Because out-of-school suspensions take students

Transcription

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE PRACTICES:
HOW FRESNO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT CAN BOOST STUDENT ATTENDANCE,
IMPROVE GRADUATION RATES, AND INCREASE FUNDING
Fresno Unified School District Overview
As the fourth largest district in the state, Fresno Unified
School District (FUSD) is responsible for educating
roughly 74,000 students.i With 83% of Fresno Unified
students eligible for Free and Reduced Price Meals,ii the
district serves a high-needs population. Nearly 1 in 4
(23%) are English language learnersiii and 1 in 10 (9%) are
enrolled in special education.iv The district is also racially
and ethnically diverse--63% Latino, 13% White, 13%
Asian, 10% African American, 1% Native American and
1% multiracial.v
Because out-of-school
suspensions take students out of
the classroom, they deprive
students of valuable instruction
time and increase the likelihood
that students will fall behind.
Currently, FUSD is failing to graduate a significant proportion of students. Only 3 in 4 (73%) students that
started in ninth grade in 2006-07 graduated from high school with
their peers in 2010-11.vi Moreover, embedded within these rates
In Fresno Unified, 1 in 2
are underlying disparities. The official graduation rate is 80% for
African Americans are
Asians, 76% for Whites, 71% for Latinos, 67% for African
suspended (53.2%), a rate
Americans, 63% for Native Americans and 65% for English
nearly 3 times that of
language learners.vii
White students (18.4%).
While there are a number of causes underlying high school
dropout rates, one contributing factor is the district’s current discipline policies which result in excessive
suspensions and expulsions.viii
Because out-of-school suspensions
take students out of the classroom,
they deprive students of valuable
instruction time and increase the
likelihood that students will fall
behind.ix In fact, studies show that
students who are suspended are 6
times more likely to repeat a grade
and 5 times more likely to drop out of
high school.x In 2010-11, FUSD issued
493 expulsions,xi more expulsions
Restorative Justice Practices: FUSD
1
than any other of California’s ten largest districts.xii Additionally, the district had the third most
suspensions,xiii issuing 14,653 suspensionsxiv in one year. Moreover, nearly forty percent of out-of-school
suspensions were for non-violent offences including “profanity and obscenities” (11%) and “willful
defiance” (29%),xv an overly broad and subjective category which includes “disrupting school activities or
otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of school staff.”xvi (For pyramid-, school-, and district-level
data, see Appendix I.) Overall, FUSD’s suspensions resulted in more than 32,000 days of lost
instruction.xvii
Research indicates that suspensions and expulsions disproportionately impact English language learners,
students with disabilities, and African
American students. For example,
African American students are 3 times
more likely to be suspended.xviii In
Fresno Unified, 10.2% of students with
disabilities and 5.0% of English
language learners (ELL) were
suspended.xix The racial disparities
noted above are mirrored in Fresno
Unified where 1 in 2 African Americans
are suspended (53.2%), a rate nearly 3
xx
times that of White students (18.4%). (See Figure 1). Moreover, African American students are four
times more likely to be expelled (2.2%) when compared to White students (.5%).xxi (See Figure 2).
A Paradigm Shift in State Policy: Improvements to California’s School Discipline Systems
Policymakers, school districts,
community leaders, and key
stakeholders across California are
acknowledging the need to remedy
harsh school discipline policies which
are costly, ineffective and unequally
levied. With evidence of effective
alternatives, California policymakers
are making strides to promote
alternative systems designed to
reduce out-of-schools suspensions
and expulsions:
●
Figure 3:
Reasons for Out-of-School Suspensions in FUSD
Profanity and
Obscenities
11%
Other
5%
Willful
Defiance
29%
Violence/Drug
Related
55%
On January 1, 2013, the state adopted 5 new laws aimed at improving school discipline policies.
These laws: (1) encourage alternative means of correction in lieu of suspension and expulsion,
including Restorative Justice practices; (2) clarify existing zero tolerance policies; (3) invite the
2
person(s) responsible for the educational rights of foster youth to all discipline-related meetings;
(4) speed up re-enrollment in school for youth in the juvenile justice system; and (5) align
truancy law with best practices.xxii
●
In February 2013, Assemblymember Dickinson introduced Assembly Bill 420, which would
eliminate the use of “willful defiance” as a reason to suspend students in grades K through 8.
For grades 9 through 12, out-of-school suspensions would be allowed for the third act of
“defiance” and only after administrators have used common-sense, research-based discipline
alternatives for the first two times a student is willfully defiant.xxiii
From Recommendation to Action:
Implementing the Recommendations of FUSD’s Graduation Task Force
Recognizing the need “to increase the number of students who stay in school on target to graduate,”xxiv
Fresno Unified School District initiated the Graduation Task Force. According to the Task Force, the
