School Discipline in Arkansas

1. School Discipline in Arkansas Kaitlin Anderson, Jennifer Ash, Gary Ritter UA Office for Education Policy July 11, 2014 State Board of Education

2. AR Education Reports • Policy Briefs • Report Cards • Newsletters • Data Resources www.officeforeducationpolicy.org/

3. Accessing Data Resources through the OEP Refer to menu bar at the top left of the OEP homepage. http://www.officeforeducationpolicy.org/ Arkansas School Data has multiple databases at both school and district levels. Click on Arkansas School Data

4. Overview of 20 Minutes • Introduction – Act 1329 requires study of school discipline • Initial Report and Database • Additional Analyses • Are there regional differences in discipline rates? • Are their differences in discipline rates based on district size, demographics, or academic performance? • Are discipline rates and academic outcomes correlated? • Questions

5. Introduction • Act 1329: An Act to Evaluate the Impact of School Discipline on Student Achievement; And For Other Purposes • Report to be prepared by July 1 of each year, beginning in 2014, to include: • Data on enrollment, disciplinary rates, achievement status of districts, and disciplinary disparity between subgroups • Possible disciplinary strategies and resources Arkansas school districts can access

6. Limitations of Data • Discipline data – obtained from the Arkansas Department of Education: • Self-reported by districts • Some categories unstandardized • Including undefined “other” category (e.g. six districts had “other” rates of over 20%. Norphlet, a district of about 412 students, had 1321-1474 “other” actions each year.) • Missing data • Including “referrals to law enforcement authorities”

7. Challenges of Interpreting Data • Districts have varying: • Discipline policies and plans • Personnel to implement policies and plans • Unclear whether high or low discipline rates are positive or negative? • Unclear in how to interpret any potential disparities? • Act 1329: “Disparity in discipline rates does not necessarily indicate discrimination; it can result from an ineffective school climate or from cultural strategies that are not successful in engaging the academic efforts of all students.”

8. Initial Report • While interpretations not obvious, discipline findings are nonetheless interesting • Initial Report includes: • Main Report: overview of state level findings • Appendix A: District Level Database (searchable) of all 7 disciplinary outcomes • Appendix B: District Level Database (searchable) with 7 disciplinary outcomes by subgroup • Appendix C: District Level Database (searchable) of disparities between subgroups

9. Searchable Databases

10. Additional Analysis

11. Discipline Data Overview Discipline rates (as defined by Act 1329), 3 year average (2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13) Incidents per 100 students N = 257

12. ISS Rates by Subgroup In School Suspension rates, 3 year average (2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13) Incidents per 100 students Disparity = 5.0% 12.8 8.9 Disparity = 7.1% 21.6

13. OSS Rates by Subgroup Out of School Suspension rates, 3 year average (2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13) Incidents per 100 students Disparity = 3.7% 8.0 Disparity = 5.2% 11.9

14. ISS and OSS Subgroup Disparities

15. Regional Differences

16. Regional Differences - ISS Northwest ISS = 5.8% Northeast ISS = 7.3% Central ISS = 5.2% Southeast ISS = 11.8% Southwest ISS = 9.5%

17. Regional Differences – ISS (Incidents per 100 students) Southeast also has the highest OSS rate and Corporal Punishment incidents per 100 students Northwest ISS = 13.3 Northeast ISS = 16.4 Central ISS = 11.9 Southeast ISS = 28.0 Southwest ISS = 22.8

18. Regional Differences - OSS Northwest OSS = 3.5% Northeast OSS = 4.9% Central OSS = 5.2% Southeast OSS = 7.7% Southwest OSS = 4.7%

19. Regional Differences – Corporal Punishment Northwest CP = 3.9% Northeast CP = 6.8% Central Corporal Punishment Rate is low due to zero use of Corporal Punishment in large schools such as LRSD, PCSSD, Conway SD Central CP = 2.8% Southeast CP = 7.6% Southwest CP = 6.4%

20. State-wide Differences

21. Discipline Rates by District Size • ISS rates are highest in mid-size districts • OSS rates increase with district size • Corporal Punishments rates decrease with district size • None of the 5 largest districts use corporal punishment Smallest Largest DistrictsDistricts

22. Discipline Rates by Racial Composition • ISS rates are higher in districts serving more minority students • OSS rates are higher in districts serving more minority students • Corporal Punishment rates are highest in mostly white districts

23. Discipline Rates by District % Low-Income • In general, discipline rates increase as district poverty increases • Corporal Punishment is slight less clear as there is a dip in the higher poverty districts Lower Higher PovertyPoverty

24. Discipline Rates by Academic Performance • In general, discipline rates are lower in districts with higher test scores Lower Higher PerformancePerformance

25. Correlation Between Discipline Rates and Academic Outcomes • We see a similar story with graduation rates • Graduation rates are negatively correlated with ISS rates and OSS rates • Graduation rates and corporal punishment rates are barely related at all

26. What Do These Correlations Look Like? Stronger Negative Weak Negative to Unrelated

27. In Summary… Disparities exist between discipline rates for different subgroups, in predictable ways These disparities are greater when considering students have repeated discipline actions Caution: Not obvious how to interpret high or low discipline rates ISS and OSS rates are negatively correlated to academic outcomes Room for improvement in collection and categorization of data (e.g. “other”) This great database provided by the state can be used to answer many more questions

28. Questions?