BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2242
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 11, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
AB 2242 (Dickinson) - As Amended: March 29, 2012
SUBJECT : Pupils: grounds for suspension and expulsion
SUMMARY : Prohibits pupils who may be subject to suspension or
expulsion of school for disrupting school activities or
otherwise willfully defying school officials from off-campus
suspension, extended suspension, or recommended for expulsion or
expelled. Specifically, this bill :
1)Specifies that a pupil may be subject to in-school suspension
in a supervised suspension classroom and subject to
documentation or other means of correction, but may not be
subject to an off-campus suspension or extended suspension, or
recommended for expulsion, or expelled, 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.
2)Relocates the provision authorizing a principal or
superintendent to suspend or recommend expulsion of a pupil
enrolled in grades 4 to 12 if the principal or superintendent
determines that the pupil has intentionally engaged in
harassment, threats, or intimidation, to the provision
specifying the acts for which a principal or superintendent
may suspend or recommend expulsion of a pupil.
3)Strikes obsolete provisions defining "local educational
agency," "a change in placement," and "individualized
education program team."
4)Makes non-substantive, conforming changes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides that a pupil may be suspended or expelled for
committing any of the following offenses:
a) Causing, attempting to cause, or threatening to cause
physical injury to another person; or willfully using force
AB 2242
Page 2
or violence upon another person, except in self-defense;
b) Possessing, selling, or otherwise furnishing a firearm,
knife, explosive, or other dangerous object;
c) Unlawfully possessing, using, selling or otherwise
furnishing a controlled substance;
d) Unlawfully offering, arranging or negotiating to sell a
controlled substance, alcoholic beverage, or an intoxicant
of any kind;
e) Committing or attempting to commit robbery or extortion;
f) Causing or attempting to cause damage to school property
or private property;
g) Stealing or attempting to steal school property or
private property;
h) Possessing or using tobacco, or products containing
tobacco or nicotine products;
i) Committing an obscene act or engaging in habitual
profanity or vulgarity;
j) Unlawfully possessing or unlawfully offering, arranging
or negotiating to sell drug paraphernalia;
aa) Disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully
defying the authority of supervisors, teachers,
administrators, school officials or other school personnel
engaged in the performance of their duties;
bb) Knowingly receive stolen school property or private
property;
cc) Possessing an imitation firearm;
dd) Committing or attempting to commit a sexual assault or
sexual battery;
ee) Harassing, threatening or intimidating a pupil who is a
complaining witness or a witness in a school disciplinary
proceeding in order to prevent the pupil from being a
witness or retaliating against that pupil for being a
witness, or both;
ff) Unlawfully offering, arranging to sell, or negotiating
to sell the prescription drug Soma;
gg) Engaging in or attempting to engage in hazing;
hh) Engaging in the act of bullying, including, but not
limited to, bullying committed by means of an electronic
act;
ii) Committing sexual harassment (grades 4 through 12 only);
jj) Causing or attempting to cause, threatening to cause, or
participating in an act of hate violence (grades 4 through
12 only);
aaa) Engaging in harassment, threats, or intimidation against
school district personnel or pupils that have the effect of
AB 2242
Page 3
disrupting classwork, creating substantial disorder and
invading the rights of either school personnel or pupils by
creating an intimidating or hostile educational environment
(grades 4 through 12 only); and,
bbb) Making a terroristic threat against school officials or
school property, or both. (Education Code (EC) Sections
48900, 48900.2, 48900.3, 48900.4, 48900.7)
2)Provides that a suspension shall only be imposed when other
means of correction fail to bring about proper conduct. (EC
Section 48900.5)
3)Provides that as part of or instead of disciplinary action, a
principal, a principal's designee, a superintendent of school,
or a governing board may require a pupil to perform community
service on school grounds, or with written permission of the
parents or guardians, off school grounds, during the pupil's
nonschool hours. (EC Section 48900.6)
4)Provides that a pupil may be assigned to a supervised
suspension classroom if the pupil poses no imminent danger or
threat to the campus, pupils or staff and authorizes the
school to continue to claim apportionment for the pupil if the
classroom is staffed and enables the pupil to complete
schoolwork and tests missed by the pupil during the
suspension. Requires the pupil to contact his or her
teacher(s) to receive the assignments and requires the
teacher(s) to provide all assignments and tests the pupil will
miss while suspended. (EC Section 48911.1)
5)Provides that a suspension may be made by a teacher, a
principal or a principal's designee, a superintendent of
schools or a governing board. Requires a conference to be
held between the pupil, his or her parents or guardians,
teacher, principal or principal's designee, or superintendent
regarding the suspension. (EC Section 48911)
6)Provides that a principal shall not suspend a pupil from
school for more than five consecutive days and the total
number of days for which a pupil may be suspended from school
shall not exceed 20 schooldays in any school year. (EC
Sections 48903 and 48911)
7)Requires the principal or superintendent to recommend
expulsion of a pupil for any of the following acts committed
AB 2242
Page 4
at school or at a school activity off school grounds, unless
the principal or superintendent finds that expulsion is
inappropriate, due to the particular circumstance:
a) Causing serious physical injury to another person,
except in self-defense.