district’s current discipline policies are ineffective in increasing the number of high school students that
graduate on-time. Consequently, the Task Force recommended that the district implement an
alternative school discipline system. According to the Task Force, an effective discipline system “must
restore healthy interactions, help participants learn from their mistakes, and connect students and adults
with the supports they need to keep all students in school on target to graduate.” More specifically, the
Task Force noted that “students need to be taught appropriate behavior and be held accountable for
their misbehaviors. The goal of every intervention should be to return students to their class with their
teacher as quickly as possible.”xxv Given the importance of the recommendations set forth by the
Graduation Task Force, failure to implement an alternative discipline system is a missed opportunity
which costs students, Fresno Unified and the community.
Student costs: With lost instruction time, students with out-of-school suspensions are more likely to fall
behind and 5 times more likely to drop out of high school.xxvi In 2011, 27% of Fresno Unified’s students
did not graduate with their classmates.xxvii Moreover, youth who are suspended or expelled are 3 times
more likely to have contact with the juvenile justice system within one year.xxviii
District costs: Lost revenue due to lower attendance rates that
result from out-of-school suspensions and expulsions cost the
district in Average Daily Attendance (ADA); In one year, Fresno
Unified students missed 32,180 days of school due to
suspensionxxix costing the district an estimated $1,029,760.xxx,xxxi
In one year, Fresno
Unified students missed
32,180 days of school due
to suspension
Societal costs: Harsh discipline policies lead to increased costs to Fresno taxpayers. The 827 drop outs
from the class of 2011,xxxii will cost Fresno, California and the Federal Government roughly $324 million
in lost tax revenue, increased dependency on safety net programs, and costs associated with crime and
incarceration.xxxiii,xxxiv
3
Shifting Away from Harsh Discipline Policies and Towards Restorative Practices
In articulating a vision for a new discipline system, Fresno Unified’s Graduation Task Force noted that a
discipline system should: restore healthy interactions; help participants learn from their mistakes;
develop new opportunities for adults working with students to listen to students’ sides of the story; and
implement effective responses to reduce misbehavior.xxxv
Restorative Justice (RJ) is one approach that meets this vision.xxxvi The intent of Restorative Justice
practices are to keep students in school and on track to graduate by providing a framework focused on
prevention and early intervention. This approach recognizes that misconduct damages relationships
between the victim, offender, and the community and instead promotes the opportunity to learn, repair
harm and restore relationships.xxxvii
Specifically, RJ subscribes to six key areas of practice, including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Accountability and continuous improvement;
Relationships and community building;
Defining and teaching expectations;
Facilitating communication between families and schools;
Interventions for misconduct; and
Use of data and problem solving.xxxviii
Successfully implemented RJ models lead to a reduction of suspensions and expulsions. Consequently,
Restorative Justice practices can: (1) boost student
attendance; (2) increase academic performance;
According to the Task Force, an
(3) create more positive relationships between students
effective discipline system “must
and staff; and (4) increase graduation rates.xxxix
With minimal upfront costs, schools and districts across
the state have demonstrated that alternative discipline
systems, like RJ, can lead to, “cost savings and funding
increases as attendance and achievement rates improve
and out-of-school suspensions decrease.”xl Below are
some examples of the ways in which RJ practices are
being implemented in districts across the state.
restore healthy interactions, help
participants learn from their
mistakes, and connect students
and adults with the supports they
need to keep all students in
school on target to graduate.”
San Francisco Unified School District
In 2009, San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) adopted district-wide Restorative Practices (RP)
policiesxli,xlii with a cost that averaged $5,800 per school site.xliii,xliv Funds were used to train 1,250
employees and included trainings, professional development presentations, and consultants.xlv,xlvi As a
result of their RP policies, the district cut suspensions from 4,341 in 2007-08 to 2,802 in 2010-11.xlvii
Additionally, by decreasing non-mandatory referrals for expulsion (i.e., offenses for which an expulsion
4
is not required by law) by more than 60%, the district increased students instruction time and saved
ADA dollars because while referrals are unlikely to lead to expulsion, they do result in weeks of missed
instruction time.xlviii An example of success is Rosa Parks Elementary, which nearly eliminated
suspensions while increasing the school’s Academic Performance Index (API) score from 713 in 2009 to
792 in 2012.xlix,l
Oakland Unified School District
