BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1235
AUTHOR: Steinberg
INTRODUCED: February 23, 2012
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 11, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Alternatives to off-campus suspension.
SUMMARY
This bill requires schools that have suspended more than 25% of
the school's enrollment or more than 25% of any numerically
significant racial or ethnic subgroup of the school's enrollment
in the prior school year to implement, for at least three years,
at least one specified strategies to reduce the suspension rate
or disproportionality.
BACKGROUND
Current law prohibits a pupil from being suspended or
recommended for expulsion unless the principal of the school
determines that the pupil has committed certain acts, and gives
schools the discretion to take action for most offenses.
(Education Code � 48900)
Discretion to suspend
Schools may suspend a pupil for violating any number of acts,
some of which include:
1) Attempting to cause or threatening to cause physical injury
to another person. (Expulsion must be recommended for
causing serious physical injury.)
(EC � 48915))
2) Being under the influence of a controlled substance.
(Expulsion must be recommended for possession or the sale
of controlled substances.)
(EC � 48915)
SB 1235
Page 2
3) Caused or attempted to cause damage to school property.
4) Possessed or used tobacco.
5) Committed an obscene act or engaged in habitual profanity
or vulgarity.
6) Possessed, offered, arranged or negotiated to sell drug
paraphernalia.
7) Engaged in, or attempted to engage in, hazing.
8) Engaged in an act of bullying.
9) (EC � 48900, � 48900.2, � 48900.3, � 48900.4, � 48900.7)
Pupils may be suspended for a first offense if the school
principal determines that the pupil's presence causes a danger
to persons or property or threatens to disrupt the instructional
process or the pupil committed certain acts. (EC � 48900.5)
Subjective decision to suspend or expel
Schools may also suspend a student for disrupting school
activities or otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of
supervisor, teachers, administrators, school officials, or other
school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties.
(EC � 48900(k))
School may expel pupils for various offenses, including
disruption and defiance, upon finding either of the following:
1) Other means of correction are not feasible or have
repeatedly failed to bring about proper conduct.
2) Due to the nature of the violation, the presence of the
pupil causes a continuing danger to the physical safety of
the pupil or others. (EC � 48915(e))
Mandatory suspension
School principals are required to immediately suspend, and
SB 1235
Page 3
recommend expulsion of, a pupil who has committed any of the
following acts at school or a school activity off school
grounds:
1) Possessing, selling, or furnishing a firearm. (This is
consistent with the federal Gun-Free Schools Act.)
2) Brandishing a knife at another person.
3) Unlawfully selling a controlled substance.
4) Committing or attempting to commit a sexual assault.
5) Possession of an explosive. (EC � 48915(c))
Prior to suspension
Current law states that suspension shall be imposed only when
other means of correction fail to bring about proper conduct.
(EC � 48900.5)
Suspension by the principal must be preceded by an informal
conference between the principal, pupil and whenever
practicable, the teacher, supervisor or school employee who
referred the pupil to the principal. School principals may
suspend a pupil without first holding an informal conference
with the pupil if an emergency situation exists. A school
employee is required to make a reasonable effort to contact the
pupil's parents at the time of suspension; however, whenever a
pupil is suspended from school (as opposed to suspension from a
class) the parent must be notified in writing.
(EC � 48911)
Decision to suspend
The governing board of a school district is required, unless a
request has been made to the contrary, to hold closed sessions
if the board is considering suspending or taking other
disciplinary action (other than expulsion) if a public hearing
would lead to the release of confidential information. School
districts are required to notify, in writing, the pupil and the
pupil's parent of the intent to call and hold a closed session.
(EC � 48912)
SB 1235
Page 4
Alternatives to out-of-school suspension
School district superintendents and school principals are
authorized to use discretion to provide alternatives to
suspension or expulsion, including counseling and an anger
management program. (EC � 48900(v))
School principals are authorized to assign a suspended 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, or if an action to expel the pupil
has not been initiated. (EC � 48911.1)
Current law states that schools should consider implementing at
least one of the following if the number of pupils suspended
during the prior school year exceeded 30% of the school's
enrollment:
1) A supervised suspension program.
2) A progressive discipline approach during the schoolday on
campus (as an alternative to off-campus suspension), using
any of the following activities:
a) Conferences between the school staff, parents and
pupils.
b) Referral to the school counselor, psychologist,
child welfare attendance personnel, or other school
support service staff.
c) Detention.
d) Study teams, guidance teams, resource panel
teams, or other assessment-related teams. (EC �
48911.2)
Teachers may suspend pupils from class for the day and the
following day. If the pupil is to remain on campus during that
suspension, the pupil must be under appropriate supervision.
