CP-i x'.MS'i^
Discipline in lyiichigan
Public Schools and
Government Enforcement of
Equal Education Opportunity
3 1428 03492673 9
/Hichi£|an Advisory Cemmittee to the
L. $. Commission on Civil Pi£|hts
ilA .^'"eood Marshall Law Library
vOTy rT'''"^ of Maryland School of Law
-5^^ Baltimore, Maryland .^^^^^
March 1996
j^ report of the 94ichigan Advisory Committu to t(U Zlnited States Commission on Civil ^fits prepared for the
information and consideration of the Commission. This report vHiC be considered by the Commission and the Commission
■wiU maiic ptiBCic its reaction. The findings and recommendations of this report shoiddnot be attributed to the Commission
but onCy to the 9^ichigan Sldvisory Committee.
The United States Commission on Civil Rights
The United States Commission on Civil Rights, first created by the Civil Rights Act of 1957,
and reestablished by the United States Commission on Civil Rights Act of 1983, is an
independent, bipartisan agency of the Federal Government By the terms of the 1983 act, as
amended by the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994, the Commission is charged
with the following duties pertaining to discrimination or denials of the equal protection of the
laws based on race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administra-
tion of justice: investigation of individual discriminatory denials of the right to vote; study and
collection of information relating to discrimination or denials of the equal protection of the law;
appraisal of the laws and policies of the United States with respect to discrimination or denials
of equal protection of the law; maintenance of a national clearinghouse for information
respecting discrimination or denials of equal protection of the law; investigation of patterns
or practices of fraud or discrimination in the conduct of Federal elections; and preparation and
issuance of public service announcements and advertising campaigns to discourage
discrimination or denials of equal protection of the law. The Commission is also required to
submit reports to the President and the Congress at such times as the Commission, the
Congress, or the President shall deem desirable.
The State Advisory Committees
An Advisory Committee to the United States Commission on Civil Rights has been established
in each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia pursuant to section 105(c) of the Civil
Rights Act of 1957 and section 3(d) of the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994.
The Advisory Committees are made up of responsible persons who serve without compensation.
Their functions under their mandate from the Commission are to: advise the Commission of
all relevant information concerning their respective States on matters within the jurisdiction
of the Commission; advise the Commission on matters of mutual concern in the preparation
of reports of the Commission to the President and the Congress; receive reports, suggestions,
and recommendations from individuals, public and private organizations, and public officials
upon matters pertinent to inquiries conducted by the State Advisory Committee; initiate and
forward advice and recommendations to the Commission upon matters in which the
Commission shall request the assistance of the State Advisory Committee; and attend, as
observers, any open hearing or conference that the Commission may hold within the State.
Discipline in IMichigan
Public Schools and
Government Enforcement of
Equal Education Opportunity
/Hichi£|an Advisory Ccmmittee t€ the
ii. $. Ccmmissicn en Civil Pifi|hts
March 1996
J? report of the O^ichigan Advisory Committu to the. Zlnited States Commission on Civil "Rights prtpared for the
information and consideration of the Commission. This report lOifC 6c considered Sy the Commission and the Commission
zinitmaiie pubCic its reaction. The findings and recommendations of this report should not 6e attributed to the Commission
but only to the 94ichi£an Advisory Committee.
Letter of Transmittal
Michigan Advisory Committee to the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Members of the Commission
Mary Frances Berry, Chairperson
Cruz Reynoso, Vice Chairperson
Carl A. Anderson
Robert P. George
A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr
Constance Homer
Yvonne Y. Lee
Russell G. Redenbaugh
Mary K. Mathews, Staff Director
The Michigan Advisory Committee submits this report, Discipline in Michigan Public Schools and
Government Enforcement of Equal Education Opportunity, as part of its responsibility to advise the
Commission on civil rights issues within the State. The Advisory Committee is indebted to the staff of
the Midwestern Regional Office for statistical analysis, background research, and editorial assistance
in the development of this report. The report was unanimously adopted by the Advisory Committee by
a 13-0 vote.
The Advisory Committee held a factfinding meeting on August 3 and 4, 1994, to obtain perspectives
and facts on the administration of discipline in Michigan secondary public schools. Those invited to
participate included the Governor, the State board of education, government officials, researchers, the
local school districts of Lansing and Ypsilanti, other local school administrators, community groups,
and parents. The Michigan Board of Education, the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of
Education, the Lansing Public School District, and the Ypsilanti Public School District were aff"orded
the opportunity to review the report prior to its submission to the Commission.
The Advisory Committee finds minority students in Michigan being suspended and expelled from
public schools at a disproportionately higher rate than nonminority students. Acknowledging that a
finding of disproportionate discipline is not tantamount to a judgment of discrimination, such findings
are disturbing. With productivity — both for individuals and society — related to educational achieve-
ment, such school practices may lead to a group of citizens less educated, less prepared, and less willing
to contribute to society.
Of additional concern to the Advisory Committee is finding that, in the face of this disproportionate
discipline, neither the State, through the Michigan Department of Education, nor the Federal Govern-
ment, through the Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, has invested time or resources
to assist local school officials examine this problem and determine if alternative or corrective measures
could be taken.
Respectfully,
Mi^A^^ Jj,. Ji^:^
Janice G. Frazier, Ed.D., Chairperson
Michigan Advisory Committee
Michigan Advisory Committee to the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Janice G. Frazier, Chairperson
Detroit
Dennis L. Gibson, Jr.
Detroit
Robert J. Gordon
Detroit
Ellen G. Ha
Detroit
Prince E. Holliday
West Bloomfield
Roland Hwang
North ville
Peter Kobrak
Kalamazoo
Jack Martin
Bingham Farms
Marylou Olivarez-Mason
Lansing
Noel John Saleh
Detroit
Sue Hamilton-Smith
Detroit
Larrain Thomas
Detroit
Joan Webkamigad
Lansing
Contents
1. Introduction 1
2. Discipline and Minority Students in Michigan Public Schools 8
Law & Policy Institute Discipline Study 8
Advisory Committee Analysis of Minority Discipline 11
Personal Statements 19
3. School Discipline and the Community: Local School Districts,
the Judicial System, and Community Programs 27
The Lansing Public School District 27
The Ypsilanti Public School District 33
The Judicial System and Community Efforts 39
4. The State of Michigan: Authority and Equal Education Opportunity 44
School Funding 44
Board of Education and Department of Education 45
Michigan Department of Civil Rights 51
5. The Federal Government and the Enforcement of Nondiscriminatory
School Discipline 56
Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education 56
Community Relations Service, U.S. Department of Justice 62
6. Discipline and Students with Disabilities 66
7. Addendum 70
8. Conclusions and Recommendations 73
Tables
1-1. Race/Ethnic Population Rates and Race/Ethnic Public School Enrollment Rates 4
2-1. Suspension Rates by Racial Group for a Sample of Michigan School Districts in 1990 . . 10
2-2. Michigan Public School Districts Surveyed by Office for Civil Rights,
U.S. Depart,ment of Education 12
2-3. Student Enrollment, Disciplines, and Poverty 13
2-4. Suspension Rates by Race/Ethnicity 14
2-5. Regression Results for Minority Suspensions 15
2-6. Regression Results for Minority Suspension Rates 17
2-7. Minority Suspension Rates for Surveyed Schools 18
3-1. Student Race/Ethnicity, Lansing Public Schools 28
3-2. Suspension Incident Rate and Student Enrollment Rate for the Lansing School District . 30
3-3. Student Suspension Rate and Student Enrollment Rate for the Lansing School District . 30
3-4. Racial Composition of Ypsilanti Public Schools 34
3-5. Comparison of Ypsilanti School Population with Suspension Population 36
4-1, Real State Spending on the Department of Education, 1990 and 1994 49
4-2. Education Complaints to the MDCR, 1987-1993 53
5-1. National Comparison of White and Black Student Suspension Rates 60
5-2. OCR Survey of Student Discipline, Michigan, 1992 60
5-3. Poverty Rates for Students in the Kentwood Schools 64
6-1. Suspension Rates of Nondisabled Students and Disabled Students 69
Figure
4-1. Michigan Department of Education 46
Appendices
I. Presenters at the Factfinding Meetings 81
n. Michigan Public School Enrollment by District 83
III. Lansing School District Suspension Report 95
rv. Michigan State Board of Education, Guidelines to the Rights and
Responsibilities of Students 100
V. Michigan Civil Rights Commission 1968 Report: Discipline and Suspension
Policy and Practices in Michigan Public Schools Ill
VI. Letter of Understanding between Kentwood School District and Concerned
Students and Parents 118
VII. Public Act 328 131
VIII. Violence and Vandalism Study Group Recommendations 134
Chapter 1
Introduction
In releasing the 1993 U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights monitoring report, Enforcement of
Equal Employment and Economic Opportunity
Laws and Programs Relating to Federally As-
sisted Transportation Projects, former Chair-
person Arthur A. Fletcher spoke of the need for
vigorous civil rights enforcement to ensure do-
mestic racial peace.
If we as a Nation are going to address the pervasive
causes of racial tension and urban unrest, and put an
end to the cycle of rioting that has most recently shaken
cities like Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Washington, D.C.,
a vigorous civil rights enforcement effort is critically
needed.'
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Educa-
tion, often stressed the importance of education,
and wrote in support of the responsibility society
has in providing equal educational opportunity.
Plato taught that a civilization faces one fundamental
task above all other the upbringing, nurture, and pro-
tection of its children. This solemn commitment must
be upheld in special measure with respect to those in
our society with special needs.
In education, the primary responsibility for meeting
those needs rightly belongs with State and local au-
thorities. But the Federal government can— indeed, the
Federal government must— assist those efforts. It
must, for example, ensure equal access and opportunity
in education for all its citizens. It should provide na-
tional leadership by focusing the country's attention on
quality education. It should serve as a clearinghouse of
important research and statistical findings. And it
should provide assessments on educational programs
which will improve educational performance.^
At the Federal level, the Office for Civil Rights
(OCR), U.S. Department of Education, enforces
four Federal statutes that prohibit discrimination
in programs and activities receiving Federal fi-
nancial assistance. Discrimination on the basis of
race, color, and national origin is prohibited by
title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; sex dis-
crimination is prohibited by title IX of the Educa-
tion Amendments of 1972; discrimination on the
basis of disability is prohibited by section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and age discrimi-
nation is prohibited by the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975.
The principal enforcement activity of OCR is
the investigation and resolution of complaints. In
addition OCR addresses potential systemic prob-
lems by conducting compliance reviews of se-
lected institutions.^ On December 11, 1990, OCR
released its "National Enforcement Strategy" for
FY 1991 and 1992. In that strategy, OCR set out
its enforcement goals for the next 2 years, and
included six priority issues for special emphasis.
One of those issues was discrimination on the
basis of race and national origin in student disci-
pline.*
The State of Michigan has two agencies that
deal with civil rights enforcement in education.
The Michigan Department of Civil Rights is
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, news release, Jan. 11, 1993.
U.S. Department of Education. "Educating StudenU With learning Problems: A Shared Respomiibility,' foreword by
William J. Bennett, November 1986. •- ^. ^
OfTioe for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education. 'Education and Title VI.*
mandated by law to protect the rights of students
and has the authority to receive and investigate
complaints in education where discrimination
based on race, sex, religion, national origin, age,
marital status, or disability is alleged. The Mich-
igan Department of Education accepts complaints
from parents and guardians of children in public
schools. Among the common categories of com-
plaints are: behavioral problems, discipline, sus-
pension, and expulsion.
Charles Vergon reported that in 14 out of the
17 years since the inception of the Gallup Educa-
tional Survey, student discipline has ranked as
the single greatest public concern regarding our
nation's schools. A succession of studies, initially
focusing on school disruption in the late 1960s,
then student rights in the early 1970s, and, more
recently, on violence and vandalism has made
school discipline a staple of our public debates on
education.^
Michigan ranks sixth in the Nation in its reli-
ance on suspensions and expulsions as a disciplin-
ary tool.^ Although there is no recent data to
indicate Michigan's current rating, anecdotal tes-
timony would suggest that it has not improved.
Between 1978 and 1986, school suspensions in the
State increased by 40 percent. African American
and Hispanic students in Michigan were sus-
pended during this period at much higher rates
than whites.
Between 1976 and 1986, the suspension rate
for African Americans was 167 per 1,000 stu-
dents; for Hispanics the rate was 100 per 1,000
students. The rate of suspensions for whites was
56 per thousand students. American Indian and
Asian students were suspended at rates lower
than whites.^ One recent local study showed this
pattern continuing. In the 1990-1991 school year,
Ypsilanti black students, who are one-third of the
school population, accounted for nearly two-
thirds of the disciplinary suspensions.*
There are two government agencies charged
with collecting data on school discipline; those
data are sparse and virtually nonexistent. Section
388.1757 of the Michigan State School Aid Act
requires "each district . . . furnish the department
[of education] the information . . . that is neces-
sary for the preparation of suspended or expelled
students in grades K to 12 as required by section
307 of the 1991-92 department of education ap-
propriations act** In addition, OCR is charged
with collecting survey data from districts in the
State on the type of discipline and the race of the
disciplined student
Although public education has always received
a great deal of attention, the interest has in-
creased in recent years as economic and social
concerns have increased over the role of public
education and its cost. In 1989 President Bush
and the Nation's Governors identified six m^or
goals that public education should attain by the
year 2000. The six goals are:
• Goal 1 — readiness: All U.S. children will
start school ready to learn.
• Goal 2 — high school completion: The high
school graduation rate will increase to at least
90 percent.
• Goal 3 — academic outcomes: U.S. students
leaving grades 4, 8, and 12 will have demon-
strated competency in important subjects such
as english, mathematics, science, history, and
geography; in addition, students will be pre-
pared for responsible and productive lives as
citizens and employees.
• Goal 4 — science and mathematics: U.S. stu-
dents will be the first in the world in science
and mathematics.
Charles B Ver(?»n. "Di.sciplinary Actions in Michigan Public Schools: Nature, Prevalence and Impact 1978-1986,* mimeo.
Law and Policy Inslitule, University of Michigan, unpublished (hereafter cited as Michigan Disciplinary Actions).
Michi(;aa Disaplinary Actions, p 2.
Michigan Disciplinary Actions, p. 3.
Janet Miller, "Blacks still suspended more oflen,' Ann Ar&orA'eu's, Sept. 10, 1992, p. CI.
Michigan State School Aid Act. Mich. Corap. Laws } 388.1757 (1991).
• Goal 5 — adult literacy: Every adult American
will be literate, possessing the knowledge and
skills necessary for competing in a global econ-
omy and for exercising the rights and responsi-
bilities of citizenship.
• Goal 6 — safe, drug-free schools: Every U.S.
school will be free of drugs and violence and
will offer a safe environment conducive to
learning.
This is the Michigan Advisory Committee's sec-
ond examination of educational issues in the
State in recent years. Earlier the Advisory Com-
mittee examined the issue of minority dropouts in
it report. Civil Rights Implications of Minority
Student Dropouts, released in March 1990. In
that report it was suggested that a relationship
existed between unfair discipline practices to-
ward minority students and minority dropouts.
Many reasons for the high rate of minority student
dropouts were advanced by forum participants and in
various research reports submitted to the Advisory
Committee. Reasons cited were segregation, unfair dis-
ciphne practices, curriculum bias, teenage pregnancy,
low achievement and self esteem, shortage of qualified
teachers, and poverty. '°
Subsequent to the Advisory Committee's re-
port, a study by the National Center for Education
Statistics found significantly higher dropout rates
for minority students. The dropout rate for non-
Hispanic whites is 7.7 percent, while the dropout
rate for non-Hispanic blacks is 13.7 percent; for
Hispanics it is 29.4 percent ' ' However, the report
also notes that although the dropout rate for
blacks was higher than the rate for whites. When
comparing blacks and whites by income level,
there were no differences between dropout
rates. '^
The issue of out-of-school discipline and the
loss of academic work and its impact on minority
students also affects minorities and their partici-
pation in higher education. Suspensions and the
loss of academic work handicap students in their
opportunity to prepare and succeed at the college
level. Although the proportion of African Ameri-
cans who had completed 4 or more years of college
rose from 4 percent in 1970 to 8 percent in 1980,
more recent studies show a widening gap in mi-
nority and nonminority college graduation rates.
Black college-student retention communicatc[s] a . . .
dismal situation. By 1991, . . . while approximately half
of White college students were graduating six yeeirs
after entering college, barely 25 percent of all success-
fully recruited minority students were doing so.*^
The issue of discipline and violence in the pub-
lic schools is a growing concern in many commu-
nities. In a 1993 survey of parent and student
perceptions of the learning environment at school,
overall American parents and youth express
mildly positive opinions regarding the learning
environments at the schools with which they have
personal experience.'*
When parents were asked about the adequacy
of disciphne at their children's schools, an 88
percent majority agreed that the child's teachers
maintain good discipline in the classroom, and a
91 percent majority said the principal maintains
good disciphne. Among students, 81 percent ex-
pressed at least mild agreement that their teach-
ers maintained good discipline in the classroom,
10 Report of the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civi] Rights, CwU Rights Implications of Minority
Student Dropouts. March 1990, p. 25.
11 U.S. Department of Education. OfTice of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics,
Dropout Rates m the United Stales: 1992. September 1993, p. 16.
12 Ibid., pp. 17-18.
13 Peter Kohrak. 'Black Student Retention in Predominantly White Regional Universities: The Politics of Faculty Involve-
ment," Journa/ o/"N«gnD Education, vol. 61, no. 4 (1992), p. 509.
14 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Eihication and
Statistics, 'Parent and Student Perceptions of the Learning Envirooment at School,' September 1993, p. 2.
TABLE 1-1
Race/Ethnic Population Rates and Race/Ethnic Public School Enrollment Rates
Public school enroflment
State population
White
77.8%
82.2%
African American
17.1
13.9
Hispanic
2.9
2.2
Asian
1.3
1.1
American Indian
0.9
0.6
Source: Midwsstorn Regional Office, USCCR.
while 89 percent agreed that their principal main-
tained good order at the school.'^
Some studies suggest that discipline issues in
the secondary schools have their roots in the ear-
lier grades. A longitudinal study relating early
school behaviors to later school outcomes was
reported by Spivack and Cianci. The study re-
vealed a consistent pattern of significant associ-
ation between behavior in the early grades and
discipline in the later grades. With regard to
school conduct disturbance, the dominant predic-
tors were early classroom disturbance, impa-
tience, and disrespect Euid defiance.'®
Michigan Demographics
The population of Michigan is 9,295,407.*' Al-
most 20 percent of the population is minority.
There are 1,292,208 ( 13.9 percent) African Ameri-
cans; 202,347 (2.2 percent) Hispanics; 105,101
(1 percent) Asians and Pacific Islanders; and
56,298 (fewer than 1 percent) American Indians.
There are 562 public school districts in Michi-
gan with an enrollmentof 1,633,981 children.'* Of
these, 1,258,734 are white; 275,386 are African
American; 47,265 are Hispanic; 20,933 are
AsiarL'Pacific Islander; and 13,988 are American
Indian. Another 21,675 are classified as other. A
listing of all students by race, ethnicity, and
school corporation is in appendix 11.
The enrollment rates of public school children
diverge ftx)m State population percentages. All
minority groups make up a larger percentage of
public school enrollment than their percentage of
the State population. African Americans, who are
13.9 percent of the State population, are 17.1
percent of the students in public schools. Asians,
Hispanics, and American Indians also have
higher public school enrollment rates than popu-
lation rates. Whites, the largest group in the
State, are the only group with a student enroll-
ment rate lower than their percentage of the pop-
ulation. Whites are 82 percent of the State's resi-
dents, but are 78 percent of the students in public
schools.
The Factfinding Meeting
This study by the Advisory Committee to the
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights examines
whether there is disproportionate discipUne of
minority students in public schools and assesses
the enforcement efforts of State and Federal
agencies to ensure eqiial educational opportunity
in this regard. The central issue of this report is
whether minorities are being adversely afTected
15 Ibid.
G. Spivack and N. Cianci. "HiRh Risk Early Behavior Pattern and LaUr DeUnquency," Ji. Burchard & SH. Burchard (Eda)
in Prevention of Delinqurnl Behavior. Beverly HilU, CA; Sa^ Publications, 1992.
1990 public census.
State orMichigan, Inrormaimn Ccnter/DMB. frona U.S. Bureau of Census and National Center for Education Statistics.
in the discipline practices of the Michigan pubHc
schools.
In examining this issue the Advisory Commit-
tee uses the term disproportionate in relationship
to discrimination in the following sense. Dispro-
portionate refers to a situation where the ratio of
actions taken with respect to one group compared
to that group's population differs significantly
from the ratio of similar actions taken with re-
spect to another group compared to its population.
Evidence of discrimination is not implied by ob-
servations of disproportionate treatment*^
The study is fourfold:
• First, determine the extent that minority
students are being disproportionately sus-
pended and expelled from public schools.
• Second, examine the actions of the State
government with respect to: ( 1) the collection of
discipline data, (2) studies of disproportionate
discipline, (3) compliance reviews of discipline
in school corporations, and (4) investigations
and resolutions of individual complaints of dis-
parate discipline.
• Third, examine the actions OCRhas taken on
the issue of discipline in Michigan with respect
to: (1) the collection of discipHne data, (2) an
overall study of disproportionate discipline,
(3) compliance reviews of discipline in local
school districts, and (4) investigations and res-
olutions of individual complaints of disparate
discipline.
• Fourth, examine ancillary problems related
to this issue, specifically matters of disability
and discipline, the use of the judiciary to en-
force school conduct, discipline issues and solu-
tions at the local level, and community con-
cerns.
The issue of school discipline is a matter of real
concern in many communities. The issue is often
frustrating and contentious among different seg-
ments in a community — all equally concerned
about quality education. Opinion is divided on the
optimal approach to disciplining students, some
arguing for more punishment and others calling
for more prevention. The Advisory Committee
conducted a 2-day factfinding meeting. Three
half-day sessions were held in two different loca-
tions. The first day's meeting was in Lansing,
Michigan, on August 3, 1994, the second session
was held in Ypsilanti on August 4, 1994.
Those invited to testify before the Advisory
Committee included current officials with the
OCR, members of the State board of education
and the Michigan Department of Education,
school superintendents, school officials, educa-
tors, and parents firom the local school corpora-
tions of Lansing and Ypsilanti, juvenile court
judges. State legislators, researchers, and com-
munity groups. To ensure that a balanced presen-
tation was received by the Advisory Committee,
presenters included State legislators fi-om both
poUtical parties, school officials who implement
disciplinary policy, individuals in the community
affected by those policies and decisions, and a
public session at which anyone could address the
Advisory Committee. An agenda of presenters is
in appendix L
Dorothy Beardmore, a member of the Michigan
Board of Education, recounted some of the recent
debate in the State on school discipline and the
State's recent political decision. She offered her
opinion that the recent direction of school disci-
pline in Michigan is more focused on punishment
than on prevention.
There are some differences of philosophy . . . between a
punitive approach and a preventative approach, and
much of the legislation becomes focused more on pun-
ishment. For example, there was a time when there
were school safety grants that were permitted by the
legislature. The State board of education's position was
that the focus of those grants should be for preventing
violence and misdemeanors in the schools and that it
should not be spient for punitive methods and it should
not be spent — as a most typical example at that time
which was — for metal detectors. So what happens in
the p>olitical process? The next year people who wanted
to have metal detectors and police officers as the pri-
mary focus of preventing disciplinary problems have
19 See U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Report of the United States Commission on Civil Rights on the Civil Rights Act of 1990,
July 1990.
convinced enough legislators that that was the way to
go. Therefore, the next year the school safety grants
were speafically permitted by legislation to cover metal
detectors. Since that time that is one of the primary
expenditures for attempting to solve problems in edu-
cation. The school safety grants have long disappeared
and there is not State funding in that same way that
there once was.^
Wilbur Brookover, a researcher of education
and retired professor of education at Michigan
State, claimed that discipline arguments center-
ing on prevention measures versus punishment
were both faulty. From his 50 years of research,
he offered that in spite of the evidence and dem-
onstration in a few schools that essentially all
children can learn and will learn what they are
expected to learn and learn what they are taught,
schools continue the practice of discrimination in
the instructional programs.^' He believed that is
this discrimination that causes discipline prob-
lems in the schools.
I would speculate that a major factor in the problems of
discipline and suspension grow out of the discrimina-
tory practices of public education There is extensive
discrimination in educational opportunities and pro-
grams which is characteristic of almost all schools and
almost all school systems in the United States. ... I
submit that the differentiation of school programs and
the placement of many students in inferior low level
instructional programs produce the problems of disci-
pline and suspension we have been talking about. . . .