In 2010, Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) passed a resolution to adopt a district-wide Restorative
Justice (RJ) policy,li with an initial school cost of $40,000 to $50,000 per year to fund an RJ Coordinator at
each sitelii and two-day annual staff trainings.liii Examples of successful outcomes in the district include: a
46% decrease in out-of-school suspensions at Castlemont High School;liv an 87% decline in suspensions
and elimination of expulsions at Cole Middle School;lv and the elimination of disproportionate
suspensions and expulsions for African American students at United For Success Academy.lvi
West Contra Costa Unified School District
With support from the Catholic Charities of the East Bay, Richmond High School adopted a Restorative
School Discipline Program, which incorporates restorative circle conflict resolution,lvii,lviii as well as a
“youth court” system.lix,lx The initial cost of this model was approximately $65,000 a year to cover
training expenses and three days of coaching support each week to build capacity within the school.lxi As
a result of their new discipline system, Richmond High School saw a 60% reduction in school
suspensions, from 1,333 in 2005 to 536 in 2010.lxii The success of the Richmond High pilot has prompted
West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) to expand restorative practices to nine additional
schools.lxiii
Financing Options
Below are some funding opportunities available to help fund new school discipline policies. The sources
below have been used by districts and schools across California, including: Vallejo Unified, Pioneer High
School, and Garfield High School, to help fund Restorative Justice and other alternatives to harsh
discipline policies.
Federal Funding Sources
•
•
•
•
•
•
Title I, Part A
Safe Schools/Healthy Students Initiative
School Improvement Grants (SIG)
California Services for Technical Assistance
and Training (CALSTAT)
Race to the Top Grants
Economic Impact Aid
State Funding Sources
•
•
School Safety and Violence Prevention Act,
California School Block Safety Grant
Mental Health Services Act, Prop 63
Private Funding Sources
•
•
The California Endowment
Open Society Foundations
5
Restorative Justice practices offer a promising solution in accordance with the district’s goal of
increasing “the number of students who stay in school and on target to graduate”. For more information
on funding and implementing alternative discipline policies visit: www.fixschooldiscipline.org
i
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, DataQuest, “Enrollment by Ethnicity
for 2011-12” for Fresno Unified. <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed February 25, 2013.
ii
Children Now analysis of data from California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit.
DataQuest, Create Your Own Report, “Free or Reduced Price Meals” for Fresno Unified.
<http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest> Accessed February 25, 2013.
iii
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, DataQuest, Fresno Unified District
“Language Group Data - Districtwide for 2011 - 12” for Fresno Unified. <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed
February 25, 2013.
iv
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, DataQuest, Special Education
Enrollment by Age and Disability, 2011-12 for Fresno Unified.“<http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed
February 25, 2013.
v
for 2011-12”fore Fresno Unified. <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed February 25, 2013.
vi
Children Now analysis of data from California Department of Education, DataQuest, “Cohort Outcome Summary
for the Class of 2011-12” <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed February 25, 2013.
vii
for 2011-12”fore Fresno Unified. <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed February 25, 2013.
viii
Teske, Steven, MA, JD. “A Study of Zero Tolerance Policies in Schools: A Multi-Integrated Systems Approach to
Improve Outcomes for Adolescents.” Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing. p. 88.
ix
Losen, Daniel J., Tia Martinez, and Jon Gillespie. "Suspended Education in California." 2012. Center for Civil Rights
Remedies. The Civil Rights Project at University of California, Los Angeles.
<http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/school-discipline/suspended-education-incalifornia/SuspendedEd-final3.pdf>. Accessed September 15, 2012.
x
Daniel J. Losen, et. al. 2012.
xi
Children Now analysis of data provided by California Department of Education, Office of the Director, Educational
Data Management Division, District, School & Innovation Branch, data on total expulsions and total expulsions
coded as willful defiance, 2011. June 2012.
xii
Baron, Kathryn. "Racial disparity in school discipline: Harsher punishment for blacks, Hispanics". Thoughts on
Public Education. 2012. <http://toped.svefoundation.org/2012/03/07/racial-disparity-in-ca-school-discipline/>
Accessed September 15, 2012.
xiii
Kathryn Baron, 2012.
xiv
Children Now analysis of data provided by California Department of Education, Office of the Director,
Educational Data Management Division, District, School & Innovation Branch, data on total expulsions
xiv
and total expulsions coded as willful defiance, 2011. June 2012.
xv
Children Now analysis of data provided by California Department of Education, Office of the Director,
