BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1235|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 1235
Author: Steinberg (D), et al.
Amended: 8/22/12
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 7-2, 4/11/12
AYES: Lowenthal, Alquist, Hancock, Liu, Price, Simitian,
Vargas
NOES: Blakeslee, Huff
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner, Vacancy
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/24/12
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Dutton
SENATE FLOOR : 23-12, 5/30/12
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, Correa, De Le�n, Evans,
Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Lowenthal,
Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio, Steinberg,
Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Dutton,
Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, La Malfa, Walters,
Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: DeSaulnier, Huff, Runner, Simitian,
Strickland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 53-26, 8/27/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Pupil suspension
SOURCE : Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
2
Public Counsel Law Center
DIGEST : This bill encourages schools to implement
evidence-based and other schoolwide strategies for the
purpose of reducing the suspension rate if the number of
pupils suspended out of the school's enrollment or any
numerically significant pupil subgroup is above a specified
threshold; and requires the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI) and the Department of Education (CDE) to
provide training and technical assistance on the
implementation of evidence-based schoolwide strategies to
address school climate.
Assembly Amendments (1) remove the mandate on school
districts; (2) directs the SPI to offer assistance that
district may opt to accept; (3) changes the commencing date
from 2013-14 to 2014-15; (4) add coauthors; and (5) make
technical changes.
ANALYSIS : Existing 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.
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.)
2. Being under the influence of a controlled substance.
(Expulsion must be recommended for possession or the
sale of controlled substances.)
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.
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
3
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.
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.
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.
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.
Mandatory suspension . School principals are required to
immediately suspend, and 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.
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
4
5. Possession of an explosive.
Prior to suspension . Existing law states that suspension
shall be imposed only when other means of correction fail
to bring about proper conduct.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Existing 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 percent
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
5
of the school's enrollment:
1. A supervised suspension program.
2. A progressive discipline approach during the school day
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.
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 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.
Schools are authorized to require a pupil to perform
community service as part of or instead of suspension or
expulsion for most offenses.
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.
Number of days of suspension . The number of days that a
pupil may be suspended from school is capped at five
consecutive schooldays.
With some exception, the total number of days for which a
pupil may be suspended is capped at 20 schooldays per
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
6
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.
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.
This bill:
1. Encourages schools to implement evidence-based and other
schoolwide strategies for the purpose of reducing the
suspension rate if the number of pupils suspended out of
the school's enrollment or any numerically significant
pupil subgroup is above a specified threshold; and,
requires the SPI and CDE to provide training and
technical assistance on the implementation of
evidence-based schoolwide strategies to address school
climate.
2. Encourages, beginning with the 2014-15 school year, a
school district with a school where the number of pupils
receiving off-campus suspensions during the prior school
year exceeded 25 percent of the school's total
enrollment or exceeded 25 percent of any numerically
significant pupil subgroup of the school's enrollment to
implement, for a minimum of 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 (PBIS) that
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
7
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 and
is aimed at improving the social, emotion and
academic success for all pupils; or,
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.
3. Requires the SPI to invite a school's leadership team to
attend an annual regional forum if the percentage of
pupils suspended off campus out of the school's total
enrollment or any numerically significant pupil subgroup
exceeds the 25 percent threshold set in paragraph 1)
during the 2014-15 school year or the following
thresholds for subsequent years:
23 percent in 2015-2016;
21 percent in 2016-2017;
19 percent in 2017-2018;
15 percent in 2018-2019; and each school year
thereafter.
4. Requires the SPI to provide technical assistance and
training at no more than three annual regional forums
each year for the 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-2018,
and 2018-2019 school years for schools that exceed the
thresholds described in paragraphs 1) or 2).
5. Specifies that the purpose of the annual regional forums
shall include, but not be limited to:
A. Providing training regarding implementation of
schoolwide evidence-based strategies;
B. Using data to create positive school climates
and to assist with data-based decision making;
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
8
C. Sharing resources and evidence-based practices,
engaging community, and building capacity for
alternatives to off-campus suspensions;
D. Identifying gaps and weaknesses in services;
E. Identifying and sharing solutions and best
practices at the local level and exposing schools
to other school leaders, experts, and educators in
California and nationally who are successfully
implementing evidence-based strategies; and,
F. Evaluating the efficacy of strategies adopted.
6. Requires the SPI, on an annual basis, to do all of the
following:
A. Notify each local educational agency that has a
school or schools that exceed the thresholds in
paragraphs 1) or 2) and provide technical
assistance as requested to those schools.
