|
April 1999
Dear Friends,
I am pleased to issue our annual report, Student Exclusions in
Massachusetts Public Schools: 1997-98. This report provides information regarding student
exclusions, defined as the removal of a student from school for disciplinary reasons permanently, indefinitely
or for more than ten consecutive school days. This information will be useful to the legislature, the
Governor, and the Board of Education as they continue to address the issues of student discipline and school
safety.
The Education Reform Act of 1993 and subsequent amendments authorize
school principals, rather than
school committees, to expel students who carry weapons or illegal drugs
to school, assault school
personnel or are convicted of a felony off school grounds. Districts
are not required to provide excluded
students with alternative education, with the exception of special
education students who under federal law
are entitled to receive alternative education if removed from school for
ten days or more.
Summary of Key Findings
In the 1997-98 school year, there were 1,334 student exclusions, an
11 percent decrease from the
1,498 exclusions in the 1996-97 school year. Springfield accounted for
much of this decrease, as the
number of student exclusions in Springfield declined from 399 in 1996-97
to 302 in 1997-98.
Springfields superintendent Peter Negroni attributed this drop to
the fact that more students are
being placed in alternative programs that he believes are effectively
addressing many of the issues that can
lead to the removal of students from school.
Nearly 67 percent of all students who were excluded from school were
provided with alternative
education, an increase of nearly four percentage points from the 1996-97
school year. Among regular
education students excluded from school, 58 percent were provided with
alternative education, an increase
of over three percentage points from the previous year. Of special
education students excluded from
school, 95 percent were provided with alternative education, an increase
of slightly more than six
percentage points from the prior year.
For those students who were excluded from school and were provided
with alternative education, just
under 57 percent attended an in-district alternative program, and nearly
29 percent were provided with
home tutoring. In cases where students were not provided with
alternative education, the reason reported
for nearly 70 percent of exclusions was that the school chose not to provide it,
down by over five percentage points from the prior
year, but up by nearly 32 percentage
points from the 1995-96 school year.
Over one-quarter of all student exclusions (26 percent) involved a
weapon, virtually the same as the
previous year. Of those exclusions that involved a weapon, under six
percent involved a gun. The
percentage of student exclusions that resulted from possession of an
illegal substance (22 percent) also
stayed about the same as the prior year. The percentage of exclusions
resulting from a felony committed
outside of school more than doubled, from four to nearly ten
percent.
In comparison to the total student enrollment, a disproportionate
number of students excluded from
school were African-American, Asian, Hispanic, and Native American
students. Minority students
comprised 23 percent of the total student enrollment but accounted for
58 percent of student exclusions.
Although white students comprised 76 percent of the total student
enrollment, they accounted for 41
percent of student exclusions.
Exclusion rates varied among school districts. In 1997-98, 155
districts excluded students, an
increase of one district from the previous year. Over half of all
school districts, or 199 districts,
reported no student exclusions. There were 91 districts that reported
between one and three exclusions
for the school year, and 43 districts reported between four and nine
exclusions. Twenty-one districts
reported ten or more student exclusions, down from 24 districts the
prior year.
Safe schools are a top priority. Providing students with a safe
learning environment is essential to
furnishing them with an effective education. Suspending and expelling
some disruptive students will
strengthen the climate for learning for the students in school. Many
districts do an outstanding job in
providing most or all of the students they exclude with alternative
education. That is a very important goal
statewide. We appreciate the efforts that school districts are making
to provide safe and orderly schools
and to provide serious learning opportunities for all students.
Sincerely,
David P. Driscoll
Commissioner of Education
Next Table of Contents
last updated: April 1, 1999
|