morrison and Skiba,
2001, p. 174).

4. First suspension Study 1975
Children’s Defense Fund
Transition slide
Add slide with same word with an Hispanic child.

5. Nearly 1 million children were suspended in the 1972-1973 school year.
In 1973, the national suspension rate was In 2010 the suspension rate was 7.4 percent (Losen & Gillespie, 2012).
Suspension rates for all students have doubled since the 1970s.

6. 
Studies spanning 40 years show that African American children are up to four times more likely to be suspended than White students
(Bradshaw et al., 2010; Children’s Defense Fund, 1975; Milner, 2013; Skiba et al., 2011).

7. There has been extensive research suspensions and other disciplinary practices however; most studies focus on children in kindergarten through 12th grades.
Few studies have examined disciplinary practices for children younger than 5 years of age in early childhood programs.
Talk about Raphael, TeyVon and Kim’s son. Also talk about language differences.
Ask participants to share “Single Stories” they may have or that others may have had of them.

8. The Civil Rights Data Collection (2014) included preschool data FOR THE 1ST time. It included the number of preschool children who: :
had at least one out-of-school suspension,
had more than one suspension,
was expelled, and
received corporal punishment.

9. Boys were 79% of the preschool population but 82% of all suspensions.
The Data Showed:
5,000 preschoolers were suspended at least once and nearly 2,500 were suspended a second time.
African American were 18 percent of the preschool population, but comprised 48% of suspensions
Boys were 79% of the preschool population but 82% of all suspensions.
Children with disabilities were also disproportionately suspended
(United States Department of Education, 2014).

10. The New OCR (2016)
Patterns of racial and gender disproportionality: 
Boys represent 54% of the preschool population but 78% of those suspended.
African American preschoolers are 3.6 times more likely to be suspended than their White peers.

11. African American girls are 20% of preschool female population but 54% of girls suspended from preschool

12. Children with disabilities are not disproportionately suspended from preschool BUT are disproportionately suspended from K-12

13. English Language Learners are not disproportionately suspended from preschool.

14. A survey conducted in Illinois reported that more than 40 percent of the State’s childcare programs had suspended infants and toddlers. Racial and gender demographics were not included in this study (Cutler & Gilkerson, 2002).

15. In North Dakota, 20% of ECE programs expelled children
In North Dakota, 20% of ECE programs expelled children. Of those expelled, 53% were infants and toddlers and 31% were preschool children. (North Dakota State Data Center, 2008).

16. In 2005, a Yale University study discovered the expulsion rates of preschoolers, in public school programs were three times the rate of children expelled from kindergarten through twelfth grades combined (Gilliam, 2005)

17. A Colorado discipline study conducted in 2006, found that 10 children per 1,000 were expelled from early childhood programs.
(Hoover, Kubicek, Rosenburg & Zundel, 2012).

18. A 2009 survey of Boulder County, Colorado early care and education providers showed children of color comprised the largest group of expelled children, at 13 per 1,000 (Greenberg & Ash, 2011).

19. The New Hampshire Child Care Expulsion Survey conducted in 2011 revealed 10 children per 115 were expelled, but did not include racial demographics (Kalinowski & Kalinowski, 2011).

20. In Michigan, the expulsion rate for preschoolers was 27 per 1000 students,
That was 34 times the state’s kindergarten through 12th grade rate. (Martin, Bosk & Bailey, n.d.).

21. The United States Departments of Education and Health and Human Services (2015) recently released a joint statement on preschool suspensions and expulsions that recommends:
raise awareness about the negative impacts of suspension and expulsion, including the disproportionate number of children of color that are subjected to such exclusionary practices,
(b) states develop policies that prevent exclusion as a disciplinary measure and to administer more appropriate policies that are without bias and discrimination and
(c) use evidence-based approaches such as PBIS and Pyramid Model to prevent suspensions and expulsions in early childhood programs.

22. In 2014, Chicago Public Schools established a “no suspension” policy for children in preschool through second grade, in its revised Student Code of Conduct.

23. In Connecticut the Governor signed Public Act prohibiting most out-of-school suspensions and expulsions of young children in pre- K through second grade.

24. New York City prohibited the expulsion or suspension of children enrolled in four-year old Pre-K for All and Early Learn NYC programs, as well as the children age 0-3 served through EarlyLearn NYC.

25. “No Suspension” Policies:
Washington State
Minneapolis
California

26. The negative outcomes for students that have been suspended and expelled include:
disengagement from the educational system,
antisocial behaviors and,
risk for entering the juvenile justice system (Arcia, 2006).
Children who are suspended from school are 10 times more likely to enter the juvenile justice system (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008; Gordon, Della, Piana, & Keleher, 2000).

27. What can we do in Colorado to address this issue?