Educational Data Management Division, District, School & Innovation Branch, data on total suspensions and
suspensions for each education code, 2010-11 Accessed June 2012.
xvi
California Education Code Section 48900-48927. Legislative Counsel. www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgibin/displaycode?section=edc&group=48001-49000&file=48900-48927 Accessed October 11, 2012.
xvii
Fresno Unified, “Summary Report of Suspensions-End of School Year.” 2009-10.
xviii
xix
Children Now analysis of data from U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights “Out of School
Suspensions in 2009.” <http://ocrdata.ed.gov/Page?t=d&eid=26746&syk=5&pid=559#>. Accessed March 4, 2013.
xx
Fresno Unified, “Summary Report of Suspensions-End of School Year.” 2009-10.
xxi
Ibid.
6
xxii
Escobedo, D. and Faer, L. “Fix School Discipline: Statewide Reforms and Next Steps.” Youth Law Center and
Public Counsel Law Center. January 25, 2013 Webinar. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx4kJoo7Ik0>.
Accessed March 1, 2013.
xxiii
Fix School Discipline. “Bill Would Limit Category Used in 40% of California Suspensions” February 28, 2013.
<http://www.fixschooldiscipline.org/2013/02/bill-would-limit-category-used-in-40-of-california-suspensions/>.
Accessed March 1, 2013.
xxiv
FUSD, “Graduation Task Force Recommendations Report.” June 6, 2012.
xxv
Ibid.
xxvi
xxvii
Children Now analysis of Cohort Outcome Summary data, County Level Analysis of Graduation Data from the
California Department of Education, DataQuest <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. 2011. Accessed February 25,
2013.
xxviii
xxix
FUSD, “Summary Report of Suspensions - End of School Year.” 2010.
xxx
Dollar amount based upon an estimate of $32/day as included in FUSD” Student Attendance Fact Sheet.”
<http://www.fresnounified.org/dept/communications/public/Fact%20Sheets/Student%20Attendance.pdf>.
xxxi
Estimated costs based on a 180 day school year, with a cost of $32/day.
xxxii
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit,
California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), “Cohort Outcome Data for the Class of 201011.” <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest>. Accessed November 12, 2012.
xxxiii
Belfield, Clive R. and Levin, Henry M. "The Economic Losses from High School Dropouts in California." California
Dropout Research Project. UC Santa Barbara. 2007.
<www.cbcse.org/media/download_gallery/Belfield%20and%20Levin--CDRPPolicy%20Brief%201.pdf>. Accessed
September 10, 2012.
xxxiv
Students who dropped out in 2011 (827) multiplied by $391,910 in total economic losses including federal,
state and local taxes equals $982,370,000.
xxxv
FUSD, “Graduation Task Force Recommendations Report.” June 6, 2012.
xxxvi
Michael D. Sumner, PhD., Silverman, Carol J. PhD., Frampton, Mary Louise, JD. “School-based restorative justice
as an alternative to zero-tolerance policies: Lessons from West Oakland” 2010. Thelton E. Henderson Center for
Social Justice, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.
xxxvi
There are a number of promising models for school discipline including Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (PBIS) and Social and Emotional Learning (SEL). PBIS focuses on promoting social skills and reinforcing
positive behaviors in students. SEL focuses on developing the individual qualities, strengths, and assets of a child
related to social, emotional, cognitive, and moral development and positive mental health.
xxxvi
Fix School Discipline. “Social Emotional Learning.” <www.fixschooldiscipline.org/toolkit/sel/>.
xxxvii
Michael D. Sumner, et. al., 2010.
xxxviii
Resolution of the Board of Education of the Oakland Unified School District. Restorative Justice.
<www.ousd.k12.ca.us/cms/lib07/ca01001176/centricity/domain/88/Board_Resolution_RJ_final.pdf>. Accessed
February 25, 2013.
xxxix
Human Impact Partners, “Health Impact Assessment of School Discipline Policies: A Health Impact Assessment
of Status—Quo Discipline, Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, and Restorative Justice Policies in Three
California School Districts.” 2012.
xl
“Fix School Discipline: How We Can Fix School Discipline Toolkit”. 2012. Public Counsel. p. 8.
xli
Ibid. 68.
xlii
SFUSD’s RP model builds fair decision-making practices and facilitates students learning to address the impact of
their actions through a restorative approach. Students learn to accept accountability and to repair the harm their
actions caused, recognize their role in maintaining a safe school environment, and build upon their personal
relationships in the school community and recognize their role as a positive contributing member of the school
community.
xliii
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education and Restorative Practices/Positive
School Climate: Project Status. March 2011. San Francisco Unified School District.
<www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/aboutRestorative Justice Practices: FUSD
7
SFUSD/files/initiatives%20and%20plans/files/Restorative%20Practices%20Project%20Status%20Report_Final_040
211.pdf>
xliv
Adjustment based on SFUSD’s district-wide budget of $665,000 for Restorative Practices, divided into 115
schools in the district.
xlv
Restorative Practices/Positive School Climate: Project Status. March 2011. San Francisco Unified School District.