The disciplinary problems are almost exclusively
among those students who are in whatever may be
called the lower academic programs.^
Chapter 2 of this report defines the issue of
school discipline and presents statistics on disci-
pline in the Michigan public schools. The first
data set is a 1987 study by the Law and Policy
Institute of the University of Michigan. This is
followed by an Advisory Committee analysis of
data from an OCR survey during the 1991-1992
school year. Both analyses present evidence that
minorities, and in particular African American
students, are disproportionately disciplined in
Michigan public schools. It concludes with ex-
cerpts of personal stories and experiences from
parents, community members, administrators,
and students of how the administration of discipl-
ine has affected the students and their famiUes.
The stories and accounts highlight the complex-
ity, seriousness, and cost of the issue in personal
terms.
Chapter 3 explores the experiences of two local
school corporations in Michigan with regard to
the discipline issue, as well as perspectives from
a county juvenile court, and alternative education
programs in the area. The two school districts are
Lansing and Ypsilanti. The districts were not
selected because of any particular problems these
corporations had in the area of school discipline,
but because both had a large percentage of stu-
dents from several racial £md ethnic backgrounds
and significantly large minority populations.
Chapter 4 examines the structure and author-
ity of both the Michigan Board of Education and
the Department of Education. Data collection ef-
forts by these agencies and their roles in ensuring
that disciphne is race neutral are examined. In
addition, the role of the Michigan Department of
Civil Rights is explored, including the number of
education complaints it has acted upon in recent
years and the outcome of those investigations.^
Chapter 5 looks at the role of the Federal Gov-
ernment in school discipline. Most of this exam-
ination centers on the Office for Civil Rights of
the Department of Education. The complaint pro-
cedure, investigations, and resolutions are
Testimony before the Michigan Advi.sory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, factrinding meeting, Lansing,
MI. Aug. .3. Ann Arbor, MI. Aug 4, 1994. transcript, pp. 20-21 {hereafter dt«d as Transcript).
In support of this a-sscrtion. Brookover cited research that showed cases of minority students from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds, who were afTordcd appropriate college preparatory opportunities, graduating at the same level and going to
college at nearly the same level as students from the higher socioeconomic strata. (See Transcript, p. 73.)
Transcript, pp. 49. 62. and 5.3
The Michigan Department of Education was given the opportunity to review a draft of this report prior to its publication.
analyzed. The Community Relations Service
(CRS) of the Department of Justice is also men-
tioned in this chapter, as this agency has the
authority to mediate racial and ethnic disputes in
local communities, and this authority extends to
local school corporations. The CRS has success-
fully mediated at least one racial issue in a public
school in Michigan in recent years.^*
Chapter 6 addresses an ancillary issue to the
matter of disproportionate minority discipbne:
the relationship of disability to school suspen-
sions and expulsions. The chapter presents both
statistics and perspectives on the association of
discipline and disability.
Chapter 7 is an addendum to the report con-
taining significant developments subsequent to
the factfinding. These developments include the
enactment of State legislation regarding school
suspension and expulsion policy, the recommen-
dations of the State's department of education's
task force on school violence and vandalism, and
recent initiatives by the Michigan Department of
Civil Rights to focus on school discipbne issues.
Chapter 8 presents the Advisory Committee's
findings and its recommendations. The Michigan
Advisory Committee is structured to be diverse,
representing a broad spectrum of political views,
and independent of any national, State, or local
administration or policy group. Its findings and
recommendations are made in a genuine spirit of
cooperation and bipartisanship.
24 The OfTice for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, was given the opportunity to review a draR of this report prior
to pubUcation.
Chapter 2
Discipline and Minority Students in Michigan Public Schools
Robert Schiller, superintendent of public in-
struction, State of Michigan, said, T think we
all realize that students in Michigan schools
are involved in acts that require disciplinary ac-
tion; particularly for violent acts."' The concern of
the State board of education is that the staff and
students of school districts be able to survive and
educate in a safe environment, free from harm,
and free from any serious impingement on the
educational process. Schiller supported
Brookover's claim that students who succeed in
school are least likely to engage in violence at the
school, "^e know that children who succeed at
school are at least risk for violence than their
nonsuccessful peers."^ But he added that schools
alone cannot solve society's problems, and when it
comes to disciplining students "schools have very
few tools and policies available to them in order to
deal with those incidents and those students who
cause concern."^
Percy Bates, director of Programs for Educa-
tion Opportunity, testified that his examination
of data shows minority students in Michigan
schools being disciplined at higher rates thsin
nonminorities. Further, since it is minority males
who are incurring the most discipline, to Bates,
"It is quite clear that we have to be able to find a
way to cut through this issue that seems to run
through many of our schools."* In Bates view, the
issues of school discipline and suspensions are a
particularly timely subject, given the discussions
about educational quality.
We spend a lot of time talking about achievement gaps.
But it is pretty clear that one cannot be educated if he
or she is not in school. When we take all of the reasons
and put them together as to why some children are not
in school and count those numbers, I think it becomes
readily apparent that we are going to have a serious
problem educating the children . . . because many of
them are not there.^
Law & Policy Institute Discipline Study
Using data collected from school districts
across the country by the Office for Civil Rights of
the U.S. Department of Education, the Law &
Policy Institute studied the nature, prevalence,
and impact of various disciplinary measures for
the State of Michigan and for selected samples of
Michigan public school districts between 1978
and 1986. Included in the 1986 sample were 115
Michigan school districts including urban, subur-
ban, and rural systems. The Detroit Public
Schools, because of its uniqueness in size and the
changes in how it defined suspensions over the
period studied, was excluded from both the state
projections and district analyses. Similar analy-
ses of the nature, prevalence and impact of sus-
pensions and expulsions were carried out for the
Midwest and the United States, allowing compar-
isons between Michigan's practices and broader
regional and national patterns.^
TeMtimDny before the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, ractflnding meeting, Lansing,
Ml. Aug .3, 1994, transcript, pp 9-10 (hereafter cited as Transcnpt).
2
Ibid.,
p. 14
3
Ibid.
,p U.
4
Ibid.,
. p 469.
6
Ibid.,
, p 467.
According to Charles Vergon, author of the
study, in 1986, and each year since 1978, over
100,000 Michigan elementary and secondary
school students became enmeshed in disciplinary
proceeding leading to corporal punishment or sus-
pension. This resulted in a Michigan suspension
rate of nearly 70 students per 1,000, as contrasted
to a national rate of about 50. Michigan students
were 44 percent more likely to experience suspen-
sion than were their classmates nationwide.'
According to Vergon, the State of Michigan has
a very high suspension rate, and minority stu-
dents are suspended from public schools in the
State at much higher rates than white students.
Compared with the other 50 states and the District of
Columbia, only five states suspended a greater propor-
tion of their school-age population than did Michigan.
These states were Maryland, Florida, Louisiana, Dela-
ware, and South Carolina. By contrast three states —
Texas, North Dakota, and South Dakota — suspended
fewer than 15 students per thousand. Even within
Michigan, substantial variations emerged among the
114 districts studied in depth. Although the suspension
rate for the entire state was 70 students per thousand,
it ranged from a low of 0 in four districts to a high of 311
students per thousand in one community. A total of 17
distncts reported rates in excess of 100 students per
thousand. Further analysis revealed that about one-
fifth of the districts, enrolling 22 percent of the stu-
dents, accounted for nearly 50 percent of all the stu-
dents suspended in 1986.
This research also examined the impact of disciplinary
actions on various student populations to ascertain if
some were at greater risk of suspension. . . . We found
that in Michigan, like the U.S. and the Midwest, males
accounted for approximately 7 of every 10 suspensions.
Minority students as a group, and African Amencan
and Hispanic students in particular were suspended at
higher rates than whites in Michigan. The suspension
rate for minorities was 141 as compared to a rate of 56
students f)er thousand for non-minority students. By
far the highest incidence of suspension involved Afri-
can Americans who were suspended at a rate of 167
students per thousand, followed by Hisp>anic8 at a rate
of 100 per thousand. American Indian £md Asian stu-
dents were suspended at rates lower than whites. Afri-
can Americans also had the highest suspension rates in
the United States, although because of the high inci-
dence of suspension in the state, Michigan blacks were
almost twice as likely to experience suspension as their
black counterparts nationwide.
While the suspension rate for African Americans rose
by a substantial 61 percent between 1978 and 1986, the
relatively small Asian population registered the largest
increase in suspension rate, a jump of 148 percent over
the 8-year period. The suspension rate for Hispanics
also increased by more than 100 percent, although
most of the increase was attributable to a sharp rise in
a single 2-year period between 1984 and 1986. Even
with these trends, the larger picture remained rela-
tively constant. In each of the four years examined,
Michigan suspended a greater proportion of its enrolled
student population than did districts in the nation, and
in four of the five years at a rate greater than districts
in the Midwest.*
Vergon told the Advisory Committee that the
Institute is extending the analysis into the 1990s.
Direct comparisons between the two studies are
precluded because of differences in the sampling
techniques employed by the Federal Government.
Still, a pattern of high minority discipline rates is
observed in both studies.
The study of 144 Michigan districts ... for which data
are available for 1990, reveals the continuing persis-
tence of high levels of suspension and disparities at
least within this sample of districts. They reported an
overall suspension rate of 63 per 1,000 students. Afri-
can American students were more than twice as likely
to experience suspension as their white classmates: 117
as contrasted to 52 students per 1,000. Suspension
rates by racial groups and gender for 1990 are
Charles B. Vergon, Law & Policy Institute, Statement to the Michigan Advisoiy Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil
Rights, Ann Arbor, ML Aug. 4, 1994, p. 1.
Ibid., p. 2.
Ibid., pp. 2-3.
TABLE 2-1
Suspension Rates by Racial Group for a Sample of Michigan School Districts in 1990
Sutp«n*ion rat* p«r thousand ttudanli
American Indian
Hispanic
Minority
Source: Vergon. Charles B., from OCR sample of 144 public school districts.
displayed in (table 2-1] for this group of Michigan dia-
trictB. As in pnor periods and samples, the rate of
suspensions varied substantially from district to dis-
tnct. In 1990 suspension rates ranged from 0 to in
excess of 300 students per 1,000, with 18 districts sus-
pending over 100 students per 1,000. . . . The pattern
suggests that while a significant number and propor-
tion of all districts operate with little reliance on sus-
pensions, a small cluster of distncts suspend in excess
of 1 in every 10 students at least once each academic
year."
The reasons for the racial disparity are argu-
able, according to Vergon. His research notes
three generally proffered causes for the dis-
proportionality in terms of suspension: (1) differ-
ential behavior on the peirt of students from
groups with low socioeconomic status, (2) differ-
ential treatment by school staff or by organiza-
tional and institutional policies, and (3) inconsis-
tent applications of school procedures or niles.
Roberta Stanley, director of the Tenure and
Federal Relations Commission, Michigan Depart-
ment of Education, advised the Advisory Commit-
tee that this study might be flawed. Responding
to a question that the study demonstrates a prob-
9 Ibid, p. 3.
10
lem with respect to disparate treatment, Stanley
told the Advisory Committee:
In reviewing that [study], one it is somewhat dated
today, but two, we . . . wondered about the sample from
which that study was drawn. Ninety percent of the
pupils in the State of Michigan are in 10 percent of the
districts. So you can ask [whether] the district, depend-
ing on the sample, and the community takes on differ-
ent tenors based on the leadership of the community at
any given time. As I mentioned, during difficult eco-
nomic times, if a plant had closed in a district, for
instance, in Ypsilanti we have had that, ... it causes
great disruption in the community. And those factors
can come into play. Otherwise there would not be those
kind of difficulties present in the schools or on the
streets. The character of our State is very disparate
from one end to the other. '°
Advisory Committee Analysis of
Minority Discipline
The Advisory Committee analyzed the most
recent discipline survey data from the Office for
Civil Rights to determine the impact of school
discipline on minorities. The survey, concluded in
January, 1993, covered 112 Michigan public
school corporations and included each school in
the surveyed district. The 1991-1992 school year
was the year of record for the survey. T^e list of
school corporations in the OCR survey is in table
2-2."
The discipline section of the survey asked for
the total enrollment by race/ethnicity and gender,
corporal punishment administered by race/
ethnicity and gender, and suspensions by
race/ethnicity and gender. Since corporal punish-
ment is not allowed in Michigan public schools,
only suspension data was analyzed. In addition,
the survey asked for the number of total disabled
students at the school and the total of corporal
punishments and suspensions administered to
this group. Discipline meted out to disabled stu-
dents was not broken down by race and ethnicity.
The number of suspensions and student popu-
lation by race and ethnicity were tabulated for
each school district in the survey. The race EUid
ethnic categories included white (not Hispanic),
black (not Hispanic), American Indian (not Hispa-
nic), Asian/Pacific Islander (not Hispanic), other
(not Hispanic), and Hispanic. For the purposes of
this data analysis, students classified as other
were considered minorities. Added to the data
were the number of students in each racial/ethnic
category within the school district defined as be-
ing in poverty status. ^^ Poverty is an arbitrary
measure of the quality of life and was included as
a proxy for socioeconomic status.*^ The percent-
age of persons below the poverty line in Michigan
is 14.3."
Using this data set, four ratios were calculated
for each school district:
• the percentage of minority students in the
school district,
• the percentage of suspensions given to minor-
ity students,
• the percentage of students in poverty,
• the percentage of minority students in pov-
erty,
• the percentage of suspensions given to black
students, and
• the percentage of black students in poverty.
There was a wide range among the school dis-
tricts in the number of students, the number of
10 Transcript, pp. 45-46.
11 U.S. Department of Education, OfTice for Civil Rights, Fall 1992 Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights Compliance
Report and Individual School Report: ED 102, 0MB no. 1870-0550.
12 Poverty status data was obtained from the Michigan Information Center/DMB.
13 Relying on studies that found the average family in the United States spent about a third of its income on food, when the
Federal Government decided to begin measuring poverty in the 19608 it calculated the cost of buying food that met a
predetermined nutritional standard and multipUed that cost by 3.
14 U.S. Department of Commerce, Sutistical Abstract of the United SUtes, 1992, table do. 723. Percent of Persons Below
Poverty Level, by SUte: 1984 to 1990, p. 458.
11
TABLE 2-2
Michigan Public School Districts Surveyed by Office for Civil Rights.
U.S. Department of Education
Alcona
Almont
Alpena
Ann Arbor
Bangor
Baraga
Bark River Harris
Bath
Beecher
Belding
Benzie
Berrien Springs
Big Rapids
Birmingham
Biissfield
Bloomfield
Brandywine
Bridgman
Brimley
Buena Vista
Burt Township
Byron
Byron Center
Cadillac
Calumet
Caro
Carrollton
Carson City Crystal
Cassopolis
Central Montcalm
Charlotte
Chassell Twp
Climax
Constantine
Delton Kellogg
Dowagiac
East China Twp
East Detroit
East Lansing
Easton Rapids
Engadine
Falmouth
Farmington
Fenville
Ferry
Flint City
Fraser
Ganges
Garden City
Gobies
Greenville
Hancock
Harbor Springs
Hartland
Haslett
Hillsdale
Hott
Hudsonville
Huron Valley
Ida
Lake Orion
Lakeview
Lapeer
Lawton
Les Cheneaux
Leslie
Lincoln Park
L'Anse Creuse
Manistee
Marcellus
Mar Lee
Marlerte
Mason
Whitmore Lake
Michigan City
Millford
Mio Au Sable
Mona Shores
Montague
Morenci
Morley Stanwood
Munising
New Buffalo
Oakridge
Okemos
Oxford
Peck
Petoskey
Pinconning
Pittsford
Portage
Ravenna
Reeths Puffer
Riverview
Rockford
Roseville
Rudyard
Saginaw
Saline
Shepard
South Redford
Southfield
St. Joseph
Sturgis
Swan Valley
Thornapple
Trenton
Van Dyke
Vassar
Walled Lake
Woodhaven
Source: Midwestern Regional Office. USCCR, from Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Education, January, 1993.
12
TABLE 2-3
Student Enrollment. Disciplines, and Poverty
Mean
Maxjnum
Minimum
Students
3,377
28,922
40
Suspensions
184
2,942
0
Suspension ratio
0.04
0.19
0
Students in poverty
597
15,670
4
Poverty ratio
0.17
0.61
0.01
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR.
minority students, the number of suspensions,
and the number of students in poverty. Among
the school districts in the sample, tiie average
number of students was 3,377. The largest dis-
trict had 28,922 students, and the smallest had
40. The number of minority students also varied
widely. The average number of minority students
in a district was 582, with the largest number of
minority students being 19,519. One school dis-
trict had no minority students.
The average number of suspensions per school
district was 184. The largest number of suspen-
sions in one district was 2,942. Seven districts had
no suspensions. More critical is the ratio of sus-
pensions to students. The average ratio of suspen-
sions-to-students was 0.04, or 4 suspensions per
100 students; the highest ratio was 0.19, 19 sus-
pensions per 100 students; the lowest rate of sus-
pension among the sampled schools was 0, in the
seven school districts with no suspensions.
There was a positive, but not significant corre-
lation, between the number of students in a
district and the ratio of suspensions-to-students,
p = 0.23. This suggests that the decision to use
suspension as a discipline is more a decision vari-
able of the individual administration.
The average number of students in poverty per
school district was 597. The largest population of
students in poverty was 15,670, while the lowest
number of students in a school district in poverty
was 4. The poverty-to-student rate averaged 0.17,
or 17 students in poverty for every 100 enrolled
students. This rate is slightly higher than the
overall rate of poverty (14.3 percent) in the State.
A wide variance (o=0.11) was observed in the
poverty-to-student ratio among the surveyed
school districts. The largest poverty-to-student
ratio was 0.61, or 61 of every 100 students living
in poverty. The smallest ratio was 0.01, one stu-
dent in every 100 students living in poverty. The
correlation between a school district's poverty-to-
student rate and its suspension-to-student rate
was 0.33, suggesting there may be some positive
relationship between suspension and poverty.
This association is stronger when the absolute
numbers of suspensions and the absolute number
of students in poverty are determined. The corre-
lation between the number of suspensions in a
school district and the number of students in
poverty is 0.89. This implies that as the number
of students in a school district who live in poverty
increases, the number of student suspensions also
increases, and offers some support to Brookover's
claim that lower student socioeconomic status ad-
versely effects educational opportunities, which
in turn cause greater discipline problems at the
school.
Minority Discipline
At issue in this report is whether minorities are
being adversely affected in the discipline prac-
tices of the Michigan public schools. The aggre-
gate data from the OCR survey suggests that
minorities do receive a disproportionately high
number of suspensions, and the disproportionate
impact of school suspensions is particularly evi-
dent with respect to African American £ind His-
panic students.
The schools in the OCR survey meted out
20,702 suspensions during the 1991-1992 school
year. The 313,020 white students, who are 82.7
percent of the total sample enrollment, received
14,158 suspensions, or 68.4 percent of all suspen-
sions. The 65,174 minority students, who are 17.3
13
TABLE 2-4
Suspension Rates by Race/Ethnicity
Student enrollment rate
White
82.7
Black
10.8
American Indian
0.8
Asian
1.8
Hispanic
2.7
Other
1.2
Student suspension rate
68.4
27.2
0.8
0.4
3.2
0
Source: Midwastarn Regional Office, USCCR, from OCR survey data.
percent of the sampled student population, re-
ceived 6,544 suspensions, or 31.6 percent of these
disciplinary actions.*^
African American students bore the burden of
this disparity. There are 40,729 African American
students in the sampled school districts, a ratio of
10.8 percent Suspensions of black students in
those districts totaled 5,619, a rate of 27.1 per-
cent. Hispanic students also had a higher suspen-
sion rate than enrollment rate. Hispanic students
were 2.7 percent of the student population and
received 3.2 percent of the suspensions. The sus-
pension rate for American Indian students was
equal to their student enrollment ratio, and the
suspension rate for Asian students was lower
than their percentage of the total enrollment
To further test the relationship of minority
suspensions with selected independent variables,
a model of probability was developed. Estimates
of the relationships between the level of poverty,
student population, number of disciplines, and
the minority school enrollment rate were derived
from a statistical procedure known as multiple
regression. Regression analysis isolates the rela-
tionship between an individual variable and the
studied variable, in this case minority suspen-
sions, holding other variables constant.
The considered regression was:
NWS = a + BiP + B2D -I- fiaN + fi^NWR +
fi6NWPR +
where,
Bi are the coeflBdents,**
NWS is the dependent variable, i.e., the num-
ber of minority suspensions,
P is the number of students living in poverty,
D is the number of student suspensions,
N is the total student enrollment,
NWR is the ratio of minority students in the
school district,
NWPR is the ratio of minority students living
in poverty, and is the error term.
The results of the regression are displayed in
table 2-5. The number of students in the school
district living in poverty has a positive and signif-
icant effect on the number of minority students
disciplined (B=0.12). Similarly, the total number
of suspension discipUnes imposed and the per-
centage of the student enrollment that is minority
are both positive and significant predictors of mi-
nority student suspensions (fi=0.35, 6=220.63). Of
interest is that school size displays a significant
1& The number ofRiispeDsioos does not necessarily equal the Dumber of studenta suspended. One student may incur muhipk
suspensions.
16 A coefTiaent is the weight applied to the independent variable in the best prediction of the dependent yariable. It ii
interpreted as the slope of the relation between the independent variable and the dependent variable.
14
TABLE 2-5
Regression Results for Minority Suspensions
Dependent variable is minority suspensions
VariaMe
Students in poverty
Student suspensions
Student enrollment
Minority student ratio
Minority poverty ratio
n = 112
R' = 0.95
Coefficient
0.12
0.35
-0.01
220.63
-0.47
T-«tst
13.05
7.75
-5.56
4.20
-1.31
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR.
and negative relationship with minority student
suspensions (D=-0.01).
The analysis also presents a disturbing por-
trait of intergroup relations. There is a significant
and positive relationship between an increased
percentage of minorities at a school and a higher
level of minority suspensions. For every 2.2 per-
cent increase in the minority ratio of the student
population, there is an increase in minority sus-
pensions. An opposite result was found for white
students. An increase in the percentage of the
student population that was minority was signif-
icantly and negatively related to white suspen-
sions." Vergon found a similar pattern:
Interestingly, districts with limited numbers of minor-
ities tend not to have particularly high suspension
rates or levels of dispropwrtionality. But there is a
dramatic effect as one begins to exceed about 20 per-
cent minority. Both the rates and the disproportional-
ity of the suspension escalates dramatically through a
level of about 60 or 70 percent minority enrollment in
those communities, after which the rates and ^e dis-
parities tend to decline somewhat again.**
Regression analysis for African American stu-
dents yields similar results. Substituting blacks
for minorities, black student population ratio for
minority student population ratio, and black pov-
erty rate for minority poverty rate, the indepen-
dent variables poverty, student suspensions, and
black student ratio have positive and significant
relationships with suspensions of black students.
Also, similar to the minority student regression,
the independent variables, student enrollment
and black poverty rate, display negative relation-
ships with bla^ suspensions. *°
The data portrays an interesting relationship
between poverty status and discipline. Although
the number of students disciplined increases as
the school district has an increased enrollment of
students living in poverty (p=0.89), an increase in
the proportion of minority students in the school
district who live in poverty has neither a positive
17 A similar regression with white Ruspensions as the dependent variable yields:
WS = -10.0 - 0.32 P + 0.66 D ♦ 0.02 N - 293 NWR + 3.17 WPR.
18 Transcript, p. 480.
19 The regression result with black suspensions as the dependent variable yields:
BS = -30.8 + 0.12 P ♦ 0.27 D - 0.01 N + 232 NWR - 0.11 BPR.
15
nor a significant relationship with the number of
suspensions given to minority students.
This imphes that the disciphne measure of sus-
pension is imposed more oflen in school districts
where the student body comes from a lower socio-
economic strata. In the OCR survey, 39 percent of
all minority students, 25,455 of 65,174, live in
poverty. For African American students, 48 per-
cent, 19,659 of 40,729, live in poverty. With school
districts having larger populations of children
from poverty observed to employ suspensions
more often, minorities in general, and African
American students in particular, are in environ-
ments where suspension is more likely, and there-
by end up disproportionately suspended when
compared to white students who are more likely
to be from higher socioeconomic strata.
The data supports studies by the Law & Policy
Institute and Brookover's assertion that suspen-
sion, and by inference other forms of discipline, is
disproportionately used in less affluent school dis-
tricts. Vergon told the Advisory Committee:
I have analyzed [suspensions] by community type, size,
racial compwsition, and SES| socioeconomic statusl and
there does tend to be correlations with rates and dis-
proportionality in particular with the socioeconomic
status and the racial composition of the districts.^
Eugene Cain, superintendentof Highland Park
schools, also asserted a connection between pov-
erty and discipline, suggesting that suspension is
a more likely discipline option for students who
come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.