Teachers must ask the parent to attend a parent-teacher
conference regarding the suspension. Pupils are prohibited from
SB 1235
Page 5
returning to the class from which he or she was suspended,
during the period of the suspension, without the concurrence of
the teacher and principal. (EC � 48910)
Schools are authorized to require a pupil to perform community
service as part of or instead of suspension or expulsion for
most offenses. (EC � 48900.6)
Missed assignments
The teacher of any class from which a pupil is suspended is
authorized to require the pupil to complete any assignments and
tests missed during the suspension. (EC � 48913)
Number of days of suspension
The number of days that a pupil may be suspended from school is
capped at five consecutive schooldays. (EC � 48911)
With some exception, the total number of days for which a pupil
may be suspended is capped at 20 schooldays per school year,
unless the pupil enrolls in or is transferred to another regular
school, an opportunity school or a continuation school, in which
case the cap is 30 schooldays per school year. School districts
are authorized to count suspensions that occur while a pupil is
enrolled in another school district toward the maximum numbers
of days for which a pupil may be suspended in any school year.
(EC � 48903)
Pupils with exceptional needs
Schools are authorized to suspend or expel an individual with
exceptional needs in accordance with federal law. If a pupil
with an individualized education program (IEP) exhibits behavior
problems, the IEP team must make a determination if the behavior
is a manifestation of the disability and whether the strategies
in the IEP are effective to address the behavior. If it is
determined that the IEP is ineffective, a functional analysis
assessment must be conducted, and typically the IEP is then
amended to include a behavior intervention plan. (EC � 48915.5,
� 56523, and California Code of Regulations Title 5, � 3052)
ANALYSIS
SB 1235
Page 6
This bill requires schools that have suspended more than 25% of
the school's enrollment or more than 25% of any numerically
significant racial or ethnic subgroup of the school's enrollment
in the prior school year to implement at least one specified
strategies to reduce the suspension rate or disproportionality.
Specifically, this bill:
1) Beginning in the 2013-14 school year, requires schools that
have suspended more than 25% of the school's enrollment or
more than 25% of any numerically significant racial or
ethnic subgroup of the school's enrollment in the prior
school year to implement, for at least three years, at
least one of the following strategies to reduce the
suspension rate or disproportionality:
a) An evidence-based system of schoolwide positive
behavioral interventions and supports that employs
school-level information about the behavioral and
academic history of pupils to define and implement
systems of support and interventions at the school,
classroom, and individual levels that is aimed at
improving the social, emotional, and academic success
for all pupils.
b) Other schoolwide strategies that are
evidence-based and designed to address school climate
in order to create learning environments where
teachers can teach and pupils can learn and to reduce
suspensions from classrooms and the school.
2) Authorizes the department to provide information regarding
additional schoolwide strategies that meet the criteria for
evidence-based strategies.
3) Beginning with the 2014-15 school year, requires schools
that suspended over 25% of its enrollment or subgroup in
the 2013-14 school year to reduce the percentage of
suspensions by 2% per year until the school does not
suspend more than 15% of its enrollment or subgroup.
4) Requires (current law authorizes) schools to report to the
district superintendent in charge of school support
SB 1235
Page 7
services on the rate of reduction in the school's
off-campus suspensions.
5) Requires school districts to annually report this
information at a regularly scheduled school board meeting
and to the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI).
6) Requires the SPI to annually publish a list of all schools
that meet the suspension thresholds specified in this bill
and include the annual rate of reduction in each school's
out-of-school suspensions.
7) States legislative intent to encourage all schools (rather
than just those that choose to implement alternatives to
suspension) to examine alternatives to off-campus
suspensions.
8) Authorizes school districts to use any appropriate state or
federal funding sources to support the evidence-based
schoolwide strategies required to be implemented pursuant
to this bill.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author, "California
recorded 750,000 suspensions in 2009-10. Each of those
suspensions represents instructional time and educational
opportunity lost. California has a higher rate of
suspension than most other states - 7.5% of all students.
The way schools implement state policy on suspension has a
disproportionate impact on students of color. Schools
generally have discretion over the grounds for suspension,
and commonly remove students from class or school grounds
for non-violent offenses such as disrupting class or
defiance of authority. More than two decades of research
has confirmed that out-of-school suspensions do not improve
student behavior and, in fact, often exacerbate it. The
disproportionate use of suspension is a significant
contributor to California's high dropout rates, which are
highest among students of color. Addressing problem
behaviors proactively with research-based supports and
interventions in school and with parents is proven to
SB 1235
Page 8
improve student behavior, school safety and school
success."