<www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/aboutSFUSD/files/initiatives%20and%20plans/files/Restorative%20Practices%20Project%20Status%20Report_Final_040
211.pdf>
xlvi
The budget includes $183,000 for salaries and benefit, $117,000 for books and supplies, and $365,000 for
consultants. Restorative Practices/Positive School Climate: Project Status. March 2011. San Francisco Unified
School District. <www.sfusd.edu/en/assets/sfusd-staff/aboutSFUSD/files/initiatives%20and%20plans/files/Restorative%20Practices%20Project%20Status%20Report_Final_040
211.pdf>
xlvi
SFUSD Restorative Practices costs and implementation resulted in 37 RP trainings for 1250 participants as well as
71 RP Professional Development and School Site Presentations in 2011-12 Restorative Justice Newsletter- May
2012. San Francisco Unified School District. Accessed February 25, 2013.
xlvi
<www.healthiersf.org/Programs/PS/Restorative%20Justice/documents/RP%20MS%20newsletter%20May%202012.pdf>
xlvii
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, DataQuest. “San Francisco Unified
Expulsion, Suspension, and Truancy Information” for 2007-08, 2010-11. <http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/>,
Accessed February 25, 2012.
xlviii
Crawford, Amy. "San Francisco schools work with kids to cut suspensions, expulsions" August 2011. The SF
Examiner. <www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/08/san-francisco-schools-work-kids-cut-suspensionsexpulsions#ixzz2LwWcs5X> Accessed February 25, 2013.
xlix
Children Now analysis of data from California Department of Education, Analysis, Measurement, &
Accountability Reporting Division. 2008-09 and 2011-12 Accountability Progress Reporting, Academic Performance
Index Report and from the California Department of Education, DataQuest. Rosa Parks Elementary Expulsion,
Suspension, and Truancy Information for 2008-09 and, 2010-11.
l
Between 2008-09 and 2010-11, Rosa Parks Elementary saw suspensions decline from 40 to 5.
li
"OUSD Restorative Justice" January 11, 2013. Oakland Unified School District. <www.ousd.k12.ca.us/Page/1048>
li
Restorative Justice forges strong and healthy relationships between students and faculty while emphasizing the
use of conflict resolution strategies as a means to handle disagreements. The District started pilot programs in 1012 schools and has also started to adopt PBIS.
lii
David Yusem, Program Manager, Restorative Justice, Family, Schools, & Community Partnerships, Oakland
Unified School District. February 25, 2013.
liii
Oakland Unified School District Family, School, and Community Partnerships Department Whole School
Restorative Justice. Accessed January 25, 2013.
liii
www.ousd.k12.ca.us/cms/lib07/CA01001176/Centricity/Domain/134/Whole_School_Restorative_Justice_info_s
heet_FINAL.pdf Yearly cost includes the cost of teacher substitutes. These costs are nominal compared to the
district financial loss of approximately $160,000 related to ADA just from OUSD African American male suspensions
resulting in combined total of 5,869 days in 2010-2011.“African American Male Achievement Initiative: A Closer
Look at Suspensions of African American Males in OUSD” May 2012. Urban Strategies Council.
liv
"OUSD Restorative Justice" January 11, 2013. Oakland Unified School District. <www.ousd.k12.ca.us/Page/1048>
lv
Michael D. Sumner, et. al., 2010.
lvi
"Highlight on: RJOY and Oakland Unified School District". Fix School Discipline.
<www.fixschooldiscipline.org/toolkit/rjoy/> Accessed February 25, 2013.
lvii
Youth Community Violence Prevention Program. Catholic Charities of the East Bay.
www.cceb.org/programs/youth-community-violence-prevention-program.htm Accessed November 12, 2012.
8
lviii
Their approach focuses on forging healthy, supportive relationships in and out of the classroom. The schools
staff organizes restorative circles, which includes student offenders and works with them to implement restitution
plans. By facilitating conflict resolution among students, the school also emphasizes personal accountability.
lix
Robyn Gee. "Calif. Schools Try Out a Gentler Form of Discipline" 2012. Youth Radio. National Public Radio.
lx
As part of the RJ program, Richmond High School adopted a “youth court” system. In this program, conflicts are
managed by a student jury and student-led prosecutions and defenses. In a court hearing, the jury decides on
appropriate consequences after listening to both sides. Instead of being suspended or expelled, students are held
accountable by other opportunities to make amends for damages, such as apologizing, attending tutoring classes,
going to Saturday school, or the honor of serving on the jury for youth court for future cases. This teaches students
to learn valuable conflict-management skills and take responsibility for their actions.
lxi
“Fix School Discipline: How We Can Fix School Discipline Toolkit”. 2012. Public Counsel. p. 38.
lxii
Children Now analysis of data from the California Department of Education, Educational Demographics Unit,
“West Contra Costa Unified Expulsion, Suspension, and Truancy Information” for 2009-10 and 2004-05.
<http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/>, Accessed September 15, 2012.
lxiii
Burns, Millie. “Highlight on Catholic Charities of the East Bay, Millie Burns and West Contra Costa Unified School
