Out-of-School Suspension for Minor
Misbehavior
Bert M. Eliason,
Robert H. Horner, Seth L. May
January, 2013
PDF Download (199 KB)
Research Statement and Rationale
This evaluation brief examines the
practice of using out-of-school suspension as a consequence for behavior coded
as “minor” on office discipline referral forms. During the 2011-2012 school
year, nearly 20% of the schools using the School-wide Information System data
base reported using out-of-school suspension as the main consequence for at
least one student behavior incident coded as a minor misbehavior. Cumulatively,
these instances resulted in over ten-thousand suspensions from school. Though
most schools in this group had between one and five of these incidents, nearly
thirty percent of the schools reported out-of-school suspension as a
consequence for minor behavior more than five times and several schools used out-of-school
suspension more than one hundred times. This report looks at the statistics
surrounding these occurrences, discusses possible rationales, and outlines a
strategy PBIS Coaches and SWIS Facilitators can use to determine whether
schools are involved in this practice. If they are, we suggest these schools improve
data entry procedures or reconsider the use of school suspension for behavior
that is described as minor.
Data Source
The data for this
brief comes from the School-wide Information System (SWIS) and includes major
and minor office discipline referrals (ODRs) entered into the SWIS data system
during the 2011-2012 school year, and specifically, those ODRs coded as minor where
the consequence was out-of school suspension.
SWIS Data
A common practice in
schools adopting School-wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports
(SWPBIS) is to use a data-based decision-making process to track progress
toward enhanced school environment through improved student behavior. During
the 2011-2012 school year, 6,212 schools used SWIS to track that progress. Vincent,
Horner and May (2009) describe SWIS as “…a web-based ODR
data collection system that allows schools to record the occurrence of a number
of behavioral violations and subsequent administrative decisions. Two levels of
behavioral violations exist in SWIS: minor violations and major violations.
Minor violations include low-intensity defiance, low-intensity disruption,
inappropriate language, and inappropriate physical contact. Major violations
include abusive language, insubordination, sustained disruption, and fighting.” Colvin and Lazar (1997) defined this
difference by noting that a record of behavior handled immediately and quickly by
staff in the context in which the behavior occurs was probably minor. Behavior
that needed to be handled by an office administrator (e.g., principal,
vice-principal, dean of students) was probably a major behavior.
Out-of-School Suspension
Exclusion from school
is the most drastic consequence a school administrator can use to address
inappropriate student behavior. Since school suspension has been linked to the
increased likelihood of academic failure, dropping out, and poor employment
outcomes (Balfanz, R., 2008; Dynarski, et al. 2008; Roderick, M., 1993), it is
important that schools determine if there are alternatives to this practice.
Additionally, it seems likely that if a behavior is accurately described as minor,
exclusion from school may not be the best consequence an administrator might
choose.
Data Presentation
Table 1 presents a
descriptive summary of major and minor referral activity for the 6,212 schools
entering referral data into SWIS during the 2011-2012 school year. During that year,
336,395 ODRs resulted in Out-of-School Suspension (OSS). Pertinent to this
conversation, 10,576 (3.1%) were entered as minor referrals, which resulted in
students missing a total of 18,079.5 days of school. Though most schools only entered one minor
ODR with OSS as a consequence (mean = 9.13, range = 1 – 316), it seems
incongruent that minor referral activity would incur such an extreme
consequence. In Figure 1, we see that this was not an infrequent occurrence as 1,159
(18.7%) of the schools using SWIS had at least one occurrence where a minor ODR
resulted in an OSS.