It is my feeling that a lot of expulsions and suspensions
are largely dn ven by your particular economic strata. I
think that you will find this more of a problem with
poor white kids and minority kids than you will find
with kids in [affluent areas]. I think you will find kids
in [affluent areas] with problems . . . but not to the
extent, not to the magnitude of the problems that are
associated in fjoor areas.^'
Minority Discipline In Secondary Schools
The Advisory Committee was interested in the
discipline imposed in the secondary schools, par-
ticularly discipline of African American students.
Using OCR 1992 survey data, the Advisory Com-
mittee examined suspension discipline meted out
to students at the sampled secondary schools.
The Advisory Committee received data on 105
Michigan secondary schools. African American
students matriculated at 94 of the schools. The
range of total black student population was from
1 student to 1,366 students, with the average
number of black students at 87. The Africfin
American percentage of the total student popula-
tion at these schools ranged from less than 1
percent to 99 percent, the average being 8.6 per-
cent
The Advisory Committee compared white and
black suspension rates at the 94 schools. The
mean black student suspension rate was 17 per-
cent, while the mean white suspension rate was
approximately half that — 9 percent Examining
the relationship between a school's suspension
rate and the African American student popula-
tion, the Advisory Committee found a positive
correlation (r=0.49) between the percentage of the
student population that is African American and
the rate of suspensions imposed on the student
body by the school. In other words, an increase in
the percentage of students who are African Amer-
ican at a school is associated with an increase in
the rate of suspensions among the student body.
The Advisory Committee was interested in de-
termining whether there was a relationship be-
tween an increase in the rate of African American
students attending a school and the rate of sus-
pensions meted out to African American students.
Specifically, the Advisory Committee surmised
that there might be a student threshold, some-
where in the range between a very small African
American student population rate emd a very
large African American student population rate,
that maximized the amount of disciphne imposed
on African American students.
20 Tranncnpt, p. 480.
21 Ibid, p. 570.
16
TABLE 2 6
Regression Results for Minority Suspension Rates
Dependent variable is minority suspension rate
Variable
Coefficient
Total student population
-0.33
Student suspension rate
0.93
Black student rate
-0.05
n = 94
R' = 0.08
T-stat
-0.49
2.62
-0.63
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR.
Analysis of the 94 secondary schools shows,
however, virtually no relationship between the
black student population rate and the black
suspension rate (r=0.09). This implies that sus-
pensions of black students are independent of
their percentage of the student population, and
instead more likely a function of the individual
school's discipline implementation.
To test this further, regression analysis was
employed to examine the relationship of the black
suspension rate at a school with the variables:
total student population, school suspension rate,
and black percentage of the student population.
The results again show the black student percent-
age rate independent of the school's black suspen-
sion rate. The size of the school in terms of total
enrollment is also found to be independent of the
school's black suspension rate. However, the
school's aggregate suspension rate is positively
and significantly associated with the school's
black suspension rate. The results are shown in
table 2-6.
The Student Advocacy Center (Ann Arbor,
Michigan) surveyed selected school districts on
the number of suspensions by race and ethnicity
during the 1992-93 school year. Sixteen school
districts were selected, with selection based on
the district's minority student population and the
Center receiving complaints from parents con-
cerning the discipline of their children by the
schools. Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti were selected
because they were located in the geographic area
of the center, while the Monroe and Kentwood
districts were surveyed because of complaints to
the center. Benton Harbor, Flint, Grand Rapids,
and Highlfuid Park were chosen because of their
high African American student population. Col-
oma, Fenville, and Holland were surveyed be-
cause of their high Hispanic student population.
The Dearborn district was surveyed because of its
large Arab student popiilation. Brimley, Chip-
pewa Hills, St Ignace, and Sault St Marie dis-
tricts were chosen because of their American In-
dian student populations. The school districts and
their response data are shown in table 2-7.
Nine school districts responded with suspen-
sion data. Five of the districts responded with
exclusively high school data. In each of these
districts, minority suspension rates were higher
than nonminority suspension rates. In the two
Ann Arbor high schools, minorities had a suspen-
sion rate of 1 1.9 percent while the suspension rate
for white students was 3.0 percent At the Kent-
wood and Benton Harbor high schools, suspen-
sion rates for both groups were very high and the
minority suspension rate was twice that of non-
minority students. At Kentwood high school, the
minority sus(>ension rate was 111.3 percent com-
pared to a nonminority rate of 67.5 percent; at
Benton Harbor, the minority suspension rate was
150.2 percent while the nonminority suspension
rate was 72.9 percent At Monroe high school the
minority suspension rate was six times the non-
minority rate, 48.9 percent to 8.2 percent Sus-
pension rates for minority and nonminority stu-
dents were only similar at the two Dearborn high
schools, though the rate for minorities was still
higher than that of whites.
17
TABLE 2-7
Minority Suspension Rates for Surveyed Schools
Student
District
population
Local districts of
interest to the center
Ann Arbor (HSs)'
3,596
Kentwood (HS)'
1,949
Monroe (HS)'
1,583
Ypsilanti*
5,037
Total Suspension rate
White Nonwhite suspensions White Nonwhite
2,529 1,067 224
1,585 364 1,486
1,493 90 166
2,922 2,115 612
3.0
11.9
67.5
111.3
8.2
48.9
7.9
17.4
Districts with large A frican
American populations
Benton Hbr (HS)' 1,518
Flint T
Grand Rapids' 26,821
Highland Park t
192
1,326
2,131
72.9
150.2
13,190
13,631
6,720
15.7
33.9
Districts with large
Hispanic populations
Colema'
2,488
1,753
735
Fenville
1,569
1,120
449
Holland
5,707
3,832
1,875
Districts with large American
Indian populations
Brimley 560
Chippewa Hills 2,386
St. Ignace' 863
Sault St. Marie 3,526
631
305 255
1,915 471
351 512
2,507 1,019
80
18.7
8.0
41.4
10.2
Districts with large Arab
populations
Dearborn (HSs)'
2,383
1,806
577
915
36.7
42.1
Sourca: Student Advocacy Center, Ann Arbor, Ml.
Key:
"i" suspensions reported by incident
*8* suspensions reported by student
TDid not respor>d
'Data not provided
18
Personal Statements
The administration of a disciplinary action
does not occur in a vacuum. Individual students,
families, and the community are often inter-
twined in and affected by the decision. Numerous
parents, students, and individuals came and tes-
tified at the factfinding meetings. They offered
their perspective of events that lead to a discipbn-
ary suspension, and the effect of that decision on
themselves, the families, and the children in-
volved.
School administrators counter, however, that
suspensions and other disciplinary actions are not
frivolously or thoughtlessly administered. Usu-
ally such discipline is the result of a series of
behaviors, leading up to a final act that causes the
suspension. Michael Foster, principal of Ypsilanti
High School, expressed this sentiment:
Susjjensions are only done by administrators, not by
teachers, not by other staff. So with that knowledge,
our administrative team sat down and decided how we
were going to best manage the climate of our school for
the most efTective instruction. . . . [There] are instances
that we feel . . . the suspension is an appropriate
alternative. Now we do not go from point A to suspen-
sion, but rather we do a process. If there is a series of
misbehaviors, we deal with it at the teacher level.
There is ... a referral to the counselor, school social
worker, school psychologist when those are appropri-
ate. We then deal with parent conferences.^
Nine accounts of student discipline are pre-
sented to put a face on the issue of school discipl-
ine and minority students. These are prefaced by
testimony from Margaret Harner, a volunteer
court-appointed surrogate parent in Washtenaw
County, who shared several personal episodes
with the Advisory Committee. Her testimony sup-
ports reports from juvenile court representatives
that school districts were delegating the educa-
tion responsibilities of some of the more difficult
children to the courts.
Margaret Harner, court-appointed surrogate
parent:
I have been involved in an advocacy role for 10 years.
In virtually every one of my cases, suspension or other
[school] exclusionary measures are part of the issue.
Likewise, nearly every child whom I advocate is black,
and most are male. My experience absolutely shows
that we move to the suspension end of the consequence
continuum with far greater speed for black children.^
The first case I will tell you about is a 13-year-old
African American male entering junior high school
with special education certification as an emotionally
impaired student Decisions had been made that his
total school program would consist of 30 minutes of
instruction each day at the home of a person he had
been court ordered not to visit. No medical doctor had
been involved in this, his due process rights had been
ignored. . . .
By the end of the first semester he had been out of
school, he had been suspended from his regular class-
room in excess of 80 days, 60 of which were out of the
school building. And he was receiving no services dur-
ingthat 60-day period. This is not a continuing 60 days,
but out for a few days and back in, or for longer periods
of time and back in. Complaints were filed, conversa-
tions to remediate the situation all led to no avail. The
child ended up being placed by the juvenile court out of
the county, and the school contributed nothing to the
cost of his education.^
The second case is a 12-year-old African American male
with special education certification as an emotionally
impaired student. The case was assigned to me after
the child was assigned to an independent study pro-
gram. He was to appeeu* at school 30 minutes on Mon-
day, pick up his assignments for the week, go home and
complete them and return them to the school on Friday.
Transportation was not provided, and teacher contact
during the course of the week was also not provided.
After complaints and appeal, this case eventually went
to mediation, and he was permitted to enroll in a school
other than his home school the next school year.
22 Transcript, pp. 189 and 192.
23 Transcript p. 650.
24 Ibid., pp. ."551-52.
19
The last case that I will give you is a 13-year-old
Afncan Amencar, not certified for special education at
the time of referral. Mom and the juvenile court case-
worker had reported that several requests had been
made for evaluation for special education services, and
nothing had happened. . . . The child had been rejjeat-
edly suspended and both the mom and the caseworker
had been told that the child was out and was not
coming back, [though] no expulsion process had oc-
curred. The child was eventually evaluated and certi-
fied for special education as an emotionally impaired
student. However, he continued to be suspended, even
with consequences — other than suspension — specific-
ally spelled out in the individual education plan.^
Ricardo Martinez, Community Awareness and
Rights in Education:"
The reason we started our CARE group was because we
had an overabundance of incidents happen. We had
over nine cases to be expelled and in all of these cases
were nothing that (the parents) were able to do any-
thing about. We had one person that we could count on
(who) IS on the school board, but every time this gentle-
man tried to do something for us, he was torn apart
by either the other board members or the school
administrator. It is getting to be very sickening and
just incident after incident has happened.^
I am finding out now that there is a lot of help out here
which we never knew about. We have been trying. We
have had a lot of us involved in some of these incidents
and found out there was nothing | we as parents] could
do. Powers beyond them stopped the whole matter. . . .
We are just finding out now that there are people that
we go to [for help]. We never knew there were people
[from whom] we could get extra help other than lawyers
because that is the only thing we knew was to go out
and . . . pay a lawyer to do this.^
Larry Scott, Parent Support Network:*"
What is alarming to PSN is the number of school sus-
pensions handed out by the Lansing school district,
specifically the number of school suspensions adminis-
tered to African American students. In the 4-yeeir pe-
riod fi'om 1989 to 1993 the Lansing school district
meted out 21,362 suspensions. Although African Amer-
ican students constituted only 32 to 36 percent of stu-
dent enrollment. . . . almost half the suspensions were
handed out to African American students.
What IS even more disconcerting was that during the
same period, African American students received more
than 1 week and multiweeks of out of school suspen-
sions than white students. In the 1992-93 school year,
the number of multi week suspensions given to African
Amencan students almost doubled the number of
multiweek susf)ensions given to white students.
This pattern of suspensions on the African American
students emerges in the elementary years. It is our
opinion that during this fertile period in the student's
life, persona], social, and cognitive growth must occur.
Self-esteem, self-confidence, and self-control must be
established if the student is to be successful. . . . *^
Students cannot learn or achieve if they are not in
school. Those students who are not suspended are af-
fected by the apparent zero tolerance of teachers and
admimstrators and are less likely to be enthusiastic
about school activities In 1994 less than 30 percent
of the African Americans in high school in the Lansing
School District were able to graduate with State
25 Ibid., p. 562.
26 Ibid . p 553
27 According to Martinez. CARE was founded in 1991 to address the problems parents were having with their children being
fiunpended {n>m school The Kn)up operates in the Fenville school distnct, Allegan County.
m Transcript, p 212.
2» Ibid, pp 208 and 213.
30 According to Scott, the Parent Support Network con.sisls of concerned parents and community members committed to the
development of tho.sc childrtn in crisis and at highest nsk for academic and disciplinary failure in the Landing School
District
31 Transcript, pp 21«-19
20
endorsed diplomas in three areas, math, reading, or
science. . . . ^
It is our fear that we are not graduating students who
can be productive in the African American community
and productive in the world community at large. We
are concerned about the preponderance of disciplintiry
action administered to African American children. We
are concerned how zero tolerance, given suspensions,
and the length of the suspensions limit the student's
self-esteem, precludes and blunts enthusiasm for
school, leading to academic failure. We believe aca-
demic failure leads to social failure. . . .^
Vemadine Lake, parent of a child in the Ypsilanti
schools:
My daughter has been a special education student since
1987. She has a learning disability, dyslexia, and just
recently she was diagnosed with ADD, which is severe.
When she went to the 9th grade she was inappropri-
ately placed in regular education classes and she re-
ceived a lot of falling grades. It was behavioral prob-
lems. We asked for meetings and we were just kind of
shoved off. . . . We have gotten to a point where we think
that she is getting passing grades now, but we went
through a lot.
Children with special needs — minority students — are
not accounted for their disability. They are placed in
regular education classes, their needs are not met . . .
They document a lot of things and whatever they have
documented, it is your word against theirs. And the
burden of proof is on you Special education students
are never believed, minority students are never be-
lieved. There is no due process for these kids, they are
just suspended and they go back to school until they
give up and they drop out."*^
My daughter right now is in therapy and this hope-
fially — with the way she has been treated this year —
can still lift, her morale to keep her in school. She is 15
right now. When she turns 16, if she is not treated
better, she will drop out just like thousands of other
kids. They get tired of being provoked and when they
talk back or speak out, they are called in for that. They
are removed from the classroom or kicked out of
school.^
And there are many, many jiarents that are losing their
children and there is nothing you can do. You file
complaints and they are dismissed. You go to meetings
and you are not believed. What else can you do? You
have nowhere to go, but you battle with going on with
your life and living every day. Your child is going to
school every day and being humiliated. They will just
drop out and you have got another problem.
Joyce Hartfield and LaQuan Hartfield — Joyce
Hartfield is a parent of students 'in the East
Grand Rapids school district; LaQuan is one of
her children.
Joyce Hartfield:
My main concern is where is the help for the black
minority in the school system? That is what I want to
know All you see on the news is how the black kids
are and that black parents do not care about their kids.
But when you are involved in the school then you are
the bad person. ^^
My kids have been through a racial period. ... I mean
they will say things to us that just like my daughter
was accused of stealing some books. They took her out
of class, took her to the office, questioned her about the
books. She spent the whole day in the office about these
books. When we go to pick her up and she tells us about
the books, the principal tells us she didn't accuse her of
stealing the books. . . .
I only have one kid that still is in school and that is the
middle school I used to walk him to school. He didnt
have to tell me the things that he went through because
I went through the same thing that he went through
32 Ibid., pp. 221-22.
33 Ibid., p. 222.
34 Ibid., pp. 279-80.
35 Ibid., p. 281.
36 Ibid., pp. 289-90.
37 Ibid., p. 300.
21
walking him there. They would call us monkeys,
names, you know. . . . They teach their kids this
way. ... I do not want anybody calling him names.^
As of this day the only meeting that I had for [my son]
to even get him back in school was a meeting with the
pnncipal and the superintendent of the school. When
she came to the meetingshe didn't even have [my son's]
file so that let me know she wasn't interested in my
child. How are you going to come to a meeting and
[have] nothing about him and then everything that we
bring up to her — telling her about — she forgot, she
doesn't remember. ... He had no problems in class
whatsoever. All his problems came outside; on the way
to school, home from school and during recess time.
Stuff hkethat.3^
LaQuan Hartfield:
I wrote a speech on racism and it was emotional. ... I
started [to have) a lot of faces made towards me from
the students about that A lot of people started making
bigger and greater racist comments towards me. I was
asked by one student have I ever met Kunta Kente and
all this stuff; and it offended me After that incident
I started getting different allegations placed against
me. I got accused ofstealing $15 from a student's locker
in the gym area. . . .That is one of the things that goes
on in the school ... A lot of students set up other
students when they are angry at them.*"
Ann Green, parent of three teenagers in the Lan-
sing school district:
We started a group working with youngboys during the
summer because I figured whatever I could do to keep
him in (school) because the district as far as the suspen-
sions, they were suspending him for things that, it was
just unreal. Like a lot of it came back to authority. The
teacher would say something, even if the kids re-
sponded to him, they would caU it talking back and you
are just responding to a question.*'
It was one time where there was something about
candy at school and that is when I filed even a civil right
complaint. A young white student had candy at school
and I guess she was sharing it with my son and other
kids because my son rode the bus to school so he didn't
have a way to get access to candy, and that is what I
was asking, "How did he get the candy?" Well they
suspended him and then they said, "Well we weren't
discriminating, we suspended the other boy," which
was another black boy, but they didn't suspend the girl
who gave him the candy and she was white.*^
There was the time [when he was in the fourth grade]
. . . the teacher slapped my son and I took him out of the
school district and When that happened, I took him
out and I told him I wasnt going to let him back to
school until I found out all of what was going on. The
school told me that they put the teacher on suspension
until they did an investigation. Well, I had my son out
4 weeks. ... I kept trying to contact the district and
finally ... I found out the teacher was back in school.
[The district told] me at that point that they had inves-
tigated and they just put it in the teacher's record . . .
and in the same meeting they told me if I didnt put my
son back in school at a set date . . . then they were going
to take me to court.*^
The only time I can remember any problem with my son
and a knife at school was when he was at middle school
his teacher gave him an art knife like a little gadget to
do some homework with it. She wrapped it up in the
paper and told him when you get on the bus, give it to
the bus driver and when you get out she will give it to
you to take it home. And it got back to the school the
next day they had documented that he had had this
knife. ... I could go on and on. Those are just some of
the issues.**
38 Ibid., pp. .3f;fi-07.
39 Ibid., pp. .in? and .308.
40 Ibid., pp .3.32 and 3.35.
41 Ibid., p. 366.
42 Ibid., p. 365.
43 Ibid., pp. .356-67.
44 Ibid . pp .359 and 360.
22
Leonia McKaye, parent of a child in the Ypsi-
lanti public schools:
I started experiencing problems with my child when he
was nine in the fourth grade. They suggested to me to
place him in a self-contained cittss because of his behav-
ior problems. He was not on task in the regular pro-
gram. So I went along with them and, from grades 4, 5,
6, and 7, 1 saw my son's grades go way down. He went
from an A-B student to a D-C student, and his self
esteem — he didn't have any of that. ... I fought the
whole fifth and sixth grade trying to keep my child in
school. I almost lost my job, lam a single parent. When
he was kicked out of school, I had to take off work or
nobody would be at home with him. By the time he
reached the seventh grade, 90 percent of the time he
was at home. He did not stay in school *^
One incident I thought was really ridiculous. He was
running down the hallway. They suspended him for 3
days. And I said, "Why?" And they said because he had
been so much trouble, that they don't have time to focus
on my child. And I said, "Well, you were aware of the
problem because you brought the problem to my atten-
tion. And you are not helping my child with the prob-
lem." Then they suggested we take him to psychiatrists
and doctors, and which I have done that. But still, the
school . . . was not addressing my son's needs.
See, teachers talk. So they already knew what my son
was about or they put a presumption on how he was
going to act So, if he went to school and had a bad day,
which everybody has a bad day sometimes, it was just
blown out of proportion land hel would be kicked out of
school for a week or two. And he I would] sit at home by
himself because nobody would be there.
In the sixth grade . . . This white kid threw a desk at
my child and my child got kicked out of school. The
other child did not get disciplined. Why is [my son]
getting kicked out of school, he is the one that got hurt.
He was the one who was kicked out of school because
(the school thought] he probably provoked it.**
I moved out of the district and he went [to another
public school system]. My son did an 85-90 degree
turnaround because the teachers took an interest in
him, not just okay, you get into trouble [and] we're
going to kick you out of school. . . . And this year has
been the most pleasant year I have had with my child.
Vemita Wilson, aunt of a student in the Ypsilanti
public schools:
I am here concerning my nephew. . . . [He] has been in
special education most of his elementary years. The
problem really began when he got into junior high
where ... he had at least 15, 16 suspensions He was
suspended over 10 days a lot of the time. . . . We ended
up taking him out of school in seventh grade, just
keeping him at home. I had to go every Monday, pick
up his homework, take him every Friday to return
homework. He was losing out on his grades, and there
was nobody to help him when he needed help and stuff.
So he was not getting the support system, but I was
trying to keep his grades up so that he could go on to
the eighth grade.^
We changed schools It went a little better, but still
suspensions went on. He is now in his sophomore year.
He should be junior, but because of the suspensions and
the problems that he has had, he has lost out on a lot of
work. You are not able to make it all up during the
suspensions. There is a limit on how much work some
teachers will take and will not take. And I find when
they do take it, the homework and stuff that he does, it
is like now he is just being passed through the system.
Academically he is not being challenged at all. It is like
well, "Well just pacify [him], keep the parents satisfied,
and this and that."^'
45 Ibid., pp. 604-05.
46 Ibid., pp. 605-06.
47 Ibid., p. 607.
4« Ibid., p. 607-08.
49 Ibid., pp. 606-7.
50 Ibid., pp. 612-14.
51 Ibid., pp. 613-14.
23
My mother and I have been looking into programs all
this summer to avoid even dealing with public school. I
am really discouraged. I really feel let down . . . that the
school has failed in a lot of ways. But I feel that the
suspension, something should be done about the sus-
pensions in the public schools; [but] I don't know if they
can even help us. I think I have lost the trust, I have
lost the faith that these things will ever change and I
don't have the time. I feel like I keep wasting time to
find out if they will [help] because everything that we
have tned — and I have gone along with the school a
long way on a lot of things — nothing is working. And
they want to place him back in the school next year, a
system that is already failing him. Why send him back
to fail again ?^^
I think it is a pattern because from other parents that
I have run into, it is an ongoing problem that I see a lot
of black parents have, but it is only with the black male.
I don't see it so much with the black female. It's a
problem that I see that is not being addressed with the
black male. It is no tolerance. No, it is really a non-
chalant attitude. This is almost expected. . . . and then
he has lost so much trust in the school system that his
trust is gone. He distrusts the teacher. He thinks every-
body is against [him). It is hard for him to succeed now
when you don't trust everybody in your surroundings.^
Sharon Baskerville, principal of a middle school
in Ann Arbor:
I think what is missing in a lot of cases [is students]
don't get the opportunities ... to tell their side of the
story. By the time the parents come in, they too have
heard another version. You get both sides of a table full
of parents and students, amd you have a very, very
enlightening dialogue taking place because parents are
looking at their students through new eyes and those
students are looking at their parents through new eyes
because they are trying to figure out what that parent
is going to say when they get out of that room.*
Ann Arbor public schools just revised its rights and
responsibilities handbook last year, July of 1993. . . .
But the reality is working through it and finding out if
it really meets the needs of the kids. I think if you look
at each one of the uniform code of conduct districts, you
will find that some of the issues are so minuscule that
they should not get the types of punishments that they
get^
In my particular district, in my school, we have student
study teams where we literally put teachers and par-
ents and counselors and social workers and principals
and custodians and anybody else who has any knowl-
edge about that youngster together, and we sit down
and talk about the strengths and what kind of support
system they can have and use. Any time you have an
individualized behavior plan for at risk students, you
are looking ahead £ind trying to come up with ways to
keep that youngster from falling between the cracks.^'
It IS not by accident or not by surpnse that there is an
attitude and an air of frustration at this table and also
in this room and in many communities around the
country. People are frustrated. . . . When parents and
students come to me because they are frnastrated, I try
to create an environment in my building where we can
at least have a meaningful dialogue. I think that is the
key. You cannot resolve any problems until you are able
toget people to sit down and open up and talk. But they
won't do that if there is not that degree of trust.^
Sensitivity training is a must because we have too
many people who are just about the business of doing
business; they are not necessarily focusing in on the
human aspect of the people or the clients they are
serving. My philosophy in my building is to create an
environment that is success oriented and focusing on
success and not so much on discipHne for kids, because
when they arc successful they dont have time to get
into trouble. And if the channels of communication are
OF>en, they will let you know before trouble strikes that
52 Ibid, p. 615.
63 Ibid. p. 618.
a* Ibid. p. 62.3.