District”. Fix School Discipline. <www.fixschooldiscipline.org/toolkit/cc-wcchusd/> Accessed January 25, 2013.
9
APPENDIX I
BULLARD HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS
Schools
Figarden Elementary
Forkner Elementary
Gibson Elementary
Kratt Elementary
Lawless Elementary
Malloch Elementary
Starr Elementary
Pyramid Elementary School Total
District Elementary School Total
Enrollment
676
428
506
510
659
402
403
3,584
41,193
Total
Suspensions
35
24
34
40
53
21
15
222
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
0
3
0
3
3
3
0
12
469
% of total that are Willful
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
26%
38%
24%
18%
19%
14%
7%
21%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
18
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
24%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
45
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
59
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
37%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
94
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
89
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
29%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
9
6
8
4
7
0
1
35
1,526
MIDDLE SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS
Schools
Tenaya Middle
District Middle School Total
Enrollment
918
10,573
Total
Suspensions
131
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
14
1,779
HIGH SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS
Schools
Bullard High
District High School Total
Enrollment
2,610
22,809
Total
Suspensions
283
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Totals
Pyramid Total
District Total
Enrollment
7,112
74,575
Total
Suspensions
636
14,653
Source: California Department of Education, FUSD Suspensions, 2010-2011
Appendix: 1
APPENDIX I
EDISON HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Columbia Elementary
King Elementary
Kirk Elementary
Lincoln Elementary
Lowell Elementary
Enrollment
570
418
317
519
444
2,268
41,193
Total
Suspensions
270
49
49
54
54
476
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
14
3
1
3
2
23
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
38%
49%
31%
52%
31%
39%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
3
73
70
42
84
272
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
24%
59%
53%
51%
51%
52%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
178
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
53
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
55%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
1,203
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
348
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
51%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
89
21
14
25
15
164
1,526
Schools
Carver Academy
Fort Miller Middle*
Scandinavian Middle*
Tehipite Middle*
Tioga Middle*
Pyramid Middle School Total
Enrollment
108
854
632
507
798
2,899
10,573
Total
Suspensions
54
421
392
435
870
2,172
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
10
176
139
180
356
861
1,779
Schools
Edison High
Enrollment
2,246
22,809
Total
Suspensions
421
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Totals
Enrollment
7,413
District Total
74,575
Total
Suspensions
3,069
14,653
* Middle schools feed into multiple high schools
Appendix: 2
APPENDIX I
FRESNO HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Addams Elementary
Del Mar Elementary
Fremont Elementary
Hamilton Elementary
Heaton Elementary
Homan Elementary
Muir Elementary
Powers-Ginsburg Elementary
Roeding Elementary
Slater Elementary
Williams Elementary
Wilson Elementary
Enrollment
875
648
490
849
557
603
504
491
647
755
638
717
7,774
41,193
Total
Suspensions
264
116
46
112
51
208
39
81
24
227
220
255
1,643
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
35
9
4
10
2
18
7
14
0
26
24
9
158
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
36%
38%
26%
32%
16%
58%
44%
38%
33%
37%
29%
25%
36%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
73
42
47
162
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
59%
51%
46%
52%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
163
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
141
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
36%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
1,066
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
461
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
41%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
61
35
8
26
6
103
10
17
8
58
40
55
427
1,526
Schools
Fort Miller Middle*
Tehipite Middle*
Wawona Middle
Enrollment
854
507
988
2,349
10,573
Total
Suspensions
421
435
364
1,220
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
176
180
120
476
1,779
Schools
Enrollment
2,575
22,809
Total
Suspensions
849
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Pyramid Total
District Total
Enrollment
12,698
74,575
Total
Suspensions
3,712
14,653
Appendix: 3
APPENDIX I
HOOVER HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Eaton Elementary
Holland Elementary
McCardle Elementary
Pyle Elementary
Robinson Elementary
Thomas Elementary
Viking Elementary
Vinland Elementary
Wolters Elementary
Enrollment
435
507
471
695
432
686
740
657
563
5,186
41,193
Total
Suspensions
18
189
51
175
72
154
48
117
78
902
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
4
5
13
8
7
10
9
3
0
59
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
44%
