American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students nationwide often face disproportionately high rates of exclusionary discipline. A recent report from WestEd examines the negative consequences of exclusionary discipline; shares examples of how some states address problems of suspension and expulsion; and offers policymakers recommendations to reduce disciplinary issues, bridge learning gaps and improve learning outcomes among this student group.
Exclusionary discipline refers to short- or long-term suspensions, expulsions or other means of denying access to regular educational activities. Examples include office discipline referrals, referrals to law enforcement, detentions, in-school suspensions, out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, disciplinary transfers or seclusion.
Research has long shown that exclusionary discipline is linked to increased feelings of alienation and disengagement among youth, reduced academic progress, increased dropout rates and a poorer overall school climate.
In response, states have adopted policies related to broadening access to childhood and adolescent behavioral health counseling and related supportive services, and have passed legislation aiming to curb disciplinary rates — particularly those driven by more subjective criteria such as willful defiance.
WestEd highlighted initiatives out of Massachusetts and Maryland, which researchers found have yielded robust evaluation data available on exclusionary discipline, and California, which adopted changes that contributed to positive changes in districts, which can serve as a model for other states.
According to researchers, the approaches in these states address exclusionary discipline practices and promote equitable and effective alternatives by prioritizing comprehensive school-based mental health services, facilitating community partnerships and supporting training and interventions delivered by qualified behavioral health professionals.
“Understanding statewide educational practices is essential for district leaders, providing them with crucial insights into the overarching policies and frameworks that shape the educational landscape. This knowledge allows leaders to align district-level initiatives with broader educational goals, ensuring a coherent and effective educational system,” the report states. “This awareness is particularly important for district leaders working with AI/AN student populations. By grasping statewide practices, these leaders can navigate and advocate within the broader educational context, ensuring the integration of the unique needs and cultural considerations of AI/AN students into district-level strategies. This contextual understanding empowers district leaders to develop targeted and culturally responsive approaches, improving educational outcomes for AI/AN students and fostering a more equitable and inclusive educational environment.”
California
In 2015, the state enacted Assembly Bill 420, which prohibited suspensions for willful defiance, which includes many disruptive behaviors such as talking back or not following directions, among students in grades K–3, and expulsions were prohibited for all students. In 2019, Senate Bill 419 amended the original law by further restricting the use of temporary expulsion as a disciplinary measure for students in grades 4–5. Additionally, the new law placed restrictions on middle school student suspensions until July 2025.
While AI/AN students statewide face a suspension rate of about twice the average, the report states that notable disparities exist in suspension rates between AI/AN students without a disability and those with a disability.
Researchers found that simply reducing the practice wasn’t enough, as significant disparities in suspension and expulsion frequencies among both AI/AN students with disabilities and those without disabilities remain.
“These findings underscore the imperative to investigate the underlying factors contributing to these disparities, necessitating targeted interventions and a thorough examination of disciplinary practices,” according to the report. “A crucial implication is the call for the reform of disciplinary approaches to be sensitive to the race/ethnicity of the student. The higher rates of suspensions and expulsions experienced by AI/AN students signal a need for strategies that promote fairness, equity and inclusivity in disciplinary practices beyond current conventional approaches.”
Recommendations
The report includes detailed descriptions of how local educational agencies can address implicit bias, expand cultural awareness, and use prevention strategies including restorative justice practices, Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, the Pyramid Model for Promoting Young Children’s Social–Emotional Competence and more to drive improvement efforts.
At the state and local levels, researchers also call on policymakers to:
- Collect and report disaggregated data on exclusionary discipline
- Eliminate zero-tolerance and other exclusionary discipline policies
- Offer technical assistance and increase oversight and accountability
- Provide additional funding for professional learning that helps educators create inclusive and culturally responsive learning environments
- Offer professional learning to help educators create inclusive and culturally responsive learning environments and foster trusting relationships with students
- Ensure transparent reporting using metrics so that all data are comparable
- Support evidence-based alternative strategies to exclusionary discipline