55 Ibid, p 624.
66 Ibid., p. 624-25.
57 Ibid., p. 625.
24
somethingisloorrung and therefore you can continue on
the success onented path.'"^
Leadership is also a vital link to the success of all
students. If the leaders do not set the tone for what
needs to be done, it does not seem to get filtered down
to everyone else. . . . And finally, trust and support for
students and families is another vital link. If families
and students do not feel that they are supported or that
you trust them, they will not come to your office, they
will not call you on the phone, they will not seek your
advice, they will not include you in their inner circle.*
I think the battle is lost because too many people are
excluded, and the kids are getting stronger and the
adults are still scratching their heads trying to figure
out what to do.**
Jeanetta Jennings, parent of a student in
Westwood school district:
There were some girls who got together and decided to
bring a gun to school to fight after school. My daughter
was aware of the gun being brought to school because
they were ail shanng about it in the bathroom and
bragging about it. These are not girls that were friends
of my daughters, they are just acquaintances because
she is there at school with them. . . . She never saw the
gun, never was around the gun, anything like that.
Later on in the day . . . they decided to conceal the gun
in a purse. The assistant principal was aware of it at
this time, and came into the classroom where all the
girls were together. The girl who had the purse saw the
assistant principal coming and asked my daughter to
hold the purse . . . without my daughter's knowledge
that the gun was inside the purse.*"
When (the assistant principal] asked my daughter,
"May I look inside your purse?" She said, "Yes." They
both looked in together and they realized that there
was a gun inside. . . . My daughter was arrested [and]
charged with CCW. She spent the night in the juvenile
system. ... I was not contacted or notified until well
after she had been arrested, fingerprinted, read her
rights.®^
I moved out of the Westwood school district in January
of this year ... I enrolled her into the Wayne Westland
High School where I now live . . . She attended from
March until May. The school records went over to (the
new school]. They called my daughter into the
principal's office. I was not called. The questioned her
about the incident at [her previous school]. They took
her books, they stripped her of her books and sent her
home with a suspension. They sent me a notice in the
mail.
I got an opportunity to come in to speak with the
principal ... At that time they told me that they just
put in a new policy. That poHcy stated that if there was
an act committed by a student while off the school
grounds or while enrolled in another school that would
permit them to expel that student [if the student] com-
mitted this act while on school grounds. . . . They
accused me of enroUing my daughter with the knowl-
edge of her being expelled. She was ultimately expelled
from [her former school but] I opted not to attend those
-hearings because she was already enrolled in the
Wayne Westland school.
My daughter is the first to be excluded under this new
policy. . . . We went through with the hearings. We
appealed to the school board. My daughter gave testi-
mony of how she did not know the gun was in the purse.
They ultimately permanently expelled my daughter
and said that she weis a danger to herself, the other
students, and the faculty members. They offered no
alternative schooling, no sympathy. They told me that
when I came into the meeting, they gave me two op-
tions: to permanently or to voluntarily withdraw her or
to go through with the proceedings for a permanent
expulsion.^
58 Ibid., pp. 626-27.
59 Ibid., pp. 627-28.
60 Ibid., p. 628.
61 Ibid., p. 630.
62 Ibid., p. 631.
63 Ibid., pp. 633-34.
25
Junr«nH h r T""'^ "^ ^^y ""'^ '^' ■"""'^ °^ "P^'"" f""- ^'- 1 have been in contact with the board
Sd me thi'l ^'^r"^T ^ ^° '" September. They of education, the student advocacy cTnt^r the Wale
d^ orT^ moth/ro i km'" '""T. "'""• ' ^" " ^°""^ Educational Resource Center. No one hasT
divorced mother of four children. That ,s just not an swers. She is just 12 years old."
M Ibid., p. 6.34.
26
Chapter 3
School Discipline and the Community: Local School
Districts, the Judicial System, and Community Programs
School discipline in Michigan is ultimately a
local issue. Local school districts have the
authority and responsibility to establish and
implement their code of student conduct and the
penalties for noncompliance. Robert Schiller ex-
plained:
I need to reiterate the fact that in our State, local school
distncts have the responsibility for establishing the
policies of disnpiine as it affects their students. We, as
the State of Michigan, unlike other States in the Na-
tion, do not have a statewide policy, statewide proce-
dure, statewide disciplinary code to affect all schools.
The 560 school districts and 3,500 schools have the
direct responsibility to establish their individual stu-
dent discipline poliaes as it affects the carrying out of
expectations for students and the punishment therein.'
Recommendations from two local school dis-
tricts, Lansing and Ypsilanti, made presentations
on school discipline. They discussed the amount
and types of discipline, its administration and
purpose, and the problems of discipline. The Ad-
visory Committee heard from administrators,
principals, and teachers.^ In addition, the county
judge of the juvenile court in Washtenaw County
and probation officers and truant officers from the
county testified at the factfinding meeting.^ They
discussed the impact of school discipline on the
judicial system and the effectiveness of the judi-
cial system in handling students with discipline
problems.
Representatives from several alternative edu-
cation programs in the Lansing and Ypsilanti
areas also made presentations. The Black Child
and Family Institute in Lansing accepts students
ft-om the Lansing pubUc schools into its program.
The Center of Occupational and Personalized Ed-
ucation (COPE), an alternative education pro-
gram operating in Washtenaw County, that
serves young people referred fi^m the juvenile
court, the pubUc schools, and the county depart-
ment of social services.
The Lansing Public School District
, The Lansing school district has 33 elementary
schools grades K-5, 4 middle schools grades 6-8,
and 4 high schools grades 9-12. It also provides
several special facilities and programs, such as
adult education, special education programs,
community education, public safety, and an envi-
ronment center. Nearly 11,000 students are in the
elementary schools, and more than 9,000 stu-
dents are in the middle amd high schools. The
alternative programs have 90 students, the Beek-
man Center has 147 students, and there are 1,37 1
students in the adult education program.^
Minorities are half the student enrollment in
the Lansing schools. There are 10,713 elementary
students, 122 American Indian, 3,307 African
Testimony before the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. CommissioD on Civil Rights, factfinding meeting, Lansing,
MI, Aug. 3. 1994, and Ann Arbor, MI, Aug. 4, 1994, transcript p. 11 Chereafler cited as Transcript).
The local school districts of Lansing and Ypsilanti were invited because of their size, diverse student population, location,
and urban setting. The ComnniUee's invitation to the two school districts should not be construed as an implication that
discipline problems or the administration of discipline is atypical or diiTerent from other similarly situated districts.
Ypsilanti is in Washtenaw County, Michigan.
Lansing School District, 199.S-94 Fact Book.
27
TABLE 3-1
Student Race/Ethnicity. Lansing Public Schools
American Indian
Back Asian
Hispanic
White
Elementary
122
3,307 525
1.299
5460
Middle schools
Gardner
18
385 20
115
702
Ono
22
293 74
168
549
Panengil
15
294 53
144
544
Rich
8
562 42
76
526
Total
63
1,534 189
503
2,321
High schools
Eastern
36
297 104
291
890
Everett
18
522 85
164
925
Sexton
12
662 54
104
633
Total:
66
1,481 243
559
2,448
Alt. Ed.
0
26 0
from Lansing School Data.
5
14
Source: Midwestern
Reoional Office, USCCR,
American, 525 Asian, 1,299 Hispanic, and 5,460
white. The four middle schools have an enroll-
ment of 4,610 students, 63 American Indian,
1,534 African American, 189 Asian, 503 Hispanic,
and 2,321 white. The three high schools have
4,797 students, including 66 American Indian,
1,481 African American, 243 Asian, 559 Hispanic,
and 2,448 white. The secondary alternative edu-
cation program has 45 students, 30 males and 15
females; 26 are African American, 5 are Hispanic,
and 14 are white.^
The Lansing Board of Education has adopted a
code of conduct to define appropriate behavior in
the Lansing schools and on district school prop-
erty. The code's primary purpose is to provide the
standards and structure necessary to foster a safe
educational environment in which students can
mentally, physically, emotionally, and socially
mature. School district employees enact provis-
ions of the code to protect the persons and prop-
erty for which they are responsible. Spanking awid
all other forms of corporal punishment are prohib-
ited. The code gives to all school district employ-
ees the right to sign a police complaint for any
violation of their personal or property rights
which occur while administering the code.*'
The code is a comprehensive 16-page document
that explains the school rules, implementation of
the code of conduct, appeal procedures, locker
searches, student distribution of printed materi-
als, student eligibility for participation in
cocurricular activities, and bus conduct There
are two categories of violations: rule violations
and severe rule violations. An appendix to the
code defines and gives examples of both types of
violations.
Examples of rule violations are: abusive lan-
guage; disorderly conduct; disrespect for safety
patrols; failure to identify oneself to staff; forgeiy;
insubordination; littering; petty theft; possession
6 Landing School Dintrict. Ethnic Report, Oct. 1. 1993.
6 Landing School Duilrict, Code of Conduct, intro<hiction.
28
of games or toys; possession of beepers, pocket
pagers, or electronic communication equipment;
tardiness; truancy; and loitering. Examples of se-
vere rule violations are: arson; assault and/or
threats; battery; extortion; false alarms; fighting;
major theft; malicious destruction; molesting;
obscene and/or lewd behavior; persistent mis-
behavior; possession and/or use of an imitation
toy gun or a facsimile/replica of a firearm; sale,
possession, and/or use of weapons or incendiary
devices; sale, use possession, or distribution of
legal or illegal drugs, materials, substances, or
alcoholic beverages; and violations of city. State,
or Federal legislation.'
According to the code, there are student conse-
quences for disruptive behavior, and students
who will not conform to school rules will be sub-
ject to a series of options intended to correct the
problem. The home school is responsible for disci-
plining students who violate school rules. To pre-
vent problems from escalating, schools are en-
couraged to initiate a parent conference when
problems arise and develop a written plan to re-
solve the problem. ~
If the student violates the written plan, the
teacher and/or principal, in consultation with the
parent, will take further corrective action. Such
other corrective actions include:
• removal of the student from the classroom,
• detention,
• in-school suspension,
• community service,
• building alternative program,
• restitution of property,
• building suspension,
• suspension to student services, and
• referral to the district's public safety depart-
ment and/or the appropriate law enforcement
agency.*
The code of conduct allows for student expul-
sions. Specifically, any student in possession of a
gun or other dangerous weapon as defined by
State law on school district property is subject to
long-term suspension and to possible expulsion
and prosecution. In addition, any student in pos-
session of a facsimile or repbca of a firearm on
school district property is suspended £md may be
expelled and subjected to prosecution.®
The Lansing school district publishes, for the
public record, a suspension report. The report by
ethnicity and race lists: (1) the incidents of sus-
pension by length, (2) incidents of suspension by
reason, (3) referrals to student services, and
(4) comparison and number of incidents of sus-
pensions and number of students suspended by
individual school. Parts (1), (2), and (3) of the
1992-1993 school year report are in appendix HI.
In the Lansing school district for the 1992-93
school year, there were 4,434 student suspension
incidents. It is understood that many of these
incidents may involve the same individual stu-
dent. Of the total number of suspensions, African
American students, who are 31.5 percent of the
student enrollment, received the highest number
of suspensions, 2,073, and had the highest group
proportion of all suspensions, 46.8 percent.
Whites, who are 50.8 percent of the student pop-
ulation, were the next highest suspended group,
receiving 1,671 suspensions, 37.7 percent of the
total (see table 3-2).
The proportion of suspensions given to Hispa-
nic students, 12.5 percent, was slightly higher
than the group's proportion of the student popu-
lation, 11.7 percent. The total rate of suspension
incidents involving American Indian students,
2.3 percent, was double their enrollment rate of
1.2 percent. Asian student suspension incidents
were lower than their student enrollment rate
(see table 3-3).
Richard J. Halik, superintendent of the Lan-
sing public schools, discussed the issue of disci-
pline in the Lansing school district. He was joined
by three school principals from the Lansing dis-
trict: Saturnino Rodriguez, principal of Pattengill
7 Lansing School District, Code of Conduct, appendix.
8 Lansing School District, Code of Conduct, Implementing the Code.
9 Ibid.
29
TABLE 3-2 o .. . r^ . • .
Suspension Incident Rate and Student Enrollment Rate lor the Lansnig School Distnct
Race/ethnicity
Suspension nddent rate
American Indian
2.3%
African American
46.8
Asian/Pacific Islander
0.8
Hispanic
12.5
White
37.7
Enrollment rate
1.2%
31.5
4.7
11.7
50.8
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR, from LjnsinQ school district data.
TABLE 3-3 o .. . r. .
Student Suspension Rate and Student Enrollment Rate for the Lansing School District
Race/elhnicrtY
American Indian
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
White
Sus
penstor
USCCR,
1 ncident rate
2.0%
43.9
1.2
14.1
38.8
Source: Midwestern Regioi
nal Office.
from Lansing schoc
Enrollment rate
1.2%
31.5
4.7
11.7
50.8
Middle School; Ann Blair, principal of Gardner
Middle School; and Michael Foster, principal of
Rich Middle School. Patricia Farrell, director of
Lansing school student services, also testified.
Halik talked about the district's code of conduct
and its purpose. He also addressed the total num-
ber of suspensions, noting that they have gone
down in recent years and that the number of
suspensions is an item that he closely monitors.
We had a very extensive group that looked at our
discipline code and how we can make it more positive,
how we can do it in a way that would result in fewer
suspensions of our students from the Lansing schools
10 TranicTipl. p 172.
11 Ibid., p 173.
[because] we cannot teach them if they are out running
on the streets and not in our classrooms.^"
I wanted to mention [that] in 1989-90 we [had] inci-
dents of 6,603 Btispensions in the Lansing school dis-
trict for whatever category. That has chimged through
last year with 4,434 [suspensions]. The numbers are
going down considerably. I look at that specifically as a
superintendent, those figures come to me. ... I send a
little communication for those [schools] that look out of
line and ask them why so many youngsters were being
suspended from their buildings, because I want them to
be aware that the superintendent actually looks at this
data."
30
Patricia Farrell discussed the district's disci-
pline report,. She noted that the report had be-
come quite extensive due to requests from individ-
ual groups for additional data. This has resulted
in the current report which breaks down suspen-
sions not only by racial and ethnic categories, but
also by gender. In addition, there is a delineation
by number of incidents, number of students, and
school. Farrell explained:
Not only do we do a distnctwide comparison of the
numbers of students we have suspended by individual
offenses — and the offenses are extensive — they are bro-
ken down by gender as well as racial ethnic categories,
but we also do it by school. I really want to pinpoint this
aspect because we asked our principals to come here
and show you how they would use this data then in
programming for themselves in their building.'^
Using the number of students involved in sus-
pension incidents provided by Farrell, 2,503 stu-
dents received a suspension. Of the total number
of suspensions, 1,099 (43.9 percent) were African
American students, who are 31.5 percent of the
student enrollment.^Vhite students, who are 50.8
percent of the student population, received 972
(38.8 percent) suspensions.
The number of Hispanic students suspended
was 354 (14.1 percent), which is higher them their
11.9 percent enrollment rate. American Indian
and Asian students received 49 (2 percent) and 29
(1.2 percent) suspensions respectively. Asian stu-
dents received proportionately fewer suspensions
than their student enrollment rate, while Ameri-
can Indian students received suspensions at a
rate higher than their proportion of the student
population.
According to school officials, the Lansing dis-
trict is not pleased with the number of suspen-
sions it has. It is committed to decreasing the
number of these type of disciplines. The district
has stepped up prevention programs in the ele-
mentary grades, to give the students a good base
before they get to the middle school or high school
level. It has buttressed these activities with addi-
tional programs in the middle schools.
The middle school principals described a num-
ber of ongoing programs designed to reduce stu-
dent suspension rates. All three principals speak-
ing to the Advisory Committee noted a decrease
in suspensions as a result of an active program to
intervene and prevent student misconduct. Pro-
grams and activities in the three schools were
similar in some respects, and unique to the indi-
vidual school in other respects.
Satumino Rodriguez described his school's dis-
ciplinary advisory group, flexible school sched-
ules, and student teams. He reported that subse-
quent to these initiatives, there were 140 fewer
suspensions in his school.
Every morning, every 20 students on discipHne, will [be
underl the advisory of one teacher for 20 minutes. . . .
This teacher is there with the students to welcome
them, to talk with them, to find out what kind of
problems they are having. This advisory program was
the creation of the community, and the parents feel it
is a good program. Definitely every child wsmts some-
body in the school to take care of him, help him, and we
do that.
The other thing we did was a flexible schedule. Stu-
dents do not follow the same schedule every day or
every week, and they are divided into teams. Every
team has their own schedule. The school is run by
teams and the decisions that the teachers and the
teams are making. Special education students are in-
cluded. This changed completely the climate of the
school. . . . What happened is that we went down in
suspensions by more than 140.^^
Ann Blair talked about her school getting ac-
tively involved with the community, implement-
ing peer mediation, and staff" training. These ef-
forts reduced ihe number of suspensions at the
school by 100.
As in any organization, dealing with p>eople makes
conflict, and a lot of our suspensions result from [stu-
dentsl not getting along with their peers, we wanted a
12 Ibid., p. 175.
13 Ibid., pp. 180-81.
31
proactive stance. We [decided) to start a p>eer mediation
conflict resolution program. In January we trained 33
youngsters in how to resolve conflict peacefully. We had
an advisory committee made up of parents, students,
and community in order to make this effort not just an
isolated school leffortj
And what we do, we make this available to youngsters.
They can sign up in each office. If they have a conflict
with another youngster, instead of fighting and leading
to a suspension, they can sign up to have one of their
peers, with the supervision of an adult who has also
been trained, to mediate and try to come to some reso-
lution themselves. In conjunction with that I did some
training with the whole staff. Ehjnng the year I had two
assemblies; one . . . dealt with (jeople, conflict resolu-
tion. And I also had another assembly [about] again
making those decisions, not taking the low road. . . .We
too reduced our suspension rates by about 100 young-
sters.'*
Michael Foster said that his school had volun-
tarily expanded its role in ensuring student
safety, limited suspensions to just three viola-
tions, developed strategies to anticipate miscon-
duct and intervene, utilized more in-school sus-
pension, and worked regularly with the parents.
The result of these efforts was a reduction in the
number of suspensions by 176.
One of the common concepts among children of middle
school is that school is a safe haven for many kids. . . .
We extended that safe haven concept from the grounds
of the school out into the community when students are
traveling between home and school or school and home.
WTiat we have done in fact is enlarge our own job.
We determined that we would suspend primarily for
three things and three things only. We communicated
that clearly to all students at the beginning of the
school year. Here are the three things: fighting or vio-
lent behavior .... violation of city. State, or Federal law
. . . , and insubordination or refusal to cooperate with a
teacher or staff member.'*
We anticipate situations where misconduct might
occur in an attempt to manage that situation so as to
prevent it. Appropriate staff eind supervision of dances,
of lunchroom activities, of loading and unloading of
buses. '^
We utilize an in-school suspension room, supervised by
a teacher and a full-time instructional assistant for
those smaller infractions that do not warrant out of
school suspension We work regularly with parents
to develop plans for conduct [and] have parents in the
building helping us supervise.**
While we have enlarged our job, we were able to reduce
suspensions from last year to this year by 176. That
balances out across the board ethnicly, an equal distri-
bution of reduction this year.'^
Several speakers alleged that the Lansing
school district, not unlike other racially mixed
school districts, has racial problems. Wilson Cald-
well, president of the Lansing branch of the
NAACP, said that the niunber of minority stu-
dents in the district has increased, reaching 50
percent in recent years. As this has occurred, he
felt that some in the community have assumed
there would be more problems in the schools.
The composition of the Lansing school board for a long
time . . . has kind of created this atmosphere . . . that
there are problems within the Lansing school district
because there are so many minority children in the
school, and because they do not fit into this middle class
idea.20
14 Ibid., pp 18.S-87, 188.
15 Th\d.. p. 190
16 Ibid., p. 191.
17 Ibid., p. 193.
18 Ibid . p. 194.
19 Ibid. p. 190.
20 Ibid, p 24.3
32
Michael Boles, first vice president and educa-
tion chair of the Lansing branch of the NAACP,
acknowledged that there have been improve-
ments in the Lansing school district regarding
disproportionate discipline of African American
students. Still though, he presented statements
from black males, who felt they are perceived as
problems in the school. In a written response to a
committee inquiry on school treatment of black
males, he wrote:
Please find the enclosed comments ft"om [African Amer-
ican] students during mentoring sessions:
-often labeled as trouble-makers or discipline prob-
lems;
-disproportionately represented in student suspen-
sions and low ability groups;
-emphasis often placed on behavior rather than aca-
demic performance;
-below average achievement scores;
-low teacher expectations.^'
John Pollard, executive director for the Black
Child and Family Institute, also felt that many
black middle and high school students were un-
fairly labeled as disruptive and were not regarded
as serious, capable students.^ Moreover, Pollard
passionately testified that many suspended chil-
dren act out to mask the fact that they are un-
educated. He expressed the concern that many of
these neglected children will become predators on
society, and argued that they are reachable. He is
also concerned because he is seeing a younger
clientele in recent years, and that many African
American children neglected by the schools will
become socialized not by teachers, but instead by
gangs creating further mayhem in our cities.
There are some administrators, some of whom are Af-
rican American, who will tell you that children across
the board seem to be more violent than they were
before. There are some who feel that maybe there is
institutionalized racism at work.
I can only tell you that in the guspension alternative
program, what I am beginning to find is that many of
these children are acting out, so to speak, not because I
consider them bad children, but because what they
really are doing is masking the fact that they are un-
educated. They cannot read, they cannot compute, and
they would rather be known as the class cutup, clown,
suspended kid, than being the idiot in every classroom
that they sit in. And so rather than admit to . . . reading
at a third grade reading level, which I have found some
of them do, they will pretend to be gangsters and cutups
£ind I think it is a masking of their self-esteem.^
In terms of the trends I see going on, I am getting
younger children. They used to be predominantly high
school students. I am finding more sixth, seventh,
eighth graders. They are being sent to me for the same
kind of fighting. You have to understand in [the Lan-
sing] school district if I start a fight with Mr. Caldwell
and Mr. Caldwell defends himself, both of us are
gone.^
There is a phenomenon that goes on in the district that
is called half days. Students who are 11, 12, 13 years
old are put on something called half days. Half day is
from 8:00 to 10:00 in the morning or 3:00 to 5:00 in the
afternoon. ... I am not sure if they are included in the
statistics I have and that the district has shared with
you Where are these children? They seem to be the
cannon fodder and the source of most of the gangs.^
The Ypsilanti Public School District
The school district of Ypsilanti serves 4,853
students from preschool through 12th grade. In
21 Michael Boles letter to ConsUnce Davis, Aug. 12, 1994, Midwestern Regional OfEce, USCCR, files.
22 The Black Child & Family Institute is a private nonprofit organi2atioD that rents its facility fit>m the Lansing school district
and, in turn, provides educational programs including adult education, after-school tutoring, and a suspension alternative
program.
23 Transcript, pp. 25&-61.
24 Ibid.., pp. 252-53. The fictional reference to a "Mr. CaldwelT was used because the speaker appeared before the Committee
on the same panel as Mr. Caldwell of the NAACP.
25 Ibid., p. 260.
33
TABLE 3-4
Racial Composition of Ypsilanti Public Schools
White
Back
Other
Total
56.5%
40.2%
3.3%
West middle school
50.9
45.6
3.5
East middle school
61.9
36.3
1.8
High school
58.0
39.0
3.0
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR, from Ypsilanti school district data.
addition, it provides instruction to 351 adult edu-
cation full time equivalents in the high school
completion GED, adult basic education, English
as a second language, and education designed for
gainful employment (EDGE) programs. There are
13 buildings within the district, including: one
kindergarten, six elementary schools grades 1-5,
two middle schools grades 6—8, one high school
grades 9- 12, the Kingston Special Education Cen-
ter program, the regional career technical center,
and the adult and community education building.
For the 1993-94 school year, 56.5 percent of Uie
student population was white, 40.2 percent was
African American, and 3.3 percent was of another
race/ethnicity. In terms of the auxiliary program
populations during the 1993-94 school year, 34
percent of students received a free/reduced lunch,
12 percent were enrolled in special education
classes, 19 percent of the student population re-
ceived compensatory education classes, and 1 per-
cent of all students were in ESL/bilingual
classes.^
In the 1993-94 school year. East Middle School
had 480 students; 61.9 percent being white, 36.3
percent African American, and 1.8 percent of
other races and ethnic groups." West Middle
School had 544 students; 50.9 percent white, 45.6
percent African American, and 3.5 percent of
other races and ethnic groups.^ Ypsilanti High
School had an enrollment of 1,191 students; 58
percent white, 39 percent African American, and
3 percent being of other races and ethnic groups."