45%
39%
18%
25%
33%
65%
15%
44%
33%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
21
84
105
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
32%
51%
47%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
32
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
43
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
25%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
670
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
207
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
38%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
4
80
7
23
11
41
22
14
34
236
1,526
Schools
Ahwahnee Middle
Tioga Middle*
Enrollment
686
798
1,484
10,573
Total
Suspensions
208
870
1,078
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
46
356
402
1,779
Schools
Herbert Hoover High
Enrollment
2,006
22,809
Total
Suspensions
303
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Source: California Department of Education, FUSD Suspensions,Enrollment
2010-2011
Pyramid Total
8,676
District Total
74,575
Total
Suspensions
2,283
14,653
Appendix: 4
APPENDIX I
McLANE HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Anthony Elementary
Birney Elementary
Centennial Elementary
Ericson Elementary
Ewing Elementary
Hidalgo Elementary
Mayfair Elementary
Norseman Elementary
Webster Elementary
Wishon Elementary
Yokomi Elementary
Enrollment
378
796
772
654
688
792
725
870
428
630
872
7,605
41,193
Total
Suspensions
69
46
80
88
63
61
68
264
95
83
105
1,022
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
4
6
8
11
3
9
6
25
4
14
10
100
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
23%
41%
35%
36%
22%
38%
35%
36%
40%
43%
28%
35%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
70
42
84
37
233
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
53%
51%
51%
36%
49%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
139
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
52
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
37%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
1,167
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
385
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
43%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
12
13
20
21
11
14
18
69
34
22
19
253
1,526
Schools
Scandinavian Middle*
Tehipite Middle*
Tioga Middle*
Yosemite Middle*
Enrollment
632
507
798
619
2,556
10,573
Total
Suspensions
392
435
870
381
2,078
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
139
180
356
100
775
1,779
Schools
Enrollment
2,400
22,809
Total
Suspensions
517
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Pyramid Total
District Total
Enrollment
12,561
74,575
Total
Suspensions
3,617
14,653
Appendix: 5
APPENDIX I
ROOSEVELT HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Burroughs Elementary
Calwa Elementary
Jackson Elementary
Jefferson Elementary
Lane Elementary
Ann B. Leavenworth
Rowell Elementary
Vang Pao Elementary
Winchell Elementary
Enrollment
748
691
501
483
666
772
783
705
757
6,106
41,193
Total
Suspensions
73
55
103
24
169
93
41
78
62
698
5,751
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
16
2
1
2
24
0
3
6
4
58
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
45%
15%
64%
13%
50%
30%
24%
17%
24%
37%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
54
69
42
33
37
235
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
47%
44%
51%
44%
36%
45%
46%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
78
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
56
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
36%
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
1,041
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
349
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
42%
39%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
17
6
65
1
61
28
7
7
11
203
1,526
Schools
Kings Canyon Middle*
Sequoia Middle*
Tehipite Middle*
Terronez Middle*
Yosemite Middle*
Enrollment
897
855
507
817
619
3,695
10,573
Total
Suspensions
464
404
435
548
381
2,232
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
166
108
180
206
100
760
1,779
Schools
Enrollment
Roosevelt High
2,334
22,809
Total
Suspensions
371
3,764
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Totals
District Total
Enrollment
12,135
74,575
Total
Suspensions
3,301
14,653
Appendix: 6
APPENDIX I
SUNNYSIDE HIGH SCHOOL PYRAMID
Schools
Ayer Elementary
Aynesworth Elementary
David L. Greenberg Elementary
Easterby Elementary
Edith B. Storey Elementary
Ezekiel Balderas Elementary
Mario G. Olmos Elementary
Molly S. Bakman Elementary
Turner Elementary
Enrollment
681
628
554
609
793
636
741
759
665
6,066
41,193
Total
Suspensions
109
24
35
75
107
128
32
76
108
694
5,751
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
10
4
12
29
28
20
5
21
51
180
1,526
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
9
0
0
6
7
18
4
8
6
58
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
17%
17%
34%
47%
33%
30%
28%
38%
53%
34%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
54
69
33
156
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
47%
44%
44%
45%
46%
Schools
Kings Canyon Middle*
Sequoia Middle*
Terronez Middle*
Enrollment
897
855
817
2,569
10,573
Total
Suspensions
464
404
548
1,416
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
166
108
206
480
1,779
Schools
Sunnyside High
Enrollment
3,229
22,809
Total
Suspensions
246
3,764
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