Table 1. Data Related to Schools Using SWIS (2011-2012)
Level |
SWIS Schools |
Total ODRs |
Minor ODRs |
Total OSS |
Minor ODRs w/ OSS |
Schools w/ Minor ODRs w/
OSS |
Mean Minor ODRs w/ OSS
per Level |
Range Minor ODRs w/ OSS
per Level |
PreK-K |
29 |
10,107 |
4,200 |
159 |
9 |
1 |
9.00 |
9 - 9 |
K-6 |
3,768 |
1,784,448 |
899,201 |
87,713 |
2,440 |
528 |
4.62 |
1 - 110 |
6-8 |
1,096 |
1,197,411 |
516,480 |
116,137 |
3,769 |
280 |
13.46 |
1 - 116 |
9-12 |
624 |
795,263 |
197,264 |
86,489 |
3,044 |
171 |
17.80 |
1 - 316 |
K-8 |
361 |
263,483 |
96,927 |
22,103 |
761 |
92 |
8.27 |
1 - 87 |
K-12 |
152 |
155,922 |
48,542 |
8,448 |
164 |
42 |
3.90 |
1 - 17 |
Other |
182 |
207,369 |
58,889 |
15,346 |
389 |
46 |
8.46 |
1 - 73 |
Totals |
6,212 |
4,414,003 |
1,821,503 |
336,395 |
10,576 |
1159 |
9.13 |
1 - 316 |
Figure 1. Schools Entering Minor Referrals with
Out-of-School Suspension as Main Consequence 
Discussion
Without truly
understanding the context of the incidents where a minor referral ended with
OSS as a consequence, it is difficult to ascertain the rationale behind each of
these scenarios. We did find a number of reasons that might explain why the
majority of these seemingly discrepant conditions exist. Some of the referrals
were attributable to mistakes in coding or data entry, and others seem likely
due to school policy, procedure, and practice. These characteristics are
described more fully below.
Miscoded
Some of the referrals
were likely miscoded. Referrals where students were suspended for striking a
teacher, threatening a peer, or throwing furniture at others may have been
entered as minor, but should have been entered as a major referral for
inappropriate and unsafe behavior.
Data Entry Error
Some referrals contained
data entry errors. In SWIS, when a referral is determined to have a suspension
as a consequence, the system prompts the data entry person to indicate the
number of days suspended in increments of half days (e.g., 0.5 days, 3.0 days,
4.5 days). Table 2 shows that a total of 623 (5.9%) of the minor referrals with
OSS had “zero” entered as the amount of time the student was suspended. If a
student is suspended for zero time, are they truly suspended? Selecting
suspension as the consequence when there was no actual suspension might be a
miscoding error in that the behavioral consequence should have been something
other than suspension. Yet, if suspension truly was the assigned consequence,
entering zero days suspended may have been the result of data entry error.
Table 2. Minor Referrals with Suspension
Indicating 0 Days Suspended
Level |
Minor ODR = OSS |
Suspended 0 Days |
Percent Suspended 0 Days |
Pre K-K |
9 |
0 |
0.0% |
K-6 |
2,440 |
82 |
3.4% |
6-8 |
3,769 |
263 |
7.0% |
9-12 |
3,044 |
176 |
5.8% |
K-8 |
761 |
11 |
1.4% |
K-12 |
164 |
8 |
4.9% |
Other |
389 |
83 |
21.3% |
Totals |
10,576 |
623 |
5.9% |
Policy - Repeated Misbehavior
Some of the minor
referrals culminated in an OSS because the student had multiple minor ODRs
prior to the referral that resulted in suspension. Some referrals reflected
behavior where students committed relatively minor infractions (e.g., minor
defiance, minor disruption, minor tardy), but were suspended because they had
numerous ODRs prior to the incident that triggered the temporary exclusion from
school. Many SWPBIS schools have a policy where multiple minors equal a major
referral (e.g., the student receives a third minor referral, and that referral,
because it is for offense number three, becomes a major referral). Schools usually
enter such minors as a major due to the repetitive nature of the behavior. The
student’s behavioral file then has a record of the school’s position regarding
the more problematic repetition of the ongoing behavior. Sometimes these
referrals are inadvertently entered as minor since the triggering behavior was
minor, but by the school’s policy of multiple minors equals a major, the
incident should have been coded as a major.