The Ypsilanti school district has a written pol-
icy on school discipline. As a general policy in the
Ypsilanti public schools, a student is always af-
forded an opportunity to state his or her under-
standing of the alleged misbehavior prior to the
imposition of any disciplinary action. In those
cases where the continued presence of the student
is a danger to person or property or is disruptive
to the school program, the student may be im-
mediately suspended and removed from the site.
As a general policy, the school district follows
the following due process procedures. First, the
student is informed of the allegation within a
timely period. Second, the principal will schedule
and conduct a factfinding conference as soon after
the alleged incident as possible, but no later than
3 school days, and the student will be given the
opportunity to present his or her defense, wit-
nesses, and evidence. A written summary of the
factfinding conference will be made. Third, the
principal or designated person will make a rea-
sonable effort to verify and evaluate fairly the
evidence. Fourth, if the principal finds that
recommendation for suspension in order, the
principal will inform the student and his or her
parents/guardians by telephone, if possible, and
26 Ypitijanli school dintnct, Di»lnct Dcacription.
27 Ypmlanli nchdol dmtnct. Went Middle School Building Profik.
26 TpKilanti nchnul distnct. Eaiil Middle School Building Profile.
29 Ypiiilanii school diianct. Ypsilanti High School Building Profile.
34
send a written communication of the decision and
their right to appear. Suspensions exceeding 10
days require assistant superintendent review and
approval."'''
There are major tmd minor offenses that may
result in a student being suspended. Minor of-
fenses may be penalized with up to a 3-day sus-
pension for a first offense and include: instigating
leading to an argument or fight, insubordination,
profanity, loitering, skipping/truancy, gambling,
anonymity, parking, violation of tardy policy,
forgery/cheating/petty theft, slander/ degrading
epithet, disruptive behavior, minor vandalism,
smoking, threats of harm. Major offenses may
result in a 10-day suspension for a first offense
and include: destruction of property, fighting,
arson, theft, false reports, other illegal acts, extor-
tion, assault and battery, motor vehicle violation,
possession of explosives, possession of weapons,
witnessed use or possession of alcohol and/or
other drugs, witnessed selling/providing alcohol
and/or drugs, look alikes, or paraphernalia.^'
The district has been recording suspension
data by race and ethnicity since 1988 and has
released a public report of the number and type of
suspensions. Historically, the community has
been very involved in school issues. The issue of
school discipline has received attention from the
community in recentyears, and the public release
of the suspension reports has played a part in that
discussion.
In March 1991, John Rohde, trustee of the
Ypsilanti school district, sent a memorandum to
then superintendent, Ralph Grimes, expressing
his alarm over the number of suspensions being
meted out in the school district, and the dispro-
portionate impact of those suspensions on African
American students. The memorandum was
prompted by his review of the suspension report.
In that memorandum, Rohde wrote:
When I look at the multiple suBpensions, I am alarmed
at those students who have received 4 or more suspen-
sions (23 students) and I am upset to see students
receiving 9-15 suspensions. I wonder how many days
the student who was suspended 15 times was out of the
classroom and building. Could it have been as many as
150 days? ( 15 X 10-day suspensions)
... I continue to believe that statistics that show that
Black students represent 60% of those suspended
(while they make up 39% of the District) shows a racia]
bias against Black students. Regardless of home life
and neighborhood realities, I believe that it is possible
for the school system to deal fairly and equitably with
students and bring forth positive, cooperative behavior
from them.
I continue to believe that the way we are dealing with
Black students in the classroom has a lot to do with the
fact that our suspension rate starts to climb at 4th
grade level and then decline in high school. By high
school, they can drop out. If the State ever changes the
law to require compulsory school attendance until 18 or
graduation, we will see the high school suspensions
increase.
I believe that we need some form of assessment
of our racial equity as a district. ^^
In the 1992-93 school year, there were 612
students who received one or more suspensions.
Of these, 152 were elementary school students,
226 were in middle school, and 234 were high
school students. Similar to the statistics cited 3
years earlier in Rohde's memorandum, 60 percent
of the suspended students in the 1992-93 school
year were African American. White students re-
ceived 38 percent of the suspensions, while stu-
dents of other races and minority ethnic groups
accounted for 2 percent of the suspensions.
Marilyn (joodsman, a member of the Ypsilanti
board of education, said that in the past year the
board directed the school administration to in-
clude in the discipline report, the schools' efforts
to prevent suspensions and dropouts.
30 Ypsilanti school district. Student Handbook, p. 18.
31 Ibid., pp. 14-17.
32 John Rohde memorandum to Ralph Grimes, superintendent, Ypsilanti Public Schools, Mar. 16, 1991, Midwestern Regional
Offioe, USCCR, files.
35
TABLE 3 5
Comparison of Ypsilanti School Population with Suspension Population
Suspension
Population
rate
rate
White
37.9%
56.5%
African American
60.3
40.2
Other
1.8
3.3
Source: Midwastern Reoionel Office, USCCR, from Ypsilanti school district data.
The past year the board of education directed the
[school] administration notjust to present this [discipl-
ine] report to us, but rather to give it some substantia-
tion in terms of what is being done to help students so
that we can prevent suspensions [amd] prevent drop-
outs from occurring with the school system. We have
very innovative employees in our school district and
innovative administrators, and we have set them to the
task of sharing with one another what has been suc-
cessful. We have had very many successful kinds of
things happening in our school district, and we want to
build on those kinds of things."*^
Duke Williams, executive director of human
resources for the Ypsilanti pubUc schools, dis-
cussed the issue of discipline in the Ypsilanti
school district He was joined by John Fulton,
principal of Ypsilanti High School; Tilani Smith-
Sambe, principal of one of the elementary schools;
and Bill Snyder, principal of East Middle School.
In addition, Herman Humes, Mary Gibson, and
Dave Johnson, teachers with the Ypsilsmti Educa-
tion Association, testified at the factfinding meet^
ing.
Williams spoke about the eflForts of the district
to be fair to all racial groups, while maintaining a
uniform code of conduct that promoted a learning
environment in the schools. He acknowledged
that African American students are disciphned in
disproportionate numbers in the district, but
stated that this is more a reflection of society
rather than a prejudicial pattern by the district
The Ypsilanti public schools operate under a uniform
code of student conduct, and it is our belief that we
administer that evenly. It is to our board of education's
credit that the expulsion rate at the Ypsilanti schools is
extremely low. In very rough numbers, maybe five
children in the last 8 years.
In my 20 months in the district, the expulsions that
have occurred have also been followed with alternative
educational opportunities for students who were re*
moved from the K-12 setting. We feel the statistics that
we keep reflect that in the case of our school district,
African American students are suspended at a hi^er
rate than Caucasian [students]. And we work diligently
to solve that
We feel the public schools reflect society's issues. And
we believe that is what we are dealing with. We have a
charge to maintain a conducive, safe, orderly edacs-
tional environment so that we can carry out our basic
mission. And that basic mission is in constant competi-
tion with the other special programs that are needed
for the various students who are suspended at a higher
rate.^
WiUiams also clarified distinctions between
out-of-school suspensions and in-school suspen-
sions.
33 Tranacnpt., p 424.
34 Ibid. p. 401.
36
In our district an in-schooi suspension is simply that.
You have a student who has broken or exhibited behav-
ior that is contrary to the uniform student code of
student conduct, and they are removed from their class-
room. At the upper level classrooms, as they have sev-
eral teachers, (they] are placed in a separate room
within the building and in general provided the work
from either their class or vannus subjects and a person
is there to assist them with it. But they are removed
from their peers, their regular class. That would be an
in-school suspension. Out-of-school suspension, you are
simply sent home. Your parents are notified or your
guardian, and that can range anywhere from half a day
to 10 days.^
Fulton, the high school principal, described ad-
ministration of the code of conduct in his building
and his philosophy of discipline. He also discussed
problems and successes of discipline implementa-
tion.
Every situation is different, but wherever there is a
situation where a student needs to be suspended we
follow the code of conduct. We try to use alternatives
pnor to suspension, first whether it be a parent confer-
ence, whether it be keeping the students after
school. ... If we can come up with some alternative
rather than suspend the student, we try to do that.
The main suspensions out of school usually pertain to
students who are involved in fighting or create risks for
other students in the building. That is a reason to
suspend them or as a measure that if you break these
rules, these are the consequences.
We tried an alternative program in the high school
setting years ago, in-house suspension. Unfortunately
we have had to discontinue that particular program
because of funding. It took a person to watch those kids
during the day, and it takes a special teacher. One does
not just take a regular teacher |for this assignment],
because now you are dealing with a room of maybe 10
or 15 students who are ... all problems.
But even with that program we did not see a real
success. The real success that we have seen in the last
few years has been communication with parents [of]
our policies that call for suspension. . . . The real key is
to have the parents come in and deal with them rather
than to have the kid out of school. . . . And that accom-
plishes probably more than anything, and the students
are more afraid of having that happen than the 10-day
suspension. If the parents can come in, you can usually
solve the problem.^
Snyder, principal of East Middle School in
Ypsilanti, discussed his building's attempts at
proactive discipline and parental involvement.
We attempt, at East Middle School, to be proactive in
terms of managing student behavior. Our goal is to not
have any students suspended and to have everybody in
class all the time, learning and successful. When a
student ... is disroptive . . . our first goal is to have the
teacher be able to manage it within the classroom so
that one, the youngster is not removed from class and
is not removed from the learning situation. When a
situation exists where the learning is disrupted ... to
the extent the teacher cannot manage it, . . . it comes to
the principal.
What we try to do is to modify behavior, not punish
people because most kids come to school really not
wanting to get in b-ouble. Most kids want to do right
and want to learn and want to succeed. But a lot of
times they come to school without the skills to help
them succeed. . . . They come out of an awful lot of
pressure from all the communities we service There
are some terrible problems that kids face on the week-
ends, at home in the evenings, and they bring them all
to school the next day.
We have an inadequate counseling situation, as all
schools do today, to help manage these problems, to
help hold kids hands and talk them through these
things, or get to the point of being able to internally
handle these situations. And a lot of times they erupt.
So when we have to send a student home on a suspen-
sion, our first goal is to make it as short as possible;
second, to involve the parents; and third, to make sure
that when the student comes back to school, whether it
is the next morning with a parent ... or whether it is
for a longer period of time, ... we have a parent
involved.^^
35 Ibid., p. 403-04.
36 Ibid., pp. 414-15.
37
Smith-Sambe, an elementary school principal
in Ypsilanti, repeated that her school tries to
avoid using suspension as a discipline, but she
admitted that minority students appear to be dis-
ciplined more often. She stressed that with multi-
racial and multiethnic student populations there
is a need for teachers to learn more about diver-
sity so that discipline would be more effective and
more fair.
There have been in-services for teachers on acceptance
of cultural differences., .so that if we are really dealing
with issues where minority children feel excluded from
the process. They therefore choose to act out. We really
[need to] address that exclusion [and] those feelings of
exclusion. I think that this is a very key issue that we
do need to talk about, and remember that [it is] in the
classroom setting where a lot of this begins.
The more that we can make our teachers aware of the
problems that the kids bnng [and] the more in-services
and the more support we can give our educators, the
less you will see this [exclusion] reflected because the
kids will feel good about being there. They will want to
be in that classroom, they will be learning.
We have done things with at-risk children at my
schoolafler school clubs and different things hke that.
We have found that the opportunity centers and the
afler school clubs we have provided have lessened the
number of suspensions.^
Several teachers from the Ypsilanti school dis-
trict testified about discipline in general and the
educational experiences of minority youth in par-
ticular. Some educators indicated that the en-
forced culture of conduct at a school created a
culture of conflict with some minority students.
Humes said:
I have been working with students for 20 years. One of
my main concerns h£is been that there are groupe of
students who are not treated as individuals. A couple of
years ago [we had] a focus group of African American
males. . . . There seemed to be a consensus that there
was a real lack of respect that was given them, a real
lack of effort put forth to understand who they are, and
just a basic, overall feeling of we are a nonentity.^®
The school system is a component of the system at
large. . . . One of the things I advocate ... is that one of
the things that we have not done very effectively is we
have not indicated to either the child or the pairents
that there are two systems. There is the white middle
class standard that is the school system . . . and then
there is my neighborhood [cuJture]. . . . And what I am
saying is a person walks into a room, an African Amer-
ican male, and what he feels or what he believes is that
he is negated, neglected, not given appropriate consid-
eration because he is black. It has nothing to do with
whether he is intelligent, . . . whether he is from a rich
family [or a] poor family. It is just that he is black.*"
Gibson, a social worker in the Ypsilanti pubUc
schools, said the issues of disproportionate dis-
cipline are multifaced, arguing that "it is race, it
is socioeconomic status, it is values, educational
opportunities, expectations, [and] environ-
ment."** She noted that some students get the
feeling of being failures from home, so they never
get a sense of being accepted or belonging, and
this is why some of them act out
Johnson, a middle school teacher, added to this
thought, saying that without parental involve-
ment, an inflexible code of conduct often falls
more severely on those children without parental
support. He also thought that some discipline
problems are the result of students being unable
to perform academically.
The problem I see at the middle school is that we try
and get the parents in the meeting when a child is
suspended. . . . We have many parents who will not
bother to come back to school the next day and their
37 Ibid, pp. 416-17.
3« Ibid., p. 422.
39 Ibid., p 438.
40 Ibid., pp 440-41.
41 Ibid., p. 442.
38
children are out [extra] days. ... So there is some
apathy on the part of the ftimily in terms of seeing that
their children get what they need in terms of this
education. The other part that I see at the middle
school ... is that learning problems at the elementary
school become behavior problems at the middle school
because they are put into classrooms and they are
expected to do certain things, . . . and they are not able
to do those tasks. So then it becomes a behavioral
problem in the classroom.*^
The Judicial System and Community
Efforts
In many cases, the administration of school
discipline and the judicial system become inter-
twined. There is a juvenile court in each county of
the State that is responsible for adjudication and
disposition of delinquency charges and child
abuse and child neglect matters. The juvenile
court of the county is assisted in this work by the
department of social services, which plans and
implements post adjudication rehabilitative
youth programs, and a probation office, which
works with the serious repeat offenders.
Nancy Francis, Washtenaw County probate
judge, presiding in the juvenile division of probate
court, spoke of the school influence on the lives of
children. She noted that "structure and routine
are usually missing elements in the lives of the
court's children. . . . School success [positively]
affects the sense of determination and self esteem
and growth potential of each child in the court. "^^
She added that, although the court did not main-
tain formal statistics on school suspensions, she
and those who professionally assist the court have
a very educated estimate of the problem of dispro-
portionate discipline in the public schools. More
chillingly, the judge maintained that local public
districts use the judicial system as a dumping
ground for children with whom the school system
is unwilling to deal.
From my perspective as a judge in the [juvenile] court,
it app>ears that at least the disciphnary methods of
suspension and expulsion fall more heavily upon Afii-
can American children in Washtenaw County I am
hearing reports regularly on what is happening to each
child in school. It is clear to me that there is a signifi-
cant disparity by race in this particular method of
discipHne, at least as it involves the court population.
Schools suspend and expel children that they do not
want to, or believe they cannot deal with in their pres-
ent format. That means the population is going to
overlap greatly with the children who are served by the
juvenile court. And, unfortunately, it appears that the
children most readily seen as those who cannot be deedt
with are the ones who do not fit in the niches made for
them by the existing system. . . .
There are ways that this process or this disparity af-
fects what goes on in the juvenile court, and how chil-
dren are treated in the court sometimes. For example,
there have been countless times that I have held chil-
dren in our secure detention facility for a longer period
of time than would otherwise be necessary, because
there is no school program for those children. They
have been suspended or expelled [from the public
schools] Our casework staff works diligently to try
to develop an outside program for theman alternative
programor we wait out a suspension so that the child
can get back into school.
There was a practice in the court, when I first took the
bench, of fiHng probation violations on youngsters
[under the supervision of the court] who were sus-
pended ft^om school, because there is a standard court
order that all children on probation who are under the
supervision of the courts attend and participate in a
school program. I have discontinued that policy and
have [publicly] stated that I will not accept an author-
ized probation violation on that basis because the basis
for suspension has become too vague and sometimes too
petty to warrant a suspension.**
42 Ibid., p. 446.
43 Ibid., p. 490.
44 Judge Francis testified that she had discontinued that policy because *the basis for suspension had become too vague . . .
and because the (court) became increasingly aware of the racial imbalance involved in the suspension decision at the school
level." (Transcript, p. 493.)
39
. . . Increasingly we are seeing recommendations by the
school for children to attend the adult education pro-
gram, children who are 15 and 16 years old.
To Judge Francis, the reason for the racial
disparities observed in the school suspensions
and encountered in the juvenile court population
is institutional racism. The individual adminis-
trator in the schools who imposes the discipline
penalties may not be motivated by a racial ani-
mus, but the continuing effects from past racism
are in play.
fRacial dispanties in school suspensions and the court's
detention facility] are based on past racism in our
communities, in our housing patterns, in the educa-
tional system, in all manner of treatments and assis-
tance that we have given to people in the past. . . . That
IS what I think we are seeing now, because the children
who are least likely to succeed are the ones that histor-
ical patterns have almost forced to not succeed.
Several positive interactions between the court
and the school district were offered by Judge
Francis. There is significant interface between
the court and the schools at the caseworker level.
For instance, the intensive probation department
is now part of the school response in dealing with
disruptive students, and has had success in keep-
ing a child in school ratherthan having him or her
suspended. But the judge cautioned that the court
had to be careful not to become the school system's
police officer.
Judge Francis offered a series of specific sug-
gestions to correct the school discipline system,
and include the following:
1. Reform the schools of education. Prepare
teachers for all the students teachers are going
to meet. Youth detention facilities should be
filled with student teachers.
2. School classes should be smaller.
3. Parents need to be empowered, educated,
and involved in the discipline of their children
within the school system.
4. There should be a mandatory requirement
for alternatives other than suspension and ex-
pulsion. If there is any hope of doing anything
with the child, it is lost when he or she is
expelled and put on the street with no educa-
tion.*^
Also appearing at the factfinding meeting fi^im
the judicial system were Nathfuiial Reid, program
coordinator at the Center for Occupational and
Personalized Education (COPE), Kim Marvellis,
director of the casework services of the Wash-
tenaw County Juvenile Court, and Rich Laster,
supervisor of the juvenile court's intensive proba-
tion casework.
Marvellis said that the county juvenile court
was being asked to handle much of the educa-
tional responsibilities for the children. According
to Marvellis, the county juvenile court annually
has a caseload of between 1,000 and 1,200 youths
in nonabuse, nonadoptive matters. Because the
school system does not handle serious juvenile
offenders, the court takes on the role of educator
with these children, a role for which the juvenile
court system is not designed.
We find . . . our caseworkers and our supervisors deal-
ing with the issue of where the kid is going to go if he
gets out of detention And most of the time there are
no good alternatives, or there is nothing available for
us to send the kid to. So the task is upon us, and not the
school, to find the [educational] solution.**
The school should not have the option to say you are out
and we are fuiished with you. . . . TTie court ends up
holding the hot potato in most instances, where the
kids reached 13, 14, 15 years of age, and we really know
that this youngster is not so delinquent as much as his
or her problem, really they have to do with the low
fiinctioning, low educational skills and other related
46 Tranocnpt, pp. 491-94.
46 Ibid, p. 495.
47 Ibid., pp. 498-99.
4« Ibid, p. 616.
40
issues. We feel that really this cannot be continued, and
that the schools ought to take a more responsible
attitude.*^
We (in the juvenile court system) think . . . the school
systems ... do not actively pursue and certify every-
body that falls under the guidelines of special educa-
tion. . . . We find ourselves . . . are the ones that initiate
individual education plans. . . . We have to initiate that
so we can get alternative education services.^
At COPE, there are 35 education slots avail-
able to the juvenile court for the county, 10 for the
Ann Arbor public schools, 3 from Willow Run, 5
from Ypsilanti, and occasionally there is a referral
from an outlying district in the county. Currently
there are five staff, four State certified teachers,
and Reid. The teachers are not special education
teachers.
One of the dilemmas facing COPE is the in-
creasing number of students expelled or serving
long term suspensions. This increasing number
makes it impossible for the current staff to serve
the needs of all the students who need services.
Reid addressed thisln telling the Advisory Com-
mittee about the types of student violations that
bring students to his facility and his negative
opinion of behavior contracts.
We receive a lot of those student that have been ex-
pelled or on long-term suspensions because of weapons
or drugs. The numbers are greater each year. Right
now the majority of them are being sent to us to deal
with.^'
When [studentsl go back [to school] usually there is a
behavioral contract made up. And this behavioral con-
tract sometimes is totally ridiculous . . . because if you
are in education or a parent or whatever, you know that
middle school timetable for youngsters and develop-
ment is up and down. One day they want to be an adult,
the next day it may be playing with dolls or G.I. Joe.
And then you will get a behavioral contract that if you
sneeze wrong, you are out of here ageiin We have
to make some adjustments in this behavioral contract
because we know it is not going to work.
Laster addressed the crosscultural misunder-
standings that frequently result in negative reac-
tions to minority students in the school setting.
The consequence of this misunderstanding re-
sults in many minority students feeling angry and
acting out "They feel that they have been singled
out or they do not feel they received proper jus-
tice.""
Judge Francis repeated this message, urging
more child advocacy to insure a better and more
equitable school discipline.
One of the most common things I hear in the courtroom
when youngsters are explaining why it was they were
suspended from school is a student on student situa-
tion, very often involving an African American child
and a white child. And the way the student describes it,
which is their subjective point of view, is that they were
both at fault in some way, but I was the one who was
suspended and the other student was left in school. I
hear that over and over again in the courtroom. And we
all have a sense of how sensitive children are to fair-
ness. And they feel particularly humiliated and angry
when that happens.^
The other point [is] . . . that even in districts which have
very, very good guidelines about discipline, it only
works when adults get involved and can come back in
and represent or speak for or with the child in an
advocacy way. And so often that does not happen. It is
what I was talking about before about the . . . empow-
ered parent The (discipline] just sails right over their
head and the kids have no assistance to come back in
and be able to have a forum in which to tell their story
and possibly get some justice. . . . system.
49 Ibid., p. 520
60 Ibid. p. 518
51 Ibid., p. 434
62 Ibid., p. 541.
53 Ibid., p. 537.
64 Ibid., pp. 541-42.
41
The juvenile court opposition to school suspen-
sion was given some measure of support by State
Superintendent Schiller. In his testimony he
noted that more and more school districts in the
State are attempting alternative approaches to
suspensions, rather than using this discipline tool
SiS a strategy for improving student behavior.
Primarily punitive [discipline] such as out-of-school
suspension runs counter to the goal of preparing young
people for full and productive lives. When the conse-
quences are fair and when they are reasonable and
consistently applied . . . the student truly respects
discipline and it becomes the learning experience it is
meant to be. Quick fixes like out of school suspen-
sion/expulsion have no benefit to the students who are
suspended.
School suspension programs are increasingly being re-
placed by more appropriate prevention intervention
strategies that provide a more effective long-term solu-
tion. There is a need for disciplinary alternatives
within a canng environment to keep students in school.
The practice of out-of-school suspension and expulsion
should be limited to only those very few students whose
presence represents a dear danger to the safety and
security of the school community in situations where a
school over a period may be needed or when a student
or parent refuses alternatives to suspension.*
Eugene Cain, superintendent of the Highland
Park school district,^^ spoke more of generic is-
sues facing school districts, than of individual
problems in his school district. He testified that:
(IJ the issue of discipline in schools is intertwined
with the issue of poverty, (2) the leadership of a
district, especially with regards to the superinten-
dent, is critical, (3) more minority teachers are
needed, and (4) there is a need for data collection.
Regarding poverty and school discipline, Cain
shared a recent experience in his school district:
Case in point, . . . one day we were looking at the
problem of the placement of black kids in special edu-
cation. . . . And it was really interesting because some
of us were looking at the problem as if it were a white-
black problem, and that is not necesstirily the case. You
find just as overwhelming a number of black males in
special education in all-black school districts as you will
find in predominantly white school districts. However,
. . . one of the things that is driving this, in my opinion,
is poverty. . . . Poverty is . . . expansive in terms of its
impact on how we treat children.^
Addressing the issue of district leadership,
Cain specifically cited Highland Park as an exam-
ple of a superintendent lowering the suspension
and expulsion rates. There were no student expul-
sions in ^e Highland Park schools last year.
One of the other things . . . you need to take a look at
. . . where you have a large number of cases of kids
being expelled . . . [is] the leadership of the district,
especially the superintendent. The superintendent can
be the red or green light for suspensions and/or expol-
I am superintendent of schools in Highland Park and
we did not expel one child last yetir. We did not expel
one child in Highland Park schools last year because I
said if you are going to advocate expelling any student,
you are going to have a good reason for wanting to expel
that student. And you had better have some
information to share with me that you have done every-
thing that you possibly can to keep this child in school.