59
887
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
10
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
28%
37%
Total
Suspensions
2,356
14,653
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
719
4,192
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
224
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
40%
39%
Totals
Pyramid Total
District Total
Enrollment
11,864
74,575
Appendix: 7
APPENDIX I
FUSD PYRAMID TOTALS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SUSPENSION TOTALS
Elementary School Totals
Bullard High School Pyramid
Edison High School Pyramid
Fresno High School Pyramid
Hoover High School Pyramid
McLane High School Pyramid
Roosevelt High School Pyramid
Sunnyside High School Pyramid
District Elementary School Total*
Enrollment
3,584
2,268
7,774
5,186
7,605
6,106
6,066
41,193
Total
Suspensions
222
476
1,643
902
1,022
698
694
5,751
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
35
164
427
236
253
203
180
1,526
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
12
23
158
59
100
58
58
469
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
21%
39%
36%
33%
35%
37%
34%
35%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
18
272
162
105
233
235
156
597
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
24%
52%
52%
47%
49%
45%
45%
46%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
59
53
141
43
52
56
10
494
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
37%
55%
36%
25%
37%
36%
28%
37%
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
89
348
461
207
385
349
224
1,560
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
29%
51%
41%
38%
43%
42%
40%
39%
MIDDLE SCHOOL SUSPENSION TOTALS
Middle School Totals
District Middle School Total*
Enrollment
918
2,899
2,349
1,484
2,556
3,695
2,569
10,573
Total
Suspensions
131
2,172
1,220
1,078
2,078
2,232
1,416
5,138
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
14
861
476
402
775
760
480
1,779
HIGH SCHOOL SUSPENSION TOTALS
High School Totals
Enrollment
2,610
2,246
2,575
2,006
2,400
2,334
3,229
22,809
Total
Suspensions
283
421
849
303
517
371
246
3,764
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
45
178
163
32
139
78
59
887
PYRAMID SUSPENSION TOTALS
Pyramid Totals
District Total*
Enrollment
7,112
7,413
12,698
8,676
12,561
12,135
11,864
74,575
Total
Suspensions
636
3,069
3,712
2,283
3,617
3,301
2,356
14,653
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
94
1,203
1,066
670
1,167
1,041
719
4,192
*Pyramid totals and district totals will not be equal because a) 8 middle schools feed into more than one high school and are therefore counted more than once, b) district
totals include Charter, Magnet, Alternative, and Special Education schools.
Appendix: 8
APPENDIX I
CHARTER / MAGNET / ALTERNATIVE / SPECIAL EDUCATION SCHOOLS
Schools
Bullard Talent Project
Irwin O. Addicot Elementary
Manchester Gate
Morris E. Dailey Charter Elementary
Phoenix Elementary Academy Community Day
Sunset Elementary
Valley Arts and Science Academy
Valley Preparatory Academy Charter
Elementary School Total Charter/Magnet/Alternative/Special Education
Enrollment
768
42
735
219
46
235
275
284
Total
Suspensions
62
0
3
14
11
4
0
0
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
17
0
0
7
4
0
0
0
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
27%
0%
0%
57%
36%
0%
0%
0%
2,604
94
28
1
31%
41,193
5,751
1,526
469
35%
Enrollment
603
505
786
Total
Suspensions
106
344
16
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
40
118
0
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
21
25
0
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
58%
42%
0%
1,894
466
158
46
44%
10,573
5,138
1,779
597
46%
Total
Suspensions
152
149
67
13
188
79
13
0
0
105
0
0
8
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
30
16
1
6
40
11
0
0
0
89
0
0
0
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
28
22
9
0
16
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
38%
26%
15%
46%
30%
20%
0%
0%
0%
85%
0%
0%
0%
774
193
80
35%
3,764
887
494
37%
Suspensions for
"Willful Defiance"
Suspensions for
"Profanity/
Obsenity"
Defiance &
Profanity/Obsenity
Schools
Baird Middle
Cooper Middle
Edison Computech
Middle Schools Total Charter/Magnet/Alternative/Special Education
Schools
Enrollment
Cambridge Continuation High
411
Carter G. Woodson Public Charter
433
Dakota Campus
49
Design Science Early College High
243
276
Erma Duncan Polytechnical High
1,005
Florence E. Rata
65
Fresno Academy for Civic and Entrepreneurial
83
65
School of Unlimited Learning
228
Sierra Charter
715
University High
479
Young Academic Center
1,357
High Schools Total 5,409
Charter/Magnet/Alternative/Special Education
22,809
TOTAL SUSPENSIONS
Totals
Total - Charter/Magnet/Alternative/Special
Education
District Total
Enrollment
Total
Suspensions
9,907
1,334
379
127
38%
74,575
14,653
4,192
1,560
39%
Appendix: 9

Because out-of-school suspensions take students

Transcription

Similar documents

LA County Wellness Course: Learning 2

Directions from NCTAMS to Helemano Elementary School

Castori Elementary School - Twin Rivers Unified School District

yozen frogurt flyer

additional information for 311 Plonk Road 3

The architect`s major challenge in designing the new Cresthaven

Job Description: ES Physical Education Teacher, Grades 3-5

11-13-15 - Easton Valley CSD

Constructs of Ritual Evolution www.wearecore.com

Document 6578688