B. Invite schools whose off-campus suspension rates
exceed the applicable threshold in paragraphs 1) or
2) to send a school leadership team that includes
the school principal and other administrators
responsible for implementing alternatives to
excessive suspensions to the applicable regional
forum, with the goal of serving no fewer than 100
schools per year.
C. Prioritize invitations to schools with the
highest rates of off-campus suspensions.
D. Provide the State Board of Education (SBE) with
the names of the schools that exceed the thresholds
in paragraphs 1) or 2), the names of the schools
invited to attend a regional forum, and the annual
rate of reduction or increase in each school's
off-campus suspensions.
7. Requires CDE to provide technical assistance regarding
the implementation of schoolwide evidence-based
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
9
strategies for schools whose off-campus suspension rates
exceed the applicable threshold in paragraphs 1) or 2).
8. Authorizes the SPI to use any appropriate state,
federal, or private funding sources to support these
activities; authorizes the CDE to provide information
regarding additional schoolwide strategies that meet the
criteria for evidence-based strategies; and, requires
the SPI to seek private funding to supplement any state
or federal funds made available for this purpose.
9. Specifies that the requirements of paragraphs 5), 6) and
7) are contingent upon the availability of funds.
10.Expresses the intent of the Legislature to encourage all
schools to examine alternatives to off-campus
suspensions that lead to resolution of pupil misconduct
without sending pupils off campus and to address
disproportionate rates of off-campus and in-school
suspensions; and, specifies that schools using
strategies described in paragraph 1) are not precluded
from suspending pupils to an off-campus site.
11.Authorizes a school district to use appropriate state,
federal, or private funding sources to support the
evidence-based schoolwide strategies required of schools
whose suspension rates are above the applicable
threshold rates specified in paragraphs 1) or 2).
12.Defines a "numerically significant pupil subgroup" as
any racial and ethnic subgroups, gender-based subgroups,
socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils, English learners
or pupils with disabilities that meet one of the
following criteria:
A. The subgroup consists of at least 100 pupils
enrolled at the school; or,
B. The subgroup constitutes at least 50 pupils and
constitutes at least 15 percent of the total
population of pupils enrolled at the school.
13.Deletes provisions in existing law encouraging schools
with suspension rates of higher than 30 percent of the
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
10
school's enrollment to implement a supervised suspension
program or a progressive discipline approach that could
include:
A. Conferences between school staff, parents and
pupils;
B. Referrals to the school counselor, psychologist,
child welfare attendance personnel, or other school
support staff;
C. Detention; and,
D. Study teams, guidance teams, resource panel
teams, or other assessment related teams.
Background
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.
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
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
11
out-of-school suspensions.
Comments
This bill seeks to reduce the suspension rate in California
schools by encouraging schools with high suspension rates
to develop and implement schoolwide strategies for
improving school climate. It provides schools with two
options for implementing schoolwide climate improving
strategies. The school may opt to employ either a PBIS
approach or another evidence-based approach designed to
address school climate. Whichever strategy is chosen, it
is encouraged that the strategy be implemented for a
minimum of three years.
Option 1: Positive behavior intervention and support . The
PBIS approach focuses on setting specific behavioral
expectations for students that reflect desirable behavior.
When students uphold these positive behavioral
expectations, they are rewarded and the positive habits are
reinforced through schoolwide systems. It is a proactive
approach that involves the whole school community and seeks
to prevent misbehavior by rewarding and recognizing desired
student behavior. Numerous studies and reports verify and
highlight the effectiveness of PBIS programs at improving
school climate and leading to greater student success.
Option 2: Other evidence-based schoolwide strategies to
improve school climate . Instead of implementing a PBIS
program, this bill also authorizes schools to use other
schoolwide strategies, such as a Restorative Justice
program, that are evidence-based and designed to address
school climate in order to create positive learning
environments.
Schoolwide strategy requirement threshold: This bill
focuses explicitly on schools that suspend off-campus a
percentage of the total school population or a percentage
of a numerically significant pupil subgroup that exceeds
the set threshold rate for that year. The threshold rate
gradually declines over time. Initially, the threshold is
an off-campus suspension rate of 25 percent or higher. In
subsequent years, the threshold is reduced each year until
it reaches an off-campus suspension rate of 15 percent or
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
12
higher. Once the threshold is an off-campus suspension rate
of 15 percent or higher, it will remain at this level over
time. Pushing all of California's schools to reduce their
off-campus suspension rates below 15 percent or to be
implementing schoolwide strategies to improve school
climate is a positive change that would likely benefit many
students across the state.