Table 3 demonstrates
the number of referrals students at various grade levels received prior to the
minor referral that lead to an out-of-school suspension. If a preponderance of these minor
referrals were related to policies where a third or fourth minor results in a
major, we should see an increase in Table 3 at referrals number three or four.
Instead we see that the greatest amount of suspensions at each grade level were
for students who had either zero referrals (14.3%) or only one referral (11.5%)
prior to the referral that lead to the OSS. This means students were suspended
from school for either their first or second referral, even though the behavior
in that referral was described as minor. Additionally, there is no significant
increase at referrals number three (8.7%) or number four (7.0%). The data actually
shows less than 16% of these referrals are the result of the “three strikes and
you are out” policies.
Table 3. Referrals
Prior to ODR that Lead to OSS
Procedure – Regular Practice
While some schools
may have mistakenly entered ODRs that resulted in OSS as a minor, other schools
seemingly made a regular practice of suspending students for multiple
inappropriate behaviors while still coding the referral as minor. In Table 3,
42.7% of the minor referrals that resulted in OSS were for students who had
more than five prior referrals (median = 4, range = 0 – 160). This seems
to suggest some administrators may implement as practice the suspension of
students who receive multiple referrals, even when the referral being addressed
is for a minor misbehavior.
Table 4 shows the
percentage of schools at each level that entered n minor referrals with OSS as a consequence. More than one-third
(36.6%) only entered only one such referral during the 2011-2012 school year.
These situations are likely one-time miscoding or data entry errors. Nearly three-fourths
(70.5%) entered no more than five such referrals, and 81.8% of the schools are
entering no more than ten per year. Schools in the above ranges are making such
entries from about once per year to about once per month. While it is
conceivable that data entry errors related to ODRs with OSS could occur
annually, it probably grows less likely that the cause is data entry error when
the situation is occurring monthly.
Table 4. Percentage of Schools with Minor
Referrals that Resulted in Suspension
Level |
Number of Schools |
Percentage of Schools with n Minor Referrals Resulting in OSS |
1 |
1-5 |
1-10 |
>10 |
Pre K-K |
1 |
0.0% |
0.0% |
100.0% |
0.0% |
K-6 |
521 |
44.9% |
79.7% |
89.8% |
10.2% |
6-8 |
285 |
30.5% |
63.5% |
74.0% |
26.0% |
9-12 |
171 |
28.7% |
59.1% |
71.9% |
28.1% |
K-8 |
102 |
29.4% |
65.7% |
79.4% |
20.6% |
K-12 |
47 |
29.8% |
68.1% |
83.0% |
17.0% |
Others |
46 |
32.6% |
65.2% |
80.4% |
19.6% |
Average |
|
36.6% |
70.5% |
81.8% |
18.2% |
In Table 4, it is
concerning that nearly one-fifth (18.2%) of the schools entered minor referrals
that resulted in out-of-school suspension even more frequently than once per
month and in some cases did so on a regular basis. The third column of Table 5
shows the number of schools at each grade level that entered more than 20 such
referrals in the 2011-2012 school year. Entering more than 20 minor referrals
with OSS would mean that on average for those 109 schools this practice is
occurring more frequently than every two weeks.
The columns in Table 5
labeled Ex. 1 through Ex. 4 show the number of minor referrals greater than 20
resulting in out-of-school suspension that the top four schools at each grade
level recorded. We have evidence of one elementary, six middle, and seven high
schools using this practice more than 100 times in one year. Although these 14 schools
are outliers of the 6,212 entering data into the SWIS system, at this rate, the
procedure is a practice that the school is instituting on a regular basis and
in some cases, on an average of multiple times daily.