b) Possession of any knife or other dangerous object of no
reasonable use to the pupil.
c) Unlawful possession of any controlled substance, except
for the first offense for the possession of no more than
one avoirdupois ounce of marijuana, other than concentrated
cannabis.
d) Robbery or extortion.
e) Assault or battery upon any school employee. (EC
Section 48915)
8)Requires a principal or superintendent to immediately suspend
and recommend expulsion of a pupil that he or she determines
has committed any of the following acts at school or at a
school activity off school grounds:
a) Possessing, selling, or otherwise furnishing a firearm.
b) Brandishing a knife at another person.
c) Unlawfully selling a controlled substance.
d) Committing or attempting to commit a sexual assault.
e) Possession of an explosive. (EC Section 48915)
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Legislative Counsel, this bill
is non-fiscal. However, the Assembly Committee on Rules has
determined that there is potential fiscal effect and has
referred the bill to the Assembly Appropriations Committee upon
passage from this Committee.
COMMENTS : Background . This bill is one of several bills
attempting to reduce the use of punitive, zero-tolerance
measures and focus, instead, on alternatives to address the
causes of a pupil's behavior. 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 U.S. 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 data collected in 2006 shows
that 28% of Black male middle school students were suspended at
least once, while the rate was 10% for while males. The report
argues that disciplinary actions that result in exclusion from
AB 2242
Page 5
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 less 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.
Purpose of the bill . According to the author, this bill
addresses the overuse of out-of-school suspensions under the
category of "disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully
defying the authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators,
school officials or other school personnel." This bill
prohibits out-of-school suspensions and expulsions due to
disruption of school activities and willfully defying the
authority of school officials. Instead, the bill authorizes a
principal or superintendent to place a pupil in an in-school
suspension in a supervised suspension classroom, and subject to
documentation or other means of corrections.
Under existing law, a principal or a superintendent may suspend
or expel a pupil for committing any of a number of specified
acts, including "disruption of school activities or willful
defiance." 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. Unfortunately, the
CDE does not currently report disaggregated data that show the
causes for suspensions and expulsions and only provides the
categories that are required for federal reporting purposes,
which includes the categories of "violent drug expulsion,"
"non-student firearm incidents," and "persistently dangerous
expulsions."
The author estimates that 42% of suspensions are due to willful
defiance, based on a review of school-level data provided by the
CDE. This is consistent with national estimates. Public
Counsel, one of the sponsors of the bill, states that
AB 2242
Page 6
nationally, from 2005 to 2007, school disciplinary exclusions
for insubordination accounted for roughly 43% of the total,
whereas only 0.7% were for use or possession of a firearm or
explosive. Some examples of district level data provided by the
author's office include the following:
Kern Union High School District reported 13,916
suspensions during 2009-10 and identified willful defiance
as the most severe grounds for 57% of its suspensions.
Clovis Unified reported 5,279 suspensions during 2009-10
and identified willful defiance as the most severe grounds
for 71% of its suspensions.
Manteca Unified School District reported 4,849
suspensions in 2010-2011 and identified willful defiance as
the most severe grounds for 61% of its suspensions.
Santa Rosa City Schools reported some 2,820 suspensions
for its five largest high schools and identified willful
defiance as the most severe grounds for 61% of these
suspensions.
Disruption of school activities and willful defiance . 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. 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 would
argue that these students can be reformed through personal
reflections and requiring a student to spend lunch time with the
Dean. Others would argue that not having the ability to impose
out-of-school suspensions would send the message that these
types of behaviors are not serious.
In-school suspensions . Current law requires that suspensions be
imposed only when other means of correction fail to bring about
proper conduct. Current law also authorizes a principal to
assign a pupil to a supervised suspension classroom for the
entire period of suspension if the pupil poses no imminent
danger or threat to the campus, pupils, or staff. Pupils must
be placed in a classroom separated from other pupils at the
schoolsite, which could be in a separate classroom, building or
site. While some districts have implemented in-classroom
AB 2242
Page 7
suspensions, it is possible that some schools may have staff and
facility challenges. The Association of California School
Administrators states, "In order to do this, the school district
would need to make sure there are enough classrooms to
accommodate the students by age or grade appropriateness. In
addition, the district would be required to have a certificated
employee in the classroom?.This will be very difficult to
accomplish during the current fiscal situation school districts
are facing." Schools that are having success in implementing
in-school suspensions provide training to teachers and staff on
how to address these types of behaviors. This bill does not
require training.