Regional forums to provide training and technical
assistance . This bill requires the SPI to provide
technical assistance and training at three annual regional
forums each year from the 2014-2015 school year through the
2018-2019 school year. These forums will be specifically
for schools with off-campus suspension rates that exceed
the specified threshold rate for the given school year.
The purpose of these forums is to provide training on
implementing schoolwide evidence-based strategies, using
data to create positive school climates, sharing resources
and evidence-based practices, identifying gaps and
weaknesses in services, identifying and sharing solutions
and best practices, and evaluating the efficacy of
strategies adopted. Beginning with the 2015-2016 school
year, the SPI will invite schools with suspension rates
above the given threshold, with a priority for the schools
with the highest suspension rates, to have their school
leadership team attend the applicable regional forum. In
addition, the SPI will provide the SBE with a list of the
names of schools that exceed the suspension rate
thresholds, who attend the regional forums and the annual
rate of reduction or increase in each of these school's
suspension rates. Further, the CDE will provide technical
assistance regarding the implementation of schoolwide
strategies to all schools whose suspension rates exceed the
thresholds laid out in this bill. This bill allows the SPI
to use state, federal or private funding sources to support
these activities and requires the SPI to seek private
funding to supplement any state or federal funds made
available for this purpose. It also specifies that the
requirements for the SPI to provide
technical assistance and training at these annual regional
forums and to complete all related tasks are contingent
upon the availability of funds.
Numerically significant pupil subgroups . This bill also
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
13
requires schools to comply with the requirements of this
bill when the off-campus suspension rate for any
numerically significant pupil subgroup is above the given
threshold. This bill identifies subgroups in five
overarching categories that generally align with those used
to report California's Academic Performance Index (API).
These subgroups include subgroups based on race and
ethnicity, gender, socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils,
English learners, and pupils with disabilities.
Additionally, this bill requires a subgroup from the groups
specified above to meet two criteria in order to be
considered a "numerically significant pupil subgroup." The
current definition is consistent with the structure in
place with the API and requires one of the two following
conditions to be met:
The subgroup consists of at least 100 pupils enrolled at
the school.
The subgroup constitutes at least 15 percent of the total
population of pupils enrolled at the school and consists of
at least 50 pupils enrolled at the school.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/28/12)
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California (co-source)
Public Counsel Law Center (co-source)
AFSCME
American Civil Liberties Union of CA
Assembly Select Committee on the Status of Boys and Men of
Color
CA Association for Bilingual Education
CA Association for Parent-Child Advocacy
CA Correctional Peace Officers Association
California Council of Community Mental Health Agencies
California School Health Centers Association
California State PTA
Californians for Justice Education Fund
Californians Together
Cal-TASH
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
14
Center for Juvenile Law and Policy
Children Now
Children's Defense Fund CA
Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth
Community Asset Development Redefining Education
Disability Rights California
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
Disability Rights Legal Center
Education Trust-West
Gay-Straight Alliance network
Hispanas Organized for Political Equality
Kids in Common
Labor/Community Strategy Center
Legal Advocates for Children and Youth
Legal Services for Children
Life Span Institute, University of Kansas
Los Angeles Unified School District
Los Angeles Unified School District Trustees Monica Garcia
&
Nury Martinez
MALDEF
National Center for Youth Law
New America Foundation
Northern California Association of Counsel for Children
Oakland Unified School District
Office of Restorative Justice of the Archdiocese of Los
Angeles
PICO California
Policy Link
Restorative Schools Vision Project
Youth and Education Law Project, Stanford Law School
Youth Justice Coalition
Youth Law Center
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : 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 percent 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
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
15
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
improve student behavior, school safety and school
success."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 53-26, 8/27/12
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block,
Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo,
Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes,
Furutani, Gatto, Gordon, Gorell, Hall, Hayashi, Roger
Hern�ndez, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Lara, Bonnie
Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Norby, Pan,
Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Portantino, Skinner, Solorio,
Swanson, Torres, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A.
P�rez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly,
Fletcher, Beth Gaines, Garrick, Grove, Hagman, Halderman,
Harkey, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Miller,
Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Olsen, Silva, Smyth, Valadao,
Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Galgiani
PQ:do 8/28/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED