BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 420
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 420 (Dickinson)
As Amended August 13, 2014
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |52-23|(May 30, 2013) |SENATE: |24-8 |(August 19, |
| | | | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: ED.
SUMMARY : Removes, until July 1, 2018, disrupting of school
activities or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of
supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials, or
other school personnel as a reason to suspend any pupil enrolled
in kindergarten through grade 3. Prohibits, until July 1, 2018,
expulsion of a pupil enrolled in kindergarten through grade 12
for disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully defying
the valid authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators,
school officials, or other school personnel.
The Senate amendments:
1)Remove the authority to use disruption of school activities or
otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of school
officials as a reason to suspend a pupil from kindergarten
through grade 5, and instead apply the prohibition on pupils
from kindergarten through grade 3.
2)Remove the provision authorizing suspension of a pupil in
grades 6 through 12 for disrupting school activities or
otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of school
officials only after the third time in a school year and after
other means of correction were attempted.
3)Add a sunset date of July 1, 2018, to the provision
prohibiting a pupil from kindergarten through grade 3 from
being suspended, or recommending for expulsion any pupil from
kindergarten through grade 12, due to disrupting of school
activities or defying the valid authority of school officials.
4)Strike the provision specifying that a teacher is not
prevented from suspending a pupil from class, pursuant to the
AB 420
Page 2
Education Code Section 48910, for disrupting school activities
or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of
supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials, or
other school personnel engaged in the performance of their
duties.
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative
Counsel. However, according to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee on the prior version of this bill, there is increased
General Fund/Proposition 98 revenue limit costs, likely in
excess of $3.5 million, to provide school districts with revenue
limit funding (general purpose) for pupils who will no longer be
suspended in grades k-5 for willful defiance and for pupils who
can no longer be suspended after the first offense.
COMMENTS : A University of California, Los Angeles' Civil Rights
Project October 2011 brief titled Discipline Policies,
Successful Schools, and Racial Justice, report that data
gathered by the United States Department of Education's Office
for Civil Rights shows disparity in suspensions and expulsions
for black students, especially males, and students with
disabilities. An analysis of the data that was collected in
2006 shows that 28% of black male middle school students were
suspended at least once, while the rate was 10% for white males.
The report argues that disciplinary actions that result in
exclusion from school cause students to miss important
instructional time and may result in a "greater risk of
disengagement and diminished educational opportunities."
Research also shows that students with frequent suspensions are
at greater risk of becoming involved in gangs, dropping out of
school and becoming a part of the juvenile justice system.
Efforts undertaken by districts in California, including the Los
Angeles Unified School District, San Francisco Unified School
District, and Alhambra Unified School District, and in other
states are beginning to show positive results of not using
punitive measures like suspension and expulsions and more
alternative practices that emphasize restorative justice
(reflections of one's behavior), counseling, referrals to drug
treatment and other social services, within the school setting.
Suspensions and expulsions: Under existing law, a principal or
a superintendent of a school district may suspend or expel a
pupil for committing any of a number of specified acts,
AB 420
Page 3
including for the disruption of school activities or willful
defiance of school or school district officials. The California
Department of Education (CDE) reports that in 2010-11, of a
total enrollment of 6,174,717, there were 700,884 suspensions
and 18,649 expulsions. Using the California Longitudinal Pupil
Achievement Data System (CALPADS), school districts began to
report student-level data in 2011-12. According to the CDE,
170,449 pupils served out-of-school suspensions for willful
defiance in 2011-12.
This bill is a modified version of AB 2242 (Dickinson) of 2012.
AB 2242 removed disrupting of school activities or otherwise
willfully defying the authority of school or school district
officials as a reason for suspending or recommending expulsion
for all grade levels. The Governor vetoed the bill with the
following statement:
I cannot support limiting the authority of local
school leaders, especially at a time when budget cuts
have greatly increased class sizes and reduced the
number of school personnel. It is important that
teachers and school officials retain broad discretion
to manage and set the tone in the classroom. The
principle of subsidiarity calls for greater, not less,
deference to our elected school boards which are
directly accountable to the citizenry.
This bill narrows the application of the bill to
kindergarten through grade 3 and inserts a sunset of July
1, 2018.
The author states, "More than two decades of research has
confirmed that out-of-school suspensions do not work. They do
not improve student behavior and, in fact, often exacerbate the
problem. In addition, students who are subjected to
out-of-school discipline not only lose important instructional
time, they are far more likely to drop out of school and enter
the juvenile justice system, at great cost to the state. One
study found that with respect to detained youth that more than
"80 percent... had been suspended... and more than 50 percent
had been expelled from school prior to their incarceration."
Whereas students whose problem behaviors are addressed
proactively with research-based supports and interventions in
school and with parents are more likely to remain in school and
on track."
AB 420
Page 4
Disruption of school activities and willful defiance: According
to supporters, this category is broad and can encompass a number
of offenses, from not following a teacher's direction, talking
back to a teacher, not turning in homework, to throwing
furniture. This category appears to be a catch-all category for
suspending a pupil as there is no definition of what constitutes
"willful defiance." Compared with offenses that require
expulsion, such as bringing a knife or firearm to school, these
types of offenses could be considered minor, although teachers
would argue that these behaviors can cause major interference to
students' learning environment in the classroom. The issue is
how to address these types of behaviors. Those who advocate for
anti-punitive measures argue that these students can be reformed
through personal reflections and positive interventions. Others
argue that not having the ability to impose out-of-school
suspensions would send the message that these types of behaviors
are not serious.
Teacher suspensions: Existing law allows a teacher to suspend a
pupil from class for the day of the suspension and the following
day for any of the acts that may be a cause for suspension or
expulsion specified under Education Code Section 48900. This
bill does not affect or eliminate this law.
Changing culture: Several bills were introduced last year and
this year attempting to reduce the use of punitive,
zero-tolerance measures and focus, instead, on alternatives to
address the causes of a pupil's behavior. While these bills are
one component in changing pupil and staff behavior, changing the
culture of a school from a less punitive environment to a more
positive one and to implement positive behavioral programs, such
as restorative justice programs, require training and support
from all school staff as well as sufficient counselors, mental
health providers, and other school personnel.
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0004704
AB 420
Page 5