Arguments in support . The author states, "AB 2242 was
introduced as a result of testimony and recommendations offered
at a hearing of the Select Committee on Delinquency Prevention
and Youth Development held in December, 2011. The hearing,
which focused on School Climate and Positive Youth Development -
Perspectives, Possibilities and Potential, heard from nationally
recognized experts who reported that out-of-school suspensions
and expulsions had risen at an alarming rate during the last ten
years, due in part to overused grounds that students were being
"willfully defiant." The Select Committee also heard that
expelled students who had run afoul of the law and were cycling
through the juvenile justice system, were much more likely to
return to incarceration unless they were successfully
transitioned back into mainstream educational programs and
schools."
A parent from Los Angeles writes in her letter of support that
her son, a second grader, has been suspended many times in first
and second grades for behavioral issues. She is convinced that
if the school did not have the option to send him home and
instead have to support him within the school setting, he would
not have lost valuable school time.
Arguments in opposition . The Association of California School
Administrators states, "Currently, school districts handle
discipline on a case-by-case basis. Suspension is used when the
defiance is egregious, put the student or others in danger, or
is a chronic problem. Willful defiance may appear to be small
but can contribute to an overall disruption of the learning
environment and can lead to classroom management and safety
issues."
AB 2242
Page 8
An instructor from Fairfield writes that disruptions in the
classroom can take up to 15 minutes to handle. These
disruptions not only interfere with other students' right to an
education, they frustrate and cause teachers to lose their train
of thought.
Related legislation . This bill is one of several bills
introduced this year attempting to reduce the use of punitive
measures to respond to disciplinary and attendance problems.
The pending bills include:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Bill | Summary |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|AB 1729 (Ammiano) |Requires other means of correction to be used |
| |and documented prior to the suspension or |
| |expulsion of any student, and revises the |
| |steps taken for suspensions and expulsions of |
| |students with exceptional needs. |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|AB 2242 |Imposes in-school suspension and prohibits |
|(Dickinson) |off-campus suspension or extended suspension, |
| |or expulsion, due to disruption of school |
|*also on today's |activities or willful defiance of school |
|agenda. |officials. |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|AB 2300 (Swanson) |Prohibits, at the request of a pupil or a |
| |pupil's parent or guardian, a school from |
|*also on today's |disclosing a pupil's disciplinary records |
|agenda. |relating to suspensions to a postsecondary |
| |educational institution. |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|AB 2537 (V. |Limits the acts committed by pupils that |
|Manuel Perez) |result in mandatory expulsion; authorizes, |
| |rather than requires, a school district to |
| |expel a student for committing specified |
|*also on today's |acts; and authorizes, rather than requires, a |
|agenda. |principal to notify appropriate law |
| |enforcement authorities of specified acts |
| |committed by pupils. |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|AB 2616 (Carter) |Eliminates the requirement and instead |
| |authorizes a school to use its discretion to |
AB 2242
Page 9
| |classify a pupil who misses three full days |
|*pending in the |in one school year or is tardy or absent for |
|Assembly |more than a 30-minute period during the |
|Education |schoolday without a valid excuse on three |
|Committee |occasions in one school year, or any |
| |combination thereof, as a truant. |
|------------------+----------------------------------------------|
|SB 1235 |Requires a school district to, if the number |
|(Steinberg) |of pupils suspended from school during the |
| |prior school year exceeded 25% of a school's |
| |enrollment or any numerically significant |
| |racial or ethnic subgroup, implement for a |
|*pending in the |minimum of three years, an evidence-based |
|Senate Education |system of schoolwide positive behavioral |
|Committee |interventions or strategies that are evidence |
| |based and designed to address school climate. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Public Counsel (co-sponsor)
Youth Law Center (co-sponsor)
American Civil Liberties Union
Californians for Justice Education Fund
Children Now
Children's Defense Fund
Coleman Advocates for Children & Youth
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
Disability Rights Legal Center
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California
Labor/Community Strategy Center
Legal Advocates for Children & Youth
Legal Services for Children
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
New America Foundation
PICO California
Restorative Schools Vision Project
Youth and Education Law Project, Mills Legal Clinic
Several individuals
Opposition
AB 2242
Page 10
Association of California School Administrators
An individual
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087