It was reported in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the Woodland Hills School District was found, in a national report on student suspensions, to be one of the ten worst districts in America at suspending elementary students.
The report — titled “Are We Closing the School Discipline Gap?” — called the rates “alarming” for the top 10 school districts with at least 1,000 students in elementary schools that included kindergarten through fifth grade and did not have grades 7 or 8.
In 2011-12, the most recent year in the report, 23.8 percent of elementary students were suspended out of school once or more in Woodland Hills, an increase of 4.5 percentage points over the prior year. The national elementary average is 2.6 percent, and the Pennsylvania elementary average is 2.0 percent. A student who is suspended more than once counts only once in the report...
...The report also found “gross disparities” in the number of out-of-school suspensions given to students with disabilities or from historically disadvantaged racial, ethnic and gender subgroups, saying the issue of suspensions is “a profound matter of civil rights and social justice.” Post-Gazette, Feb. 14,2015.
Imagine. One out of every four elementary students in the Woodland Hills Schools is suspended out of school during a school year. We are talking about students between the ages of 5 and 10, possibly 11 or at most 12. The suspension rate in Woodland Hills is 9 times the national average.
So what does a suspension mean? A suspension is a punishment for an infraction, spelled out in the District's student handbook, that is severe enough that the child is denied the opportunity to come to school for one or more days. To get a deeper understanding of how Woodland Hills uses suspensions as a disciplinary action, one can dig into their student handbook.
Exclusions from school (Out-of-School Suspension)
(i) The state law provides that the Board of School Directors define and publish the types of offenses that could lead to exclusion from school.
(aa) Exclusion from school may be imposed for any Level 2 offense and the following Level 1 offenses, in severe circumstances: Cafeteria Violations, Class Cutting, Failure to Attend Detention, Fighting, Leaving Class or School Without Permission, Misconduct, Possession of Obscene Material, Smoking, Tardiness and Truancy. (Pg. 43)
The handbook makes the distinction between "Level 1 and Level 2 offences." Level 2 are the most serious offences which include bringing a weapon to school, possession of drugs or alcohol, terrorist threats, hazing, severe bullying, etc. As you can see from the handbook, Level 1 offences are for general unruliness, defiance and lack of engagement. And the handbook states they will result in a suspension "in severe circumstances."
How does Woodland Hills become one of the worst districts in the nation for suspensions in elementary school? Those who read this blog know how Woodland Hills came into being.
After a decade of arguing how to provide a school district that was integrated and equitable, and getting no where, the judge ordered Churchill Area, Edgewood, Swissvale Area, Turtle Creek and General Braddock school districts to merge (1983). The judge created an integrated school district from five existing neighboring school districts. These five districts were quite different demographically. Churchill and Edgewood were exclusive white middle class communities, Swissvale and Turtle Creek were working class blue collar, integrated municipalities and General Braddock was a poor black community. Two of these municipalities, Edgewood and Swissvale, are part of the Regent Square area. As one can imagine, the merger of these districts was extremely controversial. This was a difficult mixing of populations that was forced by the courts, not voluntary or through migration of families as they moved east out of Pittsburgh.Thus began an experiment in forced integration. You know the drill. The middle class families flee farther east, the district goes from majority white to majority black, from majority middle class to majority poverty, and test scores and discipline plummet. Teachers with little or no background working with children in poverty can't manage their behaviors... they see the behaviors as anti-social. They don't have the training to understand these behaviors from a mental/physical/emotional health perspective. So students are sent out of the classroom to the office. The office suspends them for a few days and nothing changes.
You can't suspend your way to compliance or success... not with students who have nothing to lose. We have seen stories like this before in the nation's poorest school districts. So why am I writing about this one?
For some reason, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette decided to publish an editorial that takes a position on school suspensions. Follow the link and read the entire editorial.
 |
| Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, February 25, 2015 |
The P-G is suggesting that these "defiant, belligerent or violent" elementary students should be suspended so the others can learn. Do they understand the distinction between Level 1 and Level 2 offences? Do they know what type of offences the Woodland Hills Elementary Schools are dealing with? The P-G does not conjecture as to why the number of "defiant, belligerent or violent" students in Woodland Hills Elementary Schools is 9 times the national average. Have they done any research into the core of the problem in Woodland Hills?
The P-G states that "schools must be free to use what works." I assume this means they believe that a punishment based approach is a strategy that works. Or at least works for the "good kids" now that the "bad kid" has been removed.
Most of the suspensions in Woodland Hills Elementary Schools were not for Level 2 infractions, they were Level 1 nuisance infractions such as refusing to work, misbehavior, rude language or fighting. They were for students who were disengaged from the learning process. Students who are disengaged pose a difficult problem for classroom teachers. Often the teacher struggles to understand what is motivating the child, or how to handle the situation. This lack of insight and/or experience often ends with the teacher escalating the problem. The teacher is not a bad person, just unaware of what strategies work with poor, at-risk students.
What is the Post-Gazette getting at? Have we come to the point in America when a relatively liberal newspaper blames elementary school children for their emotional/mental/physical needs? They are not "defiant, belligerent or violent"; they are angry, depressed and confused. They are wondering why they are hungry, or don't have a father, or why they hear gun shots at night. They are wondering why there is so much violence, drugs and anger around them. They are confused and are blaming themselves. And their "behavior" in class is a cry for help, begging for someone to show them some love, some structure, some caring and the patience to stay with them for an extended period of time.
The Post-Gazette's premise is incorrect. This is not about what punishment to use. This is about creating a healthy and supportive environment where all students are welcome. This is about a full time nurse, a full time social worker, counselors, teachers who are trained in intervention. This is about a well run SAP - Student Assistance Program. It is about creating a caring healthy environment where mental/physical/emotional health is key to success. It is about a school culture that treats all children like our own. And it is about a school that works proactively, rather than reactively to student needs and behaviors.
P-G... I know what you were thinking. You were thinking like white, middle class people, who grew up in safe caring environments. A simple "go to your room" or "your on punishment" or "no TV for a week" sufficed. It worked for me... it should work for all children. You haven't a clue. Thank goodness the Superintendent of Woodland Hills does not agree with you, “There’s no way to avoid the fact that we have used suspension as an inappropriate tool for discipline and management extending way down into our elementaries.”
If you think I'm overreacting, imagine what would happen if a middle class white child was suspended for acting out or being disruptive in a classroom or swearing. I can just hear it... "he's had a tough time since his parents got divorced", "he's got ADHD and he forgot his meds this morning", "I think he is having a bad day, can he spend some time in the office and clear his head and go back to class later". Or better yet try and suspend a white middle class special education student. The parent, who knows the laws on due process and Special Education, will threaten you with a grievance and a lawyer if you don't allow the student to attend class.
We are a simple minded, mean-spirited people. It is easier to blame the child... or the child's parent. It is more nuanced to blame the lack of jobs, the breakup of families, the lack of ability of schools to be sensitive to the mental/physical/emotional health of all of its students. How dare the Post-Gazette use its bully pulpit to encourage removing children before they encourage schools to become healthy supportive institutions.
Sloppy thinking. It borders on being defiant and belligerent. Post-Gazette you are suspended for three days. Come back to school with your mother and a new attitude.