Now as a result of that, [there was] a lot of fi-ustration
Expulsion is one of the easiest ways of dealing with
66 Ibid., p. 543.
66 Transcnpl, pp. 12-13. Examples of alternative programs are given in this chapter from the Lansing and Ypsilanti school
distncta.
67 Prior to his appointment as superintendent, Cain was a teacher in the middle and high schools of Detroit, an instructor in
education at Wayne Stale University, social studies specialist in the Michigan Department of Education, director of
secondary education at Highland Park, and assistant supenntendent in the Michigan Department of Education for the office
of education equity and community services.
68 Transcnpl, pp. 5€i*-70.
5& Ibid., pp. 570-71.
42
problems. Keep the kids in school, that is perhaps the
biggest challenge. ... I became very involved in this
myself. I mentored three students.*'''
We had a young lady who was involved in distributing
marijuana cigarettes — a lot of them on this particular
day. This young lady, once I investigated the situation,
came from a very poor family. The day she was involved
in selling these cigarettes was the day the family was
being put out. She was trying to raise the rent money .^'
Cain feels that schools ought to be about the
business of creating sensitive teachers to deal
with the difficult situations that children some-
times face. Often these diflRcult situations are
intertwined with race and poverty. Minority
teachers can be a real attribute to a school district
in this area. Unfortunately, accordingto Cain, the
fiiture supply of minority teachers is decreasing.
Most of your minority teachers will be retired in the
next 5 to 10 years. It will be very rare in Michigan to
see a black teacher in the next 10 years. It is going to
be very rare because we are not there.
When you look at who is being trained down the pipe-
lines you are going to find ... it will change drastically
in the next few years because most of the folks at the
top of the longevity scale are minorities. And so that
you are going to have are lot of suburban white folks
workingin all black, mostly minority situations, a lot of
times void of contact with these cultures.^
Finally, on the issue of data collection, Cain was
emphatic.
You need some sort of statewide database to tell you
how bad or how good the situation is. Right now you do
not have that Policy is usually driven by data. If you
do not have the data, how in the world are you going to
effectuate policy? It is out of the question.^
60 Ibid., p. 572.
61 Ibid. p. 573.
62 Ibid., pp. 574-75.
63 Ibid., p. 576.
43
Chapter 4
The State of Michigan: Authority and Equal Education
Opportunity
Public education in general and school disci-
pline in particular have generated significant
public and political interest jind legislation in
Michigan in recent years. In 1994 the financing of
Michigan public schools was completely over-
hauled. A new financing scheme was enacted to
address some of the disparities between districts
in school funding. Legislation passed, effective
January 1, 1995, which gives increased authority
to local school districts in administering disci-
pline.
School Funding
In 1994 Michigan changed its financing system
of public education. The funding for pubhc educa-
tion was changed from a system primarily prop-
erty tax based, to one financed primarily through
Statewide sales tax revenues.' It was designed to
eliminate the disparities in per capita student
funding. Most provisions of the school aid reform
took effect on October 1, 1994, while others affect-
ing the 1993-94 State fiscal year were imple-
mented immediately upon the referendum's pas-
sage in 1994. Several items under the reform
indirectly affecting school discipline include:
• A per child foundation grant will be used to
allocate most of the school aid funding.
• Districts will receive foundation allowance
State aid on the difference between the dis-
trict's foundation level and the per-pupil yield
from the base millage.
• A $230 million in "at-risk pupil" funding will
be allocated to districts whose 1994-95 base
revenue per-pupil is less than $6,500 on the
basis of the October 1994 count of pupils ebgi-
ble for free lunch.
• School readiness grants of $42.5 million for
"at-risk" 4-year olds are available, an increase
of $15 million over 1993-94.
• ISD special education, vocational education,
£md operational millages will continue to be
equalized.
Kirk FVofit, State representative in the Michi-
gan House of Representatives, thought that the
new funding initiative provides a more equitable
school funding system, but significant disparities
still exist And these disparities affect the disci-
plinary options available to a district
I understand the specific focus [of the factfinding] is
discipbne and suspensions. Let me speak more of what
1 know, and that is the general issue of equity in Mich-
igan. . . . We have moved financing to public education
in Michigan from a disptirity in terms of dollars per
pupil from 3 to 1 to 2 to 1. But we still have a significant
disparity. Having done this just recently, I think there
is a genuine concern that we are finished. I do not know
how we can tell ourselves that we are finished with the
equity issue when we have a system in place that has a
2 to 1 disparity in financing per student. And it is still
driven, to a certain extent, by the property wealth
within the district .
It is difficult to deal with those [discipUne and suspen-
sions] in a context of a system that is marked by such
huge disparities. It is tough to tell a system that it is
okay to deny opportunities based on the wealth of the
PJi. 199.3, No. 336. Twenty-four other pubbc acts are part of the school rinance reform package, inchiding PA. 1993, No. 312,
which amendB the school axle with a new funding plan. The amended school funding plan was supported by a bipartisan
coalition in the legislature and the Governor. The plan was approved by the voters in a referendum in 1994.
44
community in one context, but ... in the operations
within your system, you have to be fair.^
There are not differences that would justify a 2 to 1
spending disparity. And that kind of disparity, when
you tell a child that your educational opportunity is
driven by the measure of property wealth that they are
bom into, you send a . . . message to the child that
reflects Itself in all the types of things you are trying to
address specifically here today."'
Board of Education and Department of
Education
The issue of school discipline cannot be sepa-
rated from the responsibilities of the Michigan
board of education. The Constitution of the State
of Michigan provides for a board of education to
provide leadership and general supervision over
all public education. Article VIII expresses the
State's encouragement of education (section 1),
support for a free and public elementary and sec-
ondary schools (section 2), and the duties of the
board of education (section 3):
Sec. 3. Leadership and general supervision over all
public education, including adult education and in-
structional programs in state institutions, except as to
institutions ofhigher education granting baccalaureate
degrees, is vested in a state board of education. It shall
serve as the general planning and coordinating body for
all public education, including higher education, and
shall advise the legislature as to the financial require-
ments in connection therewith.*
The bo£ird of education consists of eight mem-
bers who are nominated by party conventions and
elected at large for terms of 8 years. The Governor
is an ex-officio member of the State board of edu-
cation without the right to vote.^ The State board
of education appoints a superintendent of public
instruction who is responsible for the execution of
the board's policies. "The superintendent is the
principal executive oflRcer of a state department
of education which shall have powers and duties
provided by law.**
The department of education is created by
Michigan law 16.400, Sec. 300, which reads:
"There is hereby created a department of educa-
tion."' MSA Sections 301 and 302 establish the
State board of education as the head of the depart-
ment of education and transfer "all powers, duties
and functions vested by law in the board of educa-
tion ... to the department of education."*
The State's General Act to provide a system of
public instruction and elementary and secondary
schools is encoded in The School Code of 1976.^ In
that act, the State asserts its authority over local
school districts.
The state's general policy is to retain control of its
school system, to be administered throughout the state
under state laws by local state agencies organized with
plenary powers independent of local govemmenta with
which such agents are closely associated, and education
is no part of local self-government inherent in township
or municipality except in so far as legislature chooses
to make it such . . . The state's general policy has been
to retain control of its school system and administer it
Testimony before the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, factfinding meetings, Lansing
MI, Aug. 3, 1994, Ann Arbor, MI. Aug. 4, 1994, pp. 374-75 (hereafter referred to as Transcript).
Transcript, pp. 376-77.
Article VIQ, Michigcm Constitution.
Ibid.
Ibid.
PA. 1965, No. 380, i 300, Imd. EfT. July 23, 1965. Michigan Compiled Laws, Annotated, Sections 14 to 20. End, p. 304.
Ibid.
PA. 1976, No. 451, Imd. EfT. Jan. 13. 1977,
45
•B •
s
s §
1 :
"o «
5 ■§
c C
if
If
-1
§-
|5
o
5<
o 1
^
^J
it
E '
^^^^^
^^j
^^
^"^^^^
^^^
£
-2
is u
• a.
>>
5|
e •
s •
«< c
"5 c
< •
i?
o .
:?
•ej
o
§1
OS
<
O
S5
11
CO i
o «
E
■o 2
< S
&t;
•8 .
^ o
w o
I 6
E 2
O 0.
1 =
*5
46
through local state agencies independently of the local
government with which, however, such agencies are
closely associated.'"
The State board of education under its respon-
sibility to provide general leadership to education
in the State has published Guidelines to the
Rights and Responsibilities of Students. The pur-
pose of the Guidelines is to provide information
that local district boards, staff, students, emd com-
munity members can use in adopting, implement-
ing, and assessing local standards of student con-
duct." Beardmore stated:
Our constitutional duties require us to provide leader-
ship and guidance Fifteen years ago the State board
of education passed a model code of student conduct
and the recommendation to every school district that
they, too, should develop a code of student conduct with
responsibilities clearly spelled out for all students and
the consequence for not following and abiding by those
rules.'^
Most recently in the laws that were passed last Decem-
ber ( 1993 ), Publi c Acts 335 and 339 requi re every school
district, every school building, to be certain that the
rules are clearly understood, they are clearly estab-
lished, [and that] families [and] students are well-
informed.'^
The Guidelines do not dictate a uniform set of
rules of student conduct for all districts, recogniz-
ing the right of local boards and the community to
determine standards of conduct. But State law
does require local boards to establish some rules
of student conduct. Section 1300 of the School
Code requires each local school board to "make
reasonable regulations ... for the proper estab-
lishment, maintensmce, management, and carry-
ing on of the public schools of the district, includ-
ing regulations relative to the conduct of pupils
concerning their safety while in attendance at
school or enroute to and from school."'*
Though the State board of education acknowl-
edges that Michigan statute gives local boards of
education the authority to establish student codes
of conduct, attendance policies, and any other
policies and practices deemed necessary, in adopt-
ing and implementing school policies, local school
districts "must consider other criteria such as the
authority of the State Board of Education and the
rights and responsibiUties of students."'^
Section IV of the Guidelines, Due F*rocess and
the Fair Administration of Discipline, outlines
current law and practice and the authority of local
school boards in suspending and expelling stu-
dents. Procedural due process in this section re-
quires that the rules established at the local
school district level bear a reasonable relation-
ship to educational purposes.'® By authority of
section 1311 of the School Code, local school
boards still retain authority for school discipline.
Local school boards may authorize or order the suspen-
sion or expulsion from school of a pupril guilty of gross
misdemeanor or persistent disobedience, when in the
board's judgment the interest of the school may de-
mand the authorization or order. ..."
The terms "gross misdemeanor" and "persistent
disobedience"£ire not defined by legislation. The
State board has informed local school districts
that in developing policies:
10 Ibid., 5. Sute policy.
1 1 Michigan State Board ofEducation, "Students' Rights and Responsibilities in Michigan,''(hereafter referred to as Guuielmes)
May 1982, p. 2. The guidelines are in app. IV.
12 Transcript, p. 18.
13 Ibid.
U Mich. Comp. Laws Ann {380.1300 fWest 1988).
16 Guidelines, p. 2.
16 School Code.
17 Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. } 380.1311 (West 1988).
47
1. The policy must provide notice of what con-
duct is prohibited or permitted.
2. The rules must be reasonably understand-
able to the average student.
3. The rules must be rationally related to a
valid educational purpose.
4. The rules must be precise so as not to pro-
hibit constitutionally protected activities.
5. The policy must provide students with notice
of potential consequences for violating specific
rules.
6. The type of punishment specified in the pol-
icy must be within the expressed or implied
authority of the school district to utilize.
7. The punishment must be of reasonable se-
verity in relation to the seriousness of the mis-
conduct or the number of times the misconduct
was committed.
8. A copy of the rules and procedures must be
disseminated to all students.'^
According to the State board of education per-
haps the most important characteristic of due
process is its variable nature. The very nature of
due process rejects a rigid approach of having a
simple and succinct definition covering every con-
ceivable situation.'^ This is relevant to observed
disproportionate minority discipline in that cul-
tural factors and other mitigating circumstances
should be examined by school districts in the
administration of school discipline, and a wooden
approach to rules infractions should be eschewed.
The board and the department, however, as-
sert that their authority in matters of school dis-
cipline extend only to general guidance. Local
schools have final responsibility for the fair and
equitable administration of school discipline.
Schiller said:
I ne«d to reiterate the fact that in our State, local school
districts have the responsibility for establishing the
policies of disapline as it affects their students. We, as
the State of Michigan, unlike other States in the Na-
tion, do not have a statewide policy, statewide proce-
dure, statewide disciplinary code to affect all schools.
The 560 school districts and 3,500 schools have the
direct responsibility to establish their individual stu-
dents' discipline f>ohcies as it affects the carrying out of
expectations for students and the punishments
therein.™
Further, the department has faced real budget-
ary cuts in recent years. The cutbacks at the
department have affected the department's mon-
itoring of equal education opportunity in the
State. Programs have been fiinded at lower levels
and other programs have been eliminated.
Roberta E. Stanley, director of tenure and Federal
Relations Commission, Michigan Department of
Education, stated:
The State of Michigan was one of the predominant
States in terms of the civil rights in schools and the
desegregation court orders that were brought down by
the Federal courts. We as a State got more emergency
school aid assistance than most States in the coun-
try. . . . Many of those Federal desegregation orders
included items that related to the student suspension
and expulsion. So [Michigan] is very sensitive to that.
We have staff in the deptirtment [of education] who are
funded by the Federal Government that work with local
school districts on implementing those grants That
staff is not as strong in place right now as it once was
because of different funding trends and programmatic
trends, both at the State and Federal levels. . . .
We have convened many meetings in the department of
various groups in the department or program areas
that would address those issues. I would suggest that
because the Congress and State legislature moved
more away from categorical funding of individual pro-
grams that were for identified students [and] more into
what we call block grant funding . . . many of the
alternative programs have been funded at the lower
level or defunded entirely.^'
18 Gutdeimu. p 41.
19 Ibid., p. 42
20 Tranacnpl, p. 11.
48
Profit testified that fiinding for the department
of education had decreased in recent years, and
that such decreases had affected its effectiveness
in administering control over local school dis-
tricts. He said:
The department of education budget has been cut dras-
tically. They get very little in terms of a real SUte
appropriation. Most of their money is Federal money
with the specific mandate for a certain function. . . .
Thirty million dollars the State gives to the department
of Education Thirty million dollars out of $18 billion
in revenue from Michigan residents is spent on the
department^
A comparison of budget data for fiscal years
1990 and 1994 supports Profit's assertions. In
fiscal year 1990, the State appropriated $51.4
million to the department of education. In 1994
the appropriation from the general fund was
$30.7 million, a decrease of 70 percent.^ Funding
for the department comes from three general
sources:
• general fiand appropriations,
• Federal fiinds, and
• other local and State revenue sources.
Analysis shows State funding to the depart-
ment has decreased by 50 percent over the last 4
years. In fiscal year 1990-91, general fund appro-
priations and other revenue sources to the depart-
ment were $80,457, 000.^* In fiscal year 1994-95
that funding had decreased to $54,847,000; the
Governor's proposed spending on the department
from these two sources for fiscal year 1995-96
was slightly higher at $60,750,000.^
Cutbacks in funding by the State to the depart-
ment are even more severe when measured in real
TABLE 4-1
Real State Spending on the Department of
Education. 1990 and 1994
1990
1994
Source: Mdwestem Regional Office, USCCR, from
Execubve Budget.
dollars. Adjusting nomineil funding amounts for
inflation. State funding to the department de-
cretised 63 percent between 1990 and 1994 (see
table4-l).»
One of the units affected in the department of
education is the race relations and sex equity
unit The unit was initially established in 1980
and provided assistance to local districts in pro-
viding equal education opportunities to all
21 Transcript, pp. 27-28.
22 Transcript, pp. 387 and 396.
23 State ofMichigan, Executive Budget, Fiscal Tear 1990-91, p. H3 and Fiscal Tear 1994-96, pp. B1-B4.
24 State ofMichigan. Executive Budget. Fiscal Tear 1990-1991, p. H3.
25 SUte ofMichigan. Executive Budget. 1994-96 Fiscal Tear, pp. B1-B4.
26 Real dollars are nomina) dollars divided by an inflation index. Using the im^dt price deflator (1987=100) for the yean 1990
and 1994. real dollar expenditures to the department in FT 1990-91 was $71,092,000 and in FT 1994-95 $43,495,000.
49
students regardless of race, color, or gender. In
1990 the unit was still operating within the
department with a staff of six: a director, three
coordinators, and clerical staff. In addition, the
department acted as a central depository for
information for issues dealing with race and gen-
der equality in education. The office is now de-
funct. There remains an office of enrichment and
community services under an assistant super-
intendent, but the duties of that office do not
specifically address issues of equal education op-
portunity.^^
Discipline Data Collection
Although the department does not have re-
sponsibility for local district discipline policies,
since 1990 it has been given the responsibility to
collect data on student suspensions and expul-
sions. Michigan Compiled Laws, § 388.1757, Sec.
157 of the State School Aid Act reads:
In order to receive fiinds under this act, each district
and intermediate district shall furnish to the depart-
ment, on a form and in a manner prescribed by the
department, the mformation requested by the depart-
ment that 18 necessary for the preparation of a study of
suspended or expelled pupils in grades K to 12 as
required by section 307 of the . . . department of educa-
tion appropriations act.^
Many told the Advisory Committee that it was
essential that such data be collected on suspen-
sions and expulsions. However, there was no re-
cord of any such data collection by the depart-
ment. Schiller was questioned both on the
department's collection of suspension data and
the use of the data by the department.
Saleh (Advisory Committee member): Dr. Schiller, you
indicated . . . you are required to keep statistics on
suspensions for more than 10 days. So now these school
districts have to report these to the State board of
education, is that correct?
Superintendent Schiller Yes
Saleh: And . . . what is your role after that? Just to
develop the statistical data?
Schiller: Develop statistical data [and] report the sta-
tistics to the legislature, and to recommend to the State
board of education any policies or guidance that we do
provide to school districts in order to address these
issues.
Saleh: But again . . . you are not keeping statistics of
this on the basis of race, sex, national origin.
Schiller: We have not, but we will be in terms of dis-
aggregating the data.^
Ombudsman Unit
The Michigan Department of Education estab-
lished a student issues ombudsman unit on
March 1, 1994, within the department's office of
enrichment and community services to respond to
inquiries regarding student issues, including sus-
pensions and expulsions.^ The ixnit does not in-
vestigate or advocate on behalf of students, but
disseminates information, provides counseling,
and makes referrals. The mEgor objectives of the
unit are to:
• provide assistance which will enable students to stay
in school and to learn
• facilitate dialogue between parents and the local
school board^*
If the issue regards student discipline, such as
suspension or expulsion, the ombudsman staff
27 Ivan Colman, telephone interview, Feb. 13, 1995.
28 State School Aid Ad, MCL } 388.1757. Sec. 157. Higtory: PA. 1979, No. 94, { 157, added by PA. 1990, No. 207, { 1. Eff.
Oct. 1, 1990. Amended by PA. 1991. No. 118, { 1, Imd. Eff. Oct. 11, 1991.
29 Transcript, pp 39-tO.
30 The unit pemonnel uicluden an ombudaman, ombudsman coordinator, executive asristant ombudaman, assistant ombuds-
man, intake coordinator, and two back-up intake coordinators.
31 Robert E. Schiller, letter to Janice Frazier, Aug. 3, 1994, Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR, files.
50
may call the local school district to clarify details
of the suspension, expulsion, or other issue and
inquire about due process procedures. Staff may
also ask local district officials for information on
educational alternatives available which would
enable the student to continue his/her education
while on suspension and expulsion. The depart-
ment policy is that:
Ombudsman staff advises callers that appeals for sus-
pensions can be taken to the local district board and
expulsion appeals would be handled through private
legal action. The department does not hear appeals for
student suspension and expulsions."*^
The establishment of the ombudsman unit is
an attempt by the department to organize its
response to complaints and inquiries. In recent
years prior to the establishment of the ombuds-
mam unit, there was no organized intake or re-
sponse to complaints and inquiries made to the
department. A standard citizen complaint and
inquiry form was used, but these were accepted by
several units within the department, with no ac-
curate intake procedures and no formal followup.
An examination of the complaint and inquiry
forms at the department found complaint and
inquiry forms, along with the department's ac-
tions and dispositions, placed in three-ring bind-
ers and set in sm office in the department build-
ing. Staff of the regional office examined all
complaints and inquiries made to the department
during 1993 dealing with minority student dis-
cipline actions.
Twenty three of those inquiries dealt with mi-
nority student discipline issues. Some type of dis-
position or referral by the department was associ-
ated with each complaint and/or inquiry,
including: sending the rights and responsibilities
guidelines (eight times), referring the petitioner
to the school board and/or superintendent (six
times), referring the petitioner to the department
of civil rights (five times), and referring the peti-
tioners to other groups including the Student Ad-
vocacy Center and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
No referrals were noted to the Oflfice for Civil
Rights, U.S. Department of Education.
Michigan Department of Civil Rights
The Michigan Department of Civil Rights
(MDCR) works under the authority of the Michi-
gan Civil Rights Commission (MCRC). The
MCRC was created by the Michigan Constitution
of 1963 and is empowered to investigate allega-
tions of discrimination. Article V, §29 of the Mich-
igan Constitution reads:
There is hereby established a civil rights commis-
sion. ... It shall be the duty of the commission in a
manner which may be prescribed by law to investigate
alleged discrimination against any person because of
religion, race, color, or national origin in the eryoyment
of the civil rights guaranteed by law and by this consti-
tution, find to secure the equal protection of such civil
rights without such discrimination.^
Cooperation between the MDCR and the Mich-
igan Board of Education in dealing with issues of
race and ethnic discrimination in public schools
extends back more than 30 years. In 1966 the
MDCR and the department of education entered
into a joint policy statement that recognized the
role of the State board of education and its consti-
tutional charge to provide leadership smd general
supervision over all public education and the role
of the commission in securing and protecting the
civil right to education without unlawful discrim-
ination.
The authority of the commission extends to
educational facilities and public school districts.
Janet Cooper, deputy director for legal and com-
munity affairs with the MDCR, explained this
authority and gave information on the
commission's work with public school districts.
During the constitutional convention the framers of the
constitution talked about several civil rights areas.
Although they ultimately declined to enumerate them,
one of the those areas was . . . the area of education.**
32 Ibid
33 CoDstitution of Michigan of 1963, Art. V, §29.
51
Since 1987 (the MDCR) has received 119 complaints
against school distncts in the State of Michigan alleg-
ing unlawful suspension or expulsion. Forty-four al-
leged suspensions [were] based on race; 36 of those
claimants were black. Twenty-seven alleged expulsion
on the basis of race; 25 were black. Sixteen alleged
suspension based on national ongin, including nine
Hispanics and three Native Amencan students. Seven
alleged expulsion based on national origin, including
five Hispanics and one Native American student. The
25 other alleged suspensions and expulsions [were] on
other bases such as gender, pregnancy, handicap, retal-
iation for activities. . . .^
The Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act defines
civil rights in the State of Michigan and the duties
of the civil rights commission and the department
of civil rights.-*^ The act declares that the opportu-
nity to obtain equal utilization of educational fa-
cilities without discrimination because of race,
color, or national origin is a civil right.^^ Cooper
explained MDCR procedures in investigating ed-
ucation complaints.
Complaints must be filed with the department of civil
rights within 180 days of the alleged act of unlawful
discrimination, but under the same statute people can
go to court directly; [they] need not go through the
department of civil rights for a period of 3 years.
Once a com plaint is filed, the respondent agency, in this
case the school, school district, school board, would be
notified of that complaint. We would normeilly send out
a questionnaire asking questions which are relevant to
the kind of allegations made.
After that we usually schedule a conference at the
beginning of our investigation between whatever the
school distnct is and whoever the parent [is] ... to see
if we can sort out the issues and whether we can make
any early resolution in that process. A significant num-
ber of our complaints are resolved through that kind of
early resolution process.
If [the MDCR] is not successful in that resolution, we
will then do a complete investigation, reviewing re-
cords, interviewing witnesses, whatever is required. If
our investigation indicates evidence of unlawful dis-
crimination, we will invite the respondent to meet with
us in a formal conciliation process, which is a require-
ment to proceeding further. . . .