2) Los Angeles Unified School District . On October 11, 2011,
it was announced that the Los Angeles Unified School
District (LAUSD) entered into a voluntary agreement with
the federal Department of Education's Office of Civil
Rights. Under the agreement, LAUSD will revamp its entire
program for English learners and accelerate its efforts
focused on closing the achievement and opportunity gap for
African-American pupils. As part of the agreement, LAUSD
is to take steps to report disparate discipline rates, and
eliminate inequitable and disproportionate discipline
practices.
3) Capacity . Implementation of schoolwide strategies could
include research and consideration of which strategy to
implement, staff training, school counselors and
psychologists, staff to supervise pupils who serve
in-school suspension, and classrooms to house pupils who
serve in-school suspensions. This bill imposes mandated
costs and could have the effect of pressuring schools to
limit suspensions rather than being subject to this bill
and addressing their suspension rates. Options could be
considered that put parameters on suspensions for
subjective acts, require missed assignments and tests to be
completed, improve schools' access to information about
best practices currently used in schools, and reporting on
the use and success of in-school alternatives to
out-of-school suspensions.
4) Suggested amendments . Staff recommends the following
amendments:
a) Clarify that beginning with the 2013-14 school
year, if a school meets the 25% threshold, the school
is subject to the provisions of this bill.
b) Clarify that a school that reaches the threshold
must implement, for a minimum of three years, at least
one of the strategies described in this bill.
c) Clarify that the threshold is reduced by 2% each
SB 1235
Page 9
year (in 2013-14 the threshold is 25%, in 2014-15 the
threshold is 23%, in 2015-16 it is 21%, etc.).
d) Require schools to report the rate of reduction
in suspensions to the district superintendent, rather
than to the superintendent for school support
services.
e) Require school districts to report the rate of
reduction in suspensions to the county superintendent
of schools in addition to the SPI.
f) Define "numerically significant" relative to
racial or ethnic subgroups.
5) Related legislation . SB 1088 (Price) requires school
districts to conduct a second review for the readmission of
pupils who have been expelled and denied readmission, and
prohibits school from denying enrollment or readmission to
pupils solely on the basis that he or she has had contact
with the juvenile justice system. SB 1088 passed this
Committee on March 28, 2012 on an 8-0 vote and is currently
pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
AB 1729 (Ammiano) authorizes school districts or school
principals to use discretion to provide alternatives to
suspension or expulsion that are designed to address and
correct the root causes of the pupil's behavior, requires
that an individualized education program team meeting to be
held within three days to determine if a fundamental
behavioral assessment and behavioral intervention plan are
needed, and describes other means of corrective action. AB
1729 is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly Education
Committee on April 11, 2012.
AB 1732 (Campos) identifies conduct that would constitute a post
on a social media website, relative to cyberbullying. AB
1732 is pending on the Assembly Floor.
AB 2032 (Mendoza) requires charter schools to be subject to the
same suspension and expulsion provisions as other public
schools. AB 2032 is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly
Education Committee on April 11, 2012.
SB 1235
Page 10
AB 2145 (Alejo) relates to the disaggregation of suspension and
expulsion data by subgroup, and the reporting and
availability of suspension and expulsion data. AB 2145 is
pending in the Assembly Education Committee.
AB 2242 (Dickinson) provides that disruption or willful defiance
could result in in-school suspension but not out-of-school
suspension or expulsion. AB 2242 is scheduled to be heard
by the Assembly Education Committee on April 11, 2012.
AB 2300 (Swanson) requires school districts to expunge from
a pupil's records a suspension for certain acts if the
pupil completes five hours of community service. AB 2300
is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly Education
Committee on April 11, 2012.
AB 2537 (V. Manuel Perez) gives schools wider discretion
for currently required suspensions and expulsions, and
reduces the offenses for which expulsion is mandatory to
mirror federal law (only for possession of a firearm). AB
2537 is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly Education
Committee on April 11, 2012.
SUPPORT
American Civil Liberties Union
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
California Association for Bilingual Education
California Correctional Peace Officers Association
Californians for Justice Education Fund
Californians Together
Children Now
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
Labor/Community Strategy Center's Community Rights Campaign
Legal Services for Children
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
Office of Restorative Justice of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles
PICO California
Public Counsel
Youth and Education Law Project, Mills Legal Clinic
SB 1235
Page 11
Youth Law Center
Associate Director, Beach Center on Disability, University of
Kansas
OPPOSITION
None on file.