Table 5. Schools with Minor ODRs that Resulted
in OSS (2011-2012)
Level |
Total Schools |
Schools with >20 ODRs with OSS |
Top Four Schools having >20 ODRs
with OSS |
Ex. 1 |
Ex. 2 |
Ex. 3 |
Ex. 4 |
Pre K-K |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
K-6 |
521 |
23 |
49 |
50 |
64 |
110 |
6-8 |
285 |
45 |
120 |
167 |
190 |
291 |
9-12 |
171 |
26 |
196 |
238 |
292 |
316 |
K-8 |
102 |
10 |
28 |
31 |
32 |
87 |
K-12 |
47 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Others |
46 |
5 |
29 |
33 |
60 |
73 |
Recommendations
Many of the instances
where minor ODRs with OSS as a consequence may be attributable to mistakes in
process or at data entry, and there are possible contextual explanations for
the use of out-of-school suspension for some behaviors that were correctly coded
as minor. Still, considering the gravity and possible impacts linked to the use
of out-of-school suspension, the above data beg at least two questions:
1. If a
behavior is truly considered minor, should schools be using school suspension
as a consequence?
2. If the
behavior is significant enough to warrant suspension as a consequence, should
the student’s behavioral record of that incident be reflect a minor misbehavior?
SWIS facilitators, PBIS
coordinators, administrators, school teams, and district leadership may want to
determine if a school has a record for student behavior indicating the student
was suspended from school while the referral entry was coded as minor. In the
Appendix, we have included instructions for using the SWIS Custom Report tool
to determine whether and how often schools are involved in this practice.
If investigators find
this scenario is happening, and it is occurring more frequently than a few
times per year, schools might want to talk about consistent and careful
procedures for data entry and establish a regular pattern for checking to see whether
the situation continues. If the scenario is happening on a regular basis or has
become common practice, schools should clearly review and reconsider a) the
strategy of using school suspension for minor misbehavior, or b) the practice
of entering the record of a significant behavioral incident as a minor behavioral
referral.
References
Balfanz, R. (2008). Early warning and intervention systems: Promise
and challenges for policy and practice. Paper prepared for the workshop of
the Committee on Improved Measurement of High School Dropout and Completion
Rates: Expert Guidance on Next Steps for Research and Policy, National Research
Council, Washington. DC. October 23-24. Retrieved November 25, 2012, from http://www7.national-academies.org/bota/Paper%20by%20R.%20Balfanz.pdf
Bowditch, C. (1993). Getting
rid of troublemakers: High school disciplinary procedures and the production of
dropouts. Social Problems, 40, pp.
493-507.
Colvin G. & Lazar
M. (1997). The effective elementary classroom:
Managing for success. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Dynarski, M., Clarke,
L., Cobb, B., Finn, J., Rumberger, R., & Smink, J. (2008). Dropout prevention: A practice guide. Washington,
DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute
of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Roderick, M. (1993). The path to dropping out: Evidence for
intervention. Westport, CT: Auburn House.
Vincent, C., Horner,
R., & May, S. (2009, December). What are the patterns of office discipline referrals
across grade levels? Evaluation Brief retrieved October 23,
2011 from the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Web site, http://www.pbis.org/evaluation/evaluation_briefs/dec_09_(1).aspx
Appendix
Appendix A: Using SWIS Custom Reports
Tool to Determine Whether Schools are Reporting School Suspension on Referrals
Coded as Minor
Schools can check to
see if they are entering minor referrals into the SWIS data system with
out-of-school suspension as the main consequence by following the directions
below.
Directions
Log in to SWIS account
for the school
SWIS will open to the
Main Menu
From Reports, select Custom Report
From Referral Type select Minors Only
Do not select from Student or Staff
Select a Report Date Range by filling in the
calendar dates
Select a Time Range by filling in all times a
referral may have been written
Select a Grade range by filling in to show all
the grades in the school
Click on Advanced Options
From Student Gender choose Both Male &
Female
From Student IEP’s choose All Students
From Administrative Decision select Out-of-School Suspension
Click on Generate Report
SWIS will generate a
report listing all the referrals the school has entered that were coded as
minor, but have out-of-school suspension as the main consequence. The list can
be sorted by any of the headers at the top of each column.