If we do not succeed in resolving the complaint through
conciliation, we will issue a formal charge and conduct
a formal administrative hearing. At the end of that
administrative hearing, the hearing officer makes a
proposal to the eight members of the civil rights com-
mission, including conclusions of law and findings of
fact. When the commission enters its order, the order is
appealable through and enforceable through the circuit
court of the State.^
Complaints to the department of civil rights
alleging discrimination in education are a small
portion of the department's total caseload. From
program year 1988-59 to 1992-93 the depart-
ment received 29,000 complaints. Of those, 368
(1.3 percent) alleged discrimination in education,
and 94 dealt with the issue of school discipline.^®
Most of these complaints were from African
Americans, 74 percent (see table 4-2).
Cooper explained that allegations of discrimi-
nation in education has been a persistent, but
small part of the department's caseload.
Over the past several years, the number of education
complaints have averaged fewer than 2 percent of the
total complaints filed. Employment cases usually rep-
resent more than 90 percent of all complaints, followed
by housing, places of public accommodation, and public
service and law enforcement.
.34 Transcript, p. 142.
35 Ibi(L, p. 143.
36 PA. 1976, No. 453, EfT. Mar. 31, 1977. Amended by Pj\. 1992, No. 124 5 1, Imd. Eff. Jun. 29, 1992; PA. 1992. No. 258, { 1.
Imd. EfT Dec. 7, 1992.
37 Ibid^ Art. 1, Sec. 102(1).
3« Tranacnpl, pp. 158-59.
39 Michigan Department of Civil Rights, Annual Report Fiscal 1993. p. A-6.
52
TABLE 4-2
Education Compfaints to the MDCR. 1987-1993
Issu
«: Suspension
Expulsion
African American
44
73.3%
25 73.5%
Hispanic
9
15.0%
5 14.7%
American Indian
3
5.0%
1 2.9%
Other
4
6.7%
3 8.8%
Total
60
34
Source: Midwestern ReQional Office, USCCR, from MDCR data.
The low number of complaints in education, however,
does not reflect the extent of discrimination in our
schools or the extent of the commission and depart-
ment's concerns for achieving equal opportunities for
all students. . . . *°
In the late 1960s racial conflict and student
demonstrations reached a critical level in the
State. The MDCR in cooperation with the State
department of education assisted 18 communities
in handling more than 50 racial tension situations
in local high schools and area colleges. Subse-
quent to this cooperation agreement, the MDCR
and the commission did a report on discipline and
suspension policies and practices in the public
schools. The report was prompted by the number
of complaints made to the MDCR from several
Michigan school districts.
The report, published in 1968, recommended
that school districts should review their policies
regarding discipline, suspension, and expulsion.*'
The report also noted as a problem a concern still
expressed today — the association between minor-
ity and low socioeconomic status and school disci-
pline, i.e., minority and poor students receive un-
40 Transcript, p. 160.
equal treatment in the administration of school
discipline.
There is a wide-spread problem with respect to the
violation of the rights of pubhc school children through
the absence or inadequacy of safeguards for due process
of the law in the procedures followed by many school
districts in implementing suBf)ension and expulsion
authority. There is, in fact, accumulating evidence that
this deficiency affects, most acutely, Negro and poor
children
Underlying the racial tension which has erupted into
open confrontation in numerous Michigan school dis-
tricts this current year is the question of unequal appli-
cation of discipline [emphasis added] as seen by Negro
students at the secondary level. The matter of the
unequal application of discipline raises the question of
what action can be taken at the State level to aid in the
solution of this problem.*^
Department concern for equal educational op-
portunities for minority students has not dimin-
ished since their 1968 report. In 1986 the MDCR
conducted an analysis of equality in education
and commented on several areas of specific im-
portance to educational equality. Those issues
41 Michigan Departnnent of Civil Righta, "Discipline and Suspension Policy and Practices in Michigan PubUc Schoola.* The
complete report is in app. V.
42 Ibid., p. 4.
53
included data collection, employment and higher
education, teacher training, dropout rates for mi-
nority students, school conduct code issues, and
sex equity in the public schools.*^
Addressing the issue of school discipline,
Cooper gave information on disproportionate
discipline that has come to the attention of the
department in recent years.
Last week one of our staff members in the western side
of the State reported to us that in the Grand Rapids
public school system their statistics showed that black
students are suspended at a rate of approximately two
and one-half times that of whites. The percentage of
black student suspensions in the 1993-94 school year
was 63.5 [percent] while for whites it was 24.7 percent.
We also understand that there are similar, but not
identical problems in the Holland public schools except
that there the problem is frequently a higher rate of
suspensions for Hispanic students.**
Adding to the discussion on disproportionate
school discipline of minority students, Cooper con-
nected discipline to dropout rates, and the rela-
tionship of dropout rates to prison incarceration
rates. Some of these so-called dropouts, she al-
leged, are in reality "push outs," i.e., students
leaving school because the school has let them
know that they are unwanted.
We know that there are a number of perfectly valid
reasons for dropouts, students being moved to another
distnct, movement out of State, many other things may
occur. . . . We also recognize [though, that] . . . some-
times dropouts are the result of pushouts. They may
reflect students who have concluded because of a pat-
tern of suspension and disciplinary difficulties that
school IS not a place for them, or may drop out because
of the problems they have had in such programs.
We recommend consideration of tracking systems for
students with discipline problems. We have hetird too
frequently about students whose problems begin with
discipbne and then suspension, and they subsequently
find themselves in special education programs which
end in pushouts or dropouts.*^
The [Michigan] department of corrections (reported to]
us that of the 40,420 prisoners now in State correc-
tional facilities, 21,655 of them entered the system
without high school completion, more than 50 percent.
This covers all of the prisoners currently in Michigan
correctional facilities We need to know some of the
kinds of things that do correlate with suspensions in
school, with dropouts, with grade retention, and with
being tracked into special education where it may not
have been the appropriate response.*®
Other estimates of Michigan inmate popula-
tion without high school diplomas are higher. In
addition, these estimates also show the cost to
taxpayers of incarceration are much higher as
compared to education costs. Zweifler offered an
exhibit stating that approximately 80 percent of
Michigan prisoners did not complete high school.
The average cost for housing and maintaining one
prisoner for 1 year is $22,800, while the average
cost per year to educate a child is only $4,000.*'
The cost for one child in a State juvenile facility is
approximately $52,000 per year; in a private facil-
ity, the cost is about $48,000 per year.*®
Beardmore, too, stated that the State board of
education was concerned about students being
"pushed out" of school, luid its effect on the quality
of education in the State.
We understand that there are variations in the number
of students who are expelled or suspended and that
there are such things as student being pushed out of
school, not dropping out. . . . It is a . . . practice which
43 Janet Cooper, transcnpt, p. 146.
44 Tran.vnpt, p. 147.
46 Chap. 6 of this report examines the relationship of disability and discipline.
46 Tranacript, p. 161.
47 H. Lynn Johndahl. "The Education ABBurance Act, HB 5096, An Art to assure a better education and a brighter future for
aD Michigan children," Lansing, MI, 1990, p. 14.
48 Ibid-
54
the State board of education strongly opposes. [We] successful in learning what it is they need to know to be
recommend a number of alternatives for the school successful adults. We know that expulsion and suspen-
distncts so that we can assure that all students will be sion are not the way to assure those final outcomes *^
49 Transcript, p. 23.
55
Chapter 5
The Federal Government and the Enforcement of
Nondiscriminatory School Discipline
Two Federal agencies have responsibilities in
monitoring the administration of discipline
by local school districts. The Office for Civil
Rights (OCR), U.S. Department of Education, en-
forces the Federal statutes that prohibit discrim-
ination in programs and activities receiving Fed-
eral funds. Kenneth A. Mines, Regional Director
of OCR, stated, "Discriminatory discipline prac-
tices violate Title VI [of the Civil Rights Act of
1964] and obstructs the meaningful access to ed-
ucational opportunity."' Title VI reads:
Sec. 601. No person in the United States shall, on the
ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to, discrimination under any program or ac-
tivity receiving Federal financial assistance. . . .
Sec. 606. For the purposes of this title, the term 'pro-
gram or activity and the term "program' mean all of
the operations of . . . (2)(B) a local educational agency
(as defined in section 198<aK 10) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965), system of vocational
education, or other school system; . . . ^
The Community Relations Service (CRS), U.S.
Department of Justice, provides services, includ-
ing conciliation, mediation, and technical assis-
tance, directly to people and their communities to
help them resolve conflicts and tensions arising
from actions, policies, and practices perceived to
be discriminatory on the basis of race, color, or
national origin. It has the authority to mediate
issues of discipline in school districts where there
are allegations of racial and/or ethnic disparity.
The authority of the CRS also derives from the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title X reads:
Sec. lOOl.(a) There is hereby established .
nity Relations Service.
. a Commu-
Sec. 1002. It shall be the ftinctjon of the Service to
provide assistance to communities or persons therein
in resolving disputes, disagreements, or difficulties re-
lating to discriminatory practices based on race, color,
or national origin. . . . ^
Office for Civil Rights
U.S. Department of Education
The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) is the Federal
agency primarily responsible for enforcing civil
rights laws concerning elementary and secondary
schools. As such, they are charged with ensuring
equality of opportunity in what is a critical func-
tion of State and local government and arguably
the government's primary means of helping mi-
nority and disadvantaged children succeed in life.
The OCR is intended to be the front-line Federal
agency to eradicate barriers that impair educa-
tional opportunities for minority students.
CR enforces several Federal statutes in the
area of education, including title VI of the 1964
Civil Rights Act, title DC of the Education Amend-
ments of 1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of
1975. Discrimination on the basis of race, color,
and national origin is prohibited by title VI; sex
Testimony before the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, factfinding meetings, Lansing,
MI, Aug. 3, 1994, and Ann Arbor. MI, Aug. 4. 1994, transcript p. 77 (hereafter referred to as Transcript).
2 Pub. L. No. 88-352. July 2. 1964, 78 SUt. 241.
3 Ibid.
56
discrimination is prohibited by title DC of the Ed-
ucation Amendments of 1972; discrimination on
the basis of disability is prohibited by section 504;
and age discrimination is prohibited by the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975. OCR has the author-
ity to enforce these laws in all programs and
activities that receive funds from the U.S. Depart-
ment of Education. These include programs and
activities operated by institutions and agencies,
such as State education agencies, elementary and
secondary schools, colleges and universities, and
vocational schools.
Title VI is the major piece of legislation that is
enforced by the OCR. According to Mines:
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 governs and
enriches the efforts of States and local communities to
identify challenging educational standards and to
equip students to meet them. Title VI requires that all
students be provided equal educational opportunities
without regard to race, color, nr national origin.*
OCR is organized into 10 regional offices that report to
our headquarters in Washington ID.C] Michigan is
covered by the Region V office as are Minnesota, Wis-
consin, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Region V has a
primary office in Chicago and a field office in Cleveland,
which . . . handles secondary education matters in
Michigan and Ohio.^
The Cleveland district oflRce of the OCR has
jurisdiction over the States of Michigan and Ohio
in elementary and secondary education matters.
In the office are 25 staff, including support staff,
investigators, supervisors, and a legal staff. Addi-
tional stafTis in the Chicago regional office, which
has oversight responsibilities for the Cleveland
district office and jurisdiction over Indiana,
Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin.
Currently, the Cleveland district office is di-
vided into two teams, the Michigan team and the
Ohio team. The Michigan team has one super-
visor, one clerical worker, eight investigators, and
two attorneys. The Ohio team has one supervisor,
two clerical workers, seven investigators, and two
attorneys. In case of work overflow, adjustments
are made between the two teams and between the
district office and the regional office in terms of
staff and work tissignments.®
A potent enforcement tool of the OCR is its
ability to terminate a school district's Federal
funding. In the 1970s the OCR's willingness to
defer or terminate funding and to threaten such
terminations caused many school districts to com-
ply with provisions of civil rights statutes.
Zweifler testified that in the area of disparate
school discipline, the efforts of OCR and other
enforcement agencies are crucial:
[The Student Advocacy Center] is not funded. We do
both individual case advocacy and we do throughout
the State and we do our best to monitor policies and
practices and we receive hundreds of similar calls. . . .
We cannot represent these children without the help of
the agencies, agencies mandated to protect the kids. It
is impossible.
OCR investigates complaints filed by individu-
als, or their representatives, who believe that
they have been discriminated against because of
race, color, national origin, sex, disability, or age.
The Office also initiates compliance reviews of
recipient institutions and agencies, and monitors
the progress in eliminating discriminatory prac-
tices of institutions and agencies that are im-
plementing plans negotiated by OCR. First at-
tempts at resolving problems uncovered during
compliance reviews are through negotiation. If
problems cannot be resolved through negotiation,
then OCR initiates enforcement proceedings.
Mines described the compliance review priorities.
OCR is currently implementing a strategic enforce-
ment plan which targets several significant civil rights
issues for a concentrated effort4ncluding compliance
review investigations and technical assistance
4 Transcript, p. 77.
5 Ibid., p. 78-79.
6 Ibid., p. 110-11.
7 Ibid., p. 59.
57
activities. These issues were identified after wide-rang-
ing consultation with parents, advocacy groups, educa-
tors, State and local agencies, OCR and department of
education offices, and other members of the civil rights
and education communities. Our current highest pnor-
ities are:
• overrepresentation of minority students in special
education classes and programs;
• uses of testing that discnminate on the basis of race,
color, national origin, or sex;
• underrepresentation of minority students and wo-
men in mathematics and science and high tech courses;
and
• special language assistance to limited-English profi-
cient national origin minnnty students.*
On December 11, 1990, OCR released its Na-
tional Enforcement Strategy for FYs 1991 and
1992. In that strategy, OCR set out its enforce-
ment goals for the next 2 fiscal years and prom-
ised a "more comprehensive and balanced en-
forcement strategy to supplement, and
complement, OCR's complaint investigation pro-
gram [and thus] enable OCR to focus its available
resources on many important issues that do not
usually arise through complaints and to initiate
investigations of broader impact than are found in
most complaint allegations."®
For FY 1991, OCR listed seven strategic prior-
ities the agency would emphasize in its planned
activities to ensure equal education opportunity:
1. Equal educational opportunities for national
origin minority and Native American students
who are limited-English proficient;
2. Ability grouping that results in segregation
on the basis of race and national origin;
3. Racial harassment in educational institu-
tions;
4. Responsibilities of school systems to provide
equal educational opportunities to pregnant
students;
5. Appropriate identification for special educa-
tion and related services for certain student
populations, e.g., 4,32 'crack babies" and home-
less children with handicaps;
6. Discrimination on the basis of sex in athlet-
ics; and
7. Discrimination on the basis of race in admis-
sions programs and in the provision of financial
assistance to undergraduate and graduate stu-
dents.'°
For its program year in FY 1992 OCR identi-
fied six priority issues of concern for the agency,
five of which potentially affected elementary and
secondary schools. One of these priority issues
was discrimination in student discipline.
1. Overinclusion of minority students in special
education classes;
2. Sexual harassment of students;
3. Student transfer and school assignment
practices that result in the illegal resegrega-
tion of minority students;
4. Discrimination on the basis of race and na-
tional origin in student discipline; and
5. Equal opportunities for minorities and
women to participate in math and science
courses."
The Advisory Committee notes that school dis-
cipline was dropped as a priority issue in the 1993
strategic plan. Mines acknowledged that in recent
years, responding to community concerns over
increases in violence in schools and other safety
issues, many school districts throughout the
country have instituted stricter disciplinary
codes. In many districts, these more stringent
codes are resulting in more suspensions and ex-
pulsions. Since minority and nonminority chil-
dren are disciplined for all types of reasons and
under all kinds of circumstances, as a matter of
Ibid., pp. 79-80.
US. Department of Education, OITioe of Assistant Secretary forCiviJ ^\g\it». National Enforcement Strategy Office for Civil
RighmFYs 1991-1992 (Dec. 11. 1990).
Ibid.
rbid-, emphasis on school discipline added.
58
course these actions do not involve the OCR. How-
ever, according to Mines:
When discipline is imposed on the basis of race, color,
or national origin in federally assisted education pro-
grams, civil rights issues covered by title VI arise.
While frequency of discipline alone is not enough evi-
dence to establish a violation, statistics about the im-
pact of discipline practices upon minority students pro-
vide an indicator of possible civil nghts compliance
issues.
Statistics are frequently relied on as indicators of pos-
sible discrimination in discipline. Studies conducted
since the early 1970s have shown that minority chil-
dren are being disciplined more frequently, and in some
situations, receive more severe penalties than non-
minonty students.
For example, according to studies by the OCR and the
Children's Defense Fund in the 1970s and 1980s, Afri-
can American students were more likely to be referred
for suspension than white students. The 1988 OCR
Elementary and Secondary School District Civil Rights
Survey of 4,556 school districts showed that black stu-
dents comprised 21.4 percent of the total school enroll-
ment, but received over 38 percent of all suspensions
while white students, making up over 61 percent of the
total enrollment, received 48 percent of total suspen-
sions.
According to the 1990 OCR survey . . . white students
were 68 percent of the total enrollment and got 54
percent of the susjjensions. Afncan Amencan students
receive 32 percent of the suspensions, double their 16
percent national enrollment. Suspension rates for His-
panics and other minority groups were very close to the
enrollment percentages.'^
Nationally for the 1992 OCR survey . . . African Amer-
ican students were 16 percent of the total school popu-
lation and received 34 percent of all suspensions. White
students were 67 percent of the enrollment and got 51
percent of the suspensions.'^
Mines acknowledged that the OCR data for
Michigan revealed a similar pattern. The 1992
OCR survey of Michigan elementary and second-
ary schools showed whites being 80 percent of the
student population and recipients of 71 percent of
the disciplinary suspensions. African Americans
were the group receiving the most disproportion-
ate discipline. They were 15 percent of the stu-
dent population, and received 25 percent of school
suspensions.
Asians were 2 percent of the student popula-
tion and received less than 1 percent of school
suspensions. American Indians were 1 percent of
the student population and received 1 percent of
the suspensions. Hispanics received 3 percent of
the suspensions, and were just 2 percent of the
student population (see table 5-2).
Mines discussed the OCR's involvement in
school discipline issues. In the past the OCR has
conducted both complaint investigations and com-
pliance reviews, involving possible discrimination
in discipline, in region V. The complaints have
been generated by minority parents asking OCR
to investigate what they consider to be discrimi-
natory treatment of their children.
According to OCR regional records, in the 3-
year period, June 1, 1991, to June 30, 1994, there
were 346 complziints filed against Michigan pub-
he school institutions. Of those 346 complaints,
outside of special education, just 6 were related to
student discipline. This impUes that less than 2
percent of all complaints received by the OCR
concerning discrimination in education opportu-
nity in Michigan had to do with allegations of
disparate discipUne.
Moreover, even though the statistics generated
by the OCR and other studies show African Amer-
ican students being the group suffering the most
disproportionate discipline, only half of the dis-
cipline complaints concerned African American
students. Three of the six discipline complaints
alleging discrimination concerned African Ameri-
can students, two concerned American Indian
students, and one concerned a white student.'*
Mines admitted that the small number of dis-
cipline related complaints may stem from few
12 Transcnpt, pp. 83-84.
13 Ibid.
59
TABLE 5-1
National Comparison of White and Black Student Suspension Rates
Enrollment rate
Suspension rate
Whrte
Back
White Black
1988
61%
21%
48% 38%
1990
68%
16%
54% 32%
1992
67%
16%
51% 34%
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR, from OCR data.
TABLE 5-2
OCR Survey of School Discipline. Michigan, 1992
American Indian
Asian
Hispanic
Black
White
Membership
16,972
24,533
30,283
237,533
1,257,032
Rate
1%
2%
2%
15%
80%
Suspension
797
307
2,215
19,093
53,757
Rate
1%
0%
3%
25%
71%
Numbers may not add to total due to rounding and reporting errors.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. 1992 Elementary and Secondary School Civil Rights
Compliance Report, Projected Values for the State of Michigan.
individuals knowing about the existence of the
OCR. Mines admitted as nnuch.
We have thought in the past, that because we have
been enforcing this since 1964 that everyone knew that
we existed. We found out that they did not So what
we had begun to do is getting focus groups, in other
words, parents, teachers, advocacy groups, meeting
with them, trying to find out their concerns and also
through our technical assistance program, just go out
and meet with parent groups and to send the word out
on what the rights are and what our tigency is all
about. . . . And also I think we need to use the news
media better, let people know that we are out there. '^
OCR Compliance Reviews
Mines discussed school discipline as a civil
rights issue. He said that the issue first arose in
the context of school desegregation, reaching a
high point in the 17 southern and border States
during the 1971-72 school year. There were re-
ports from OCR regional offices of HEW which
were monitoring implementation of desegrega-
tion plans and conducting onsite reviews that
school systems were discriminating against black
students in applying discipline. Also, in enacting
the Emergency School Aid Act of 1972 Congress
expressed its concern about testimony regarding
discriminatory expulsions and suspensions.*'
U Ibid., p. 103.
16 Ibid., pp. 105-06.
16 Ibid., p. 81.
60
According to Mines, OCR has recently been
actively involved with discipline issues:
In the past, OCR conducted complaint investigation
and compliance reviews involving possible discrimina-
tion in discipline. Many of the complaints are filed by
minority parents who are asking OCR to investigate
what they consider to be discriminatory treatment of
their children.
OCR has fdso conducted a full compliance review inves-
tigation under title VI of the disciplinary pohaes and
practices in school districts. Districts have been se-
lected for discipline compliance reviews on the basis of
pattern of complaints for a penod of time, information
from OCR surveys. State data or other sources showing
an unusually high suspension/expulsion rate for minor-
ity students, or information from parents, organiza-
tions, and others.
These investigations involve massive data collection,
indepth statistical analysis, and extensive interviews
of students, teachers, administrators, and ptirents for a
wide range of legal and factual issues To investigate
racially different treatment in disciphne, OCR covers
three areas: discipline rules and practices, referrals,
and the imposition of sanctions. '^
Federal officials with the Department of Edu-
cation further stated that OCR, with respect to
the administration of discipline rules and prac-
tices, examines several facets of discipline. This
includes doing an analysis of whether discipline
policies and procedures are racially neutral in
content. In examining the basis for referrals, OCR
examines whether there are disproportionate re-
ferrals for minority students for subjective as op-
posed to objective offenses. Finally, OCR deter-
mines whether minority and nonminority stu-
dents are being administered similar disciplinary
sanctions for similar offenses. Similarity includes
both the type of punishment, i.e., suspension, and
also the severity of the punishment, i.e., days
suspended.'*
According to Mines, from 1980 to 1992 OCR
investigations of alleged civil rights violations
were restricted to the different treatment model.
The agency was required to show that a minority
student received different treatment from a simi-
larly situated nonminority. The Attorney General
has issued a memorandum to Federal depart-
ments and agencies directing them to also use the
disparate impact approach in enforcing civil
rights.'^
A disparate impact approach may include a
prima facie case dependent upon statistical evi-
dence that a district's discipline system, or a com-
ponent practice, although facially neutral, pro-
duces a significant, adverse, disparate impact
upon minority students. With the prima facie case
established, OCR would examine whether the
school district could produce sufficient evidence
showing the discipline system or component is
educationally justified.^
The Advisory Committee examined the num-
ber and type of OCR compliance reviews nation-
wide, in region V, and in Michigan for the years
1991-92, 1992-93, and 1993-94. This period in-
cluded a time when a strategic priority of the U.S.
Department of Education was "discrimination on
the basis of race and national origin in student
discipline."^'
17 Ibid., pp. 85-86.
18 Ibid., pp. 86, 87. and 88.
Ibid., p. 90. The mernorandum from the Attorney General reads: "Enforcement of the disparate impact provisions is an
essential component ofan efTective civil rights compliance program. Individuals continue to be denied, on the basis of their
race, color, or national ongin. the full and equal opportunity to participate in or receive the benefits of programs assisted by
Federal funds. Frequently discnmination results from poHcies and practices that are neutral on their face but have the effect
of discriminating. Those policies and practices must be eliminated unless they are shown to be necessary to the program's
operation and there is no less discriminatory alternative." Office of the Attorney General, Memorandum for Heads of
Departments and Agencies that Provide Federal Financial Assistance, July 14, 1994.
Ibid., pp. 91-92.
U.S. Department of Education, OrPice of Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, National Enforcement Strategy Office for Civil
61
The Cleveland district oflRce of the OCR has
recently completed three compliance reviews in-
vestigating the issue of disparate discipline. Two
of the reviews were initiated by the district office,
and one was the result of a complaint filed with
the oflRce. The three reviews were of school dis-
tricts located in Ohio, Youngstown, Euclid, and
Cleveland Heights-University Heights. There
have been no reviews by OCR of siny Michigan
school district regarding its administration of dis-
cipline.
In the three reviews, OCR sought to determine
whether the district's disciplinary policy and
practices and the imposition of disciplinary sanc-
tions result in discrimination against black stu-
dents on the basis of race, in violation of title VI
of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. A violation was found
in one of the school districts, and the district
agreed to engage in action-oriented programs. No
violation was found in the other two Ohio school
districts.
In the course of the investigation of each dis-
trict, OCR:
• examined the district's disciplinary code;
• interviewed teachers regarding their under-
standing and administration of the code;
• analyzed the number of discipline referrals
by race;
• analyzed whether, after referral, black stu-
dents receive equal penalties to those im-
posed against white students for the same
disciplinary offense.
• analyzed the discipline referrals of teachers
identified as making a great number of re-
ferrals, and interviewed those teachers;
• analyzed enrollment and referrals by race for
Lee House sind Cedar House, district alter-
native education placements;
• examined suspension and expulsion hear-
ings;
• interviewed students; and
• asked school officials for an explanation for
the disparate number of discipline referrals
meted out to black students.^
Community Relations Service
U.S. Department of Justice
Unlike OCR, the Community Relations Service
(CRS) mediates racial conflicts in a nonenforce-
ment manner, and has successfully intervened in
school discipline disputes in Michigan. In 1994
CRS mediated a student conflict in a public school
in Michigan. The involvement of CRS followed a
series of student conflicts with racial overtones
that culminated in the expulsion from school of
two African American students. The mediation
involved a series of discussion sessions that re-
sulted in a letter of understanding signed by rep-
resentatives from the Kentwood School District,
and involved students, parents, and community
representatives.^ The letter of understanding is
in appendix VI.
The CRS carries out conflict resolution services
by mediation professionals located in 10 regional
offices and three field offices. Michigan operations
are served by the Midwest Region, which has its
offices in Chicago, Illinois. Five conciliation spe-
ciahsts are assigned to the region. A field office
operates in Detroit, Michigan, under the jurisdic-
tion of the Chicago regional office. It is the only
field office in the Midwest Region, and the one
Righu FYs 1991-1992 (Dec. 11, 1990).
U.S. Department oT Education, OCR, Cleveland district ofTice, investigative report for the Cleveland Heights-University
Heights School District.
Letter of Understanding Between Kentwood School District & Concerned Students and Parents, June 8, 1994, Midwestern
Regional Office, USCCR, files (hereafter referred to as CRS Letter of Understanding). Signing the agreement for the
Kentwood F*ublic School Distnct were: Mary Lieker, superintendent; Linda David, school board member; Rosemary Ervine,
assistant superintendent for instruction; Patricia Brown, principal; Larry Corbett, principal. Students, parents, and
members of the community signing the agreement included: Linda Hitchcock, parent; Kamau Hosey, parent; Mrs.
Blasaingame, parent; Curt Agard. student; Tia Bates, student; NeUie Blue, NAACP; Rodney Brooks, Urban League; and
Billy Taylor, community represcnLative. Witnessmgon behalf of the CRS was Gustavo Gaynett, director of the Detroit field
office.
62
conciliation specialist assigned to the office has
MichigEin for his area of responsibility.^*
CflS is alerted to community racial problems or
violence through news media reports, staff obser-
vation, or through requests for assistance from
State and local officials and community leaders or
individuals. CRS follows a systematic process for
conflict resolution. Conciliators first file alerts
when they identify conflicts resulting from actual
or perceived discriminatory practices based on
race, color, or national origin. Assessments are
conducted to confirm initial information reported
through alerts and to determine whether CRS
should intervene.^
Racial tensions on college or university cam-
puses and at elementary, middle, or high schools
are specific conflicts the CRS mediates. Moreover,
the issue of school discipline is of particular inter-
est to CRS. In its public information pamphlet.
Catalyst for Calm, the service asks:
Have you seen an increase in racial fights in your
school? Do members of one racial or ethnic group seem
to be disciplined more severely than another for the
same offenses? Are there allegations of racial favorit-
i8m?26
Alerts with respect to incidents at educational
institutions is a significant part of the CRS alert
activity. In fiscal year 1993 the total number of
alerts in Michigan was 77. Fifteen (19.4 percent)
involved education establishments, though none
were concerned with school discipline. The issues
included:
- employee layoffs,
- minority faculty members and minority-
oriented classes (2),
-racial climate on campus, including fights (5),
- racial slurs by officials (2),
- bias in testing (2), and
- location of private schools (3).^'
The total number of alerts in Michigan during
fiscal year 1994 was 56. Eleven CRS alerts (19.6
percent) involved educational institutions, includ-
ing three school discipline issues. These included:
- racial harassment/slurs (3),
- discipline after racial fights (3),
- curriculum and services (2),
- minority student-administration tensions
(2), and
- athletic league districting.
In the past 5 years, the Kentwood school dis-
trict is the only public school district mediation in
Michigan which resulted in a signed letter of un-
derstanding among the involved psulies.^ Cen-
tral to the issue in the district was the allegation
of disparate discipline, particularly suspensions
and expulsions, being given to black students,
who allegedly were responding to racial taunts
and intimidation from their white peers. The let-
ter of understanding states:
Following a series of student conflicts with racial over-
tones which culminated in the expulsion from school of
two African American students, the Community Rela-
tions Service of the United States Department Of Jus-
tice convened a number of discussion sessions with
representatives from the Kentwood school district in
Michigan and students, parents and community repre-
sentatives of two African American organizations.
The Kentwood school district abuts Grand Rap-
ids in the western part of the lower peninsula. The
24 The Detroit field ofTice is located at 211 W. Ford St., Suite 1404, Detroit, MI.
25 U.S. Department of Justice, Community Relations Service, The Community Relations Service . . . Catalyst for Calm
(hereafter referred to as Catalyst for Calm), p. 5.
26 Ibid., p. 2.
27 Community Relations Service, U.S. Department of Justice, letter to Constance M. Davis, Mar. 23, 1995, Midwestern
Regional Office files.
28 The Michigan field office in recent years also negotiated a written agreement at Obvet College after the school experienced
racial strife on campus. In addition, the Michigan field office has been involved in other mediations involving school districts,
which did not result in a formal written agreement.
63
TABLE 5-3
Poverty Rates for Students in the Kentwood Schools
Number
Rate
White
512
8.3
African American
92
16.9
American Indian
16
42.1
Hispanic
25
11.6
Asian
6
2.7
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR. from State of Michigan data.
district's 7,231 students are predominantly non-
minority; 6,124 (84 percent) are white, 544 (9
percent are African American), 215 (3 percent)
are Hispanic, 225 (3 percent are Asian), and the
remaining 123 students (2 percent) are American
Indians and other ethnic minorities.
The district is relatively prosperous; just 651 (9
percent) of the district's 7,231 school children live
in poverty compared with a national children pov-
erty rate of 19.9 percent.^ Of those children living
below the poverty line, 15.1 percent of white chil-
dren, 44.2 percent of black children, and 39.7
percent of Hispanic children are in poverty.^' The
number of black, Hispanic, and American Indian
children dominate the children in poverty. Seven-
teen percent of the district's African American
children, 42 percent of the American Indian chil-
dren, and nearly 12 percent of the Hispanic chil-
dren live in poverty (see table 5-3).
Sixteen separate issues were addressed in the
letter of understanding, citing the concern of the
minority community smd promised actions by the
school district. The issues included:
( 1) allegations of the existence of white suprem-
acy groups in the local school system,
(2) racial slurs directed at minority students,
(3) the enactment of a formal racial harass-
ment policy,
(4) minority representation in the student
council,
(5) need for a public assembly to address racial
issues,
(6) the school district allowing STAR (Students
Together Against Racism) to participate as a
recognized campus group,
(7) recognition and awareness of the contribu-
tions of minorities to the American society in
the curriculum,
(8) the authority and power of a dean of stu-
dents,
(9) faculty and staff cultural sensitivity,
( 10) minority role models,
(11) multicultural curriculum,
(12) race/ethnic diversity training for school
employees,
(13)underutilization of minorities in the school
district,
28 CRS Letter ofUnderatanding.
30 Sute of Michigan. Information Center/DMB. Michigan School Diatrict 1989 Poverty/Relevant Children/Raoe & Hispanic
Ongin, p 6.
31 US. Depertmenl of Commerce, Sutistical Abatract of the United States, 1992, No. 718. ChOdren Below The Poverty Level
by Race and Higpanic Origin; 1970 to 1990. p. 466.
64
(14) the employment ofa permanent director of The agreement never discussed the issue of
multicultural development, discipline, suspensions, or the expulsions of mi-
(15) school district community forums, distinct nority students that precipitated the involvement
in format and procedures from school board of the CRS. Gaynett explained the reason for this,
meetings, at which members of the public "CRS did not address the merits or lack of merits
can informally ask questions, express opin- of the precipitating instance, the expulsion, be-
ions, and receive information, and cause it was addressed through the appropriate
(16) the amount of security at the schools. internal school procedures. "^^
32 Gustavo Gaynelte, telephone interview, Jan. 12, 1995.
65
Chapter 6
Discipline and Students with Disabilities
In enacting section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973,' the Congress recognized that many
individuals with disabilities have been victims
of discrimination. Harvey Burkhour of Michigan
Protection and Advocacy testified that with the
passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) in 1990, Congress recognized that "individ-
uals with disabilities are a discreet and insular
minority who have been faced with restrictions
and limitations [and] subjected to a history of
purposeful unequal treatment"^
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
was the first Federal civil rights law protecting
the rights of individuals with disabilities. Educa-
tion programs receiving Federal money are sub-
ject to this legislation, as the act provides:
No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in
the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of . . .
disability, be excluded from the participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any program or activity receiving Federal finan-
cial assistance.''
Section 504 regulation applies to preschool, ele-
mentary, secondary, and adult education pro-
grams and activities that receive or benefit from
Federal financial assistance and to recipients that
operate, or that receive or benefit from Federal
financial assistance and to recipients that oper-
ate, or that receive or benefit from Federal finan-
cial assistance.
1 PubhcL. No. g.'i-m.
For purposes of public educational services, a
qualified person is an individual with a disability
who is: ( 1) of an age during which persons without
a disabibty are provided such services, (2) of any
age during which it is mandatory under State law
to provide such services to persons with disability,
or (3) a person for whom a State is required to
provide a firee appropriate public education under
the 1990 Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA).*
The term disability refers to anyone with a
physical or mental impairment that substantially
Hmits or restricts one or more major life activities.
The term physical or mental impairment in-
cludes, but is not limited to: speech, hearing, vi-
sual and orthopedic impairments, cerebral palsy,
epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis,
cancer, diabetes, heart disease, mental retarda-
tion, emotional illness, and specific learning dis-
abilities such as perceptual handicaps, dyslexia,
minimal brain dysfunction, and developmental
aphasia.^
Each school district that operates a federally
assisted public elementary or secondary educa-
tion program must provide a free and appropriate
public education to each qualified person in its
jurisdiction, regardless of the nature or severity of
the person's disability. The provision of an appro-
priate education is the provision of regular or
special education and related aids and services
such that:
2 Testimf)ny before the Michigan Advisory Committee to the U.S. CommiBsion on Civil Rights, factrinding meetings, Aug. 3,
1994, Lansing. MI. and Aug. 4. 1994, Ann Arbor, MI, transcript p. 117 (hereafter referred to as Tranacript).
3 Pub L. No. 9a-112. Sept. 26, 197.3. 87 SUt. 365.
4 The IDEA pn)vide8 for Federal finanaal assistance to States to ensure that each child with handicapfs) receives a free pubUc
education. Pub. L. No. 101-476. Oct. 30. 1990, 104 Stat. 1142.
5 U.S. Department of Education. Office for Civil Rights, The Rights of Individuals with Handicaps Under Federal Law, p.l.
66
• Educational services are designed to meet
children with disabilities individual educa-
tional needs as adequately as the needs of non-
disabled persons are met.
• Each child with a disability is educated with
nondisabled children, the maximum extent ap-
propriate to the needs of the child with the
disability.
• Nondiscriminatory evaluation and place-
ment procedures are established to guard
against misclassification or misplacement of
students, and a periodic reevaluation is con-
ducted of students who have been provided
special education or related services.
• Due process procedures are established so
that parents and guardians can review educa-
tional records and challenge evaluation and
placement decisions made with respect to their
children, and can participate and be repre-
sented by counsel in any subsequent impartial
hearing.^
Section 504 and IDEA prohibit public school
districts from excluding handicapped persons,
and directs public school districts to take into
account the needs of the student in determining
the aid, benefits, and placement of the child. Since
disciplinary actions are often student placement
decisions, the Federal laws mandate additional
protections to prevent discrimination on the basis
of disability when suspension or expulsion are
considered.
The IDEA recognizes each student's parent as
the primary advocate for that child in the school
setting. Since not all children have a parent to
function as an advocate, the IDEA mandates sur-
rogate parents to fulfill this role for such chil-
dren.' The public school district is responsible for
identifying children who qualify for a surrogate
parent and assigning one to the child.*
Although the IDEA was passed in 1990, the
Michigan Department of Education did not recog-
nize surrogate parents nor did it have any policy
on this subject until August 1992. As Burkhour
testified:
[Michigan Protection and Advocacy] realized . . . back
in 1987 that Michigan did not recognize, nor have
available the provisions of surrogate parents to chil-
dren. Mind you, this was 12 years after the Federal law
was first passed. We proceeded to advocate to remedy
this problem. Our efforts included both informal and
formal efforts, including complaints to the Michigan
Department of Education, U.S. Department of Educa-
tion, Office of Special Education Programs, and the
U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights.
We also testified in various arenas with the Office of
Special Education Programs about this problem. The
Michigan Department of Education finally im-
plemented a surrogate parent policy in February 1993,
18 years after it became mandated in Federal law, 6
years after our agency raised the issue.
The Michigan State poHcy, which received ap-
proval fi-om the U.S. Department of Education,
Office of Special Education Programs, is limited,
however, only to those children whose parent's
rights have been terminated. This policy poten-
tially leaves many children without the protection
designed for them under the IDEA. According to
Burkhour:
The result of this practice is that many children who
are state wards and who have a disability are not
afforded the protection intended by IDEA, including in
the £irea of suspension and expulsion. We beHeve that
racial and ethnic minorities constitute a larger percent-
age of this population than is found in the general
population, although we do not have the statistics to
support our belief.'"
6 Ibid., p. 4.
7 34 CFR 300.514).
8 34 CFR 300.514 Cb).
9 TranscripU pp. 121-22.
10 Harvey Burkour, prepared gUteraent to the Michigan Advisory Committee to the USCCR, Ann Arbor, MI, Aug. 31, 1994,
Midwestern Regional OfTice. USCCR. files.
67
The outcome of this srituation is obvious. The suspen-
sion and expulsion of minorities based on disability,
including children who are racial/ethnic minorities is
excessive because they are not afforded the protections
of a Surrogate Parent as required by IDEA. The US.
Supreme Court established some very specific require-
ments for suspension and expulsion of students with
handicaps in Honig v. Doe, however it is crucial that the
child have an effective advocate present to insure that
those protections are followed."
Mack Cody, Association for Community Advo-
cacy, buttressed Burkhour's testimony. He stated
that many of the students who are expelled or
suspended from school have that discipline im-
posed on them as a result of the failure of the
pubhc school system to deliver appropriate spe-
cial education needs. There is a "willingness on
the part of educators to label certain behaviors as
being 'conduct disorder' as opposed to emotional
impairment when that behavior is exhibited by
persons of color."'^
Cody said evidence exists which suggests fac-
tors involved in a student's suspension or expul-
sion are factors for which appropriate services
should have been received from the school system.
Instead — similar to the allegations made by the
juvenile court — school systems ignore their re-
sponsibilities to the disabled student and transfer
children with whom they are having problems to
the State's department of social services.
In April of 1992, staS" from the Department of Social
Services for the Stat* of Michigan, proposed that the
Maxey Boys Training School which is essentially the
highest level of delinquency facility in this State for
male youths, proposed the creation of a special treat-
ment unit consisting of 140 beds . . . and these will be
primarily devoted to treatment of youths with emo-
tional impairments, developmental disabilities, and
other disabling conditions. So they clearly viewed a
substantial portion of the population that they were
serving as special need youth. . . .
In July of 1992 at a forum in which he was announcing
a new program to reduce the institutionalization of
delinquent youth of this State, Dr. Gerald Miller, direc-
tor of the Department of Social Services, attributed the
over-institutionahzation of delinquent youth in this
State . . . largely to the failure of the public school
systems in this State.
The youth that are institutionalized in this State, par-
ticularly the delinquency facihties are primarily people
of color. It does not take a sociologist to wedk through
Maxey Boys Training School to see that there is a
disparity institutionalization of youth of color as op-
posed to young white men. . . . Again we would submit
that many of these youths would not be in extended
facihties had the public school systems faithfully un-
dertaken their obligations under the IDEA and Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act.^^
The testimony and evidence regarding the dis-
abled student and discipline, and previous testi-
mony regarding minority discipline, prompted
the Advisory Committee to examine the relation-
ship between disability and discipline. The Advi-
sory Committee sought to determine whether ev-
idence exist showing students with disabilities
receiving disproportionately more discipline than
students without disabilities.
The Advisory Committee examined 1992 OCR
school survey data of middle schools and high
schools. The student enrollment, suspensions,
number of disabled students, and the number of
disabled students who received suspensions was
calculated. Ninety-four middle and high schools
in the survey had data for all four categories.**
The mean suspension rate of nondisabled stu-
dents was 11.7 percent, or almost 12 students per
100. The mean suspension rate for the same
schools of disabled students was 14.6 percent, a
suspension rate of almost 15 students per 100
enrolled disabled students. In addition, a high
and positive correlation (p=0.65) was found
1 1 Ibid. See also Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 ( 1988).
12 Ibid., p. 132.
13 Ibid,, pp. 128-30.
14 The 94 schools represented in the survey is not a random sample, and do not, therefore, represent a valid estimate of the
State Rchooi population and discipline activity.
68
TABLE 6 1
Suspension Rates of Nondisabled Students and Disabled Students
All schools in survey
Schools suspending
disabled students
Nondisabled
Rate Max.
11.6 49.7
15.7
Disabled
Rate Max.
14.6 68.2
49.7
25.5
68.2
Source: Midwestern Regional Office, USCCR, from OCR survey data.
between a school's suspension rate of the non-
disabled student population and its suspension
rate of disabled students.
Of the 94 schools with disabled students, 41
schools suspended no disabled students. When
these schools were excluded from the analysis, the
effect of suspension activity on disabled students
was more pronounced. In the group of 53 middle
and high schools who did suspend disabled stu-
dents, the nondisabled student body had a sus-
pension rate of 15.7 percent, or eilmost 16 stu-
dents per 100 enrolled. Disabled students were
suspended at a rate of 25.5 percent, a rate of one
in every four disabled students.
Both sets of statistics give preliminary indica-
tions that disabled students are being adversely
affected by school suspension policies. Among all
94 schools, the highest suspension rate for non-
disabled students was 49.7 percent, one suspen-
sion for every two students. The highest suspen-
sion rate found for disabled students was 68.2
percent, two suspensions for every three enrolled
disabled students (see table 6-1).
Burkhour concluded with a summation of
rights that are to be afforded students with dis-
abilities with respect to discipline matters. In his
opinion, there is a lack of enforcement of these
protections by both the State and the Federal
Government.
How many . . . children have disabilities and are eligi-
ble for special education is uncertain Children with
disabilities have been recognized as having additional
protection in the areas of disciplinary actions in
schools, particularly suspension and expulsion. These
children are not to be suspended or expelled or other-
wise removed from school as a disciplinary action for
more than an accumulation of 10 days in a given school
year
They are also to be provided additional due process
protection [which] includes the conducting of an indi-
vidualized educational planning meeting if [the school]
is considering removal of the child from school. And at
that meeting three questions have to be answered. Is
the child's disability properly identified? Are the pro-
grams and services that the child is receiving appropri-
ate for the child? And thirdly, is the behavior that the
child is going to be disciplined for, a manifestation or
related in some way to [the child's] disability? . . . '^
In summation I think the problem is one of inadequate
leadership and enforcement on the part of both State
and Federal agencies who are responsible to handle
these matters. . . . You have heard from other people
testifying, including our own superintendent of pubhc
instruction, that our State board of education takes the
position of advisory rather than mandating action and
activities by local school districts, and it only serves to
compound the problem.
15 Transcript, pp. 12^-24.
16 Ibid., pp. 126-27.
69
Chapter 7
Addendum
Subsequent to the Advisory Committee's
factfinding meetings in August 1994, three
significant events have occurred with respect
to school discipline. First, State legislation has
been enacted expanding the powers of local school
districts to suspend and expel students. Second,
the Michigan Department of Education task force
to study violence and vandalism in the schools
completed its work and issued public findings and
recommendations. Third, the Michigan Depart-
ment of Civil Rights has initiated specific pro-
gram activities to deal with disproportionate mi-
nority disciphne.
1. State Legislation and School
Discipline Act No. 328 of the Public
Acts of 1994
Prior to passage of P.A. 1994, No. 328, author-
ity to expel was limited to the district school
board. Effective January 1, 1995, the authority to
suspend or expel is expanded to other school offi-
cials and administrators as designated by the
local school board.
Sec. 1311.(1) Subject to subsection (2), the school board,
or the school distnct supenntendent, a school building
pnncipal, or another school district offiaa] if desig-
nated by the school board, may authonze or order the
suspension or expulsion from school of pupil guilty of
gross misdemeanor or persistent disobedience if, in the
judgment of the school board or ita designee, as appli-
cable, the interest of the school is served by the autho-
rization or order. . . . '
In addition. Act No. 328 mandates expulsion
for certain activities, removing local district dis-
cretion and latitude in those instances. Further,
the expulsion under Act No. 328 in one district is
applicable to all districts in the State (Act No. 328
is in appendix VII).
(2) If a pupil pMssesses in a weapon free school zone a
weapon that constitutes a dangerous weapon, or com-
mits arson in the school building or one the school
grounds, or rapes someone in the building or on school
grounds, the school board, or the designee of the school
board as described in subsection (1) on behalf of the
school board, shall expel the pupil from the school
disfrict permanently. . . . ^
(3) If an individual is expelled pursuant to subsection
(2), the expelling school district shall enter on the
individual's permanent record that he or she has been
expelled pursuant to subsection (2). Except if a school
district operates or participates in a program appropri-
ate for individuals expelled pursuant to subsection (2)
and in its discretion admits the individual to that pro-
gram, an individual exp>elled pursuant to subsection (2)
is expelled from all public schools in this state and the
officials of a school district shall not allow the individ-
ued to enroll in the school district unless the individual
has been reinstated under subsection (5) '
PA. 1994, No.328. §1311.(1).
Ibid.. Sec. 1311.(2). The act further reads a pupil may be exonerated if he/she clearly and convincingly establishes at least
1 of the following: "(a) The object or instrument was not possessed by the pupil for use as a weapon, or for direct or indirect
delivery to another person for use as a weapon, (b) The weapon was not knowiagly possessed by the pupil, (c) The pupil did
not know or have reason to know that the object or the instrument possessed by the pupil constituted a dangerous weapon.
(d) The weapon wax possessed by the pupil at the suggestion, request, direction of, or with the express permission of, school
or police authorities. *
Ibid., (3).
70
In contrast, the proposed Education Assurance
Act, first introduced in 1991 by representative H.
Lynn Jondahl, remains unenacted by the State
legislature/ It addresses four elements regarding
the issue of school discipline, emphasizing the
need for schools to be responsive to student rights
and the need for public education to provide alter-
native education programs rather than imposing
suspension and expulsion, which puts children
outside the control and influence of the school
environment. Under the proposed legislation,
each school district will:
(1) file an annual school exclusion report with
the State board of education and the public on
the numbers and percentage of students who
are suspended or expelled,
(2) adopt a written policy on suspensions and
expulsions that clearly explain students' rights
and responsibilities,
(3) follow the due process regulations provided
to ensure all suspended or expelled students
are accorded fundamental fairness protection,
and
(4) provide alternative education services for
suspended or expelled students.
In the rationale for the act, Jondahl reported
that, according to the 1986 OCR survey, Michigan
ranks ninth in the Nation for the highest use of
suspensions; the educational establishment dis-
proportionately disciplines African American
children, as black students are suspended at twice
the rate as white children. Further, the current
school system is not successful for a significant
proportion of students. Only 75 percent of
Michigan's children graduate from high school.
The social costs of that failure can be observed in
that nearly 80 percent of prison inmates in Mich-
igan do not have a high school diploma, and the
average annual cost for housing and maintaining
one prisoner is $22,800. In contrast, the average
cost per year to educate one child is $4,000.^
2. Michigan Department of Education
Study Group on Violence and
Vandalism
Responding to the increasing incidence of vio-
lence and vandalism in public schools and recog-
nizing the educational duty of the State with re-
spect to the children, in early 1994 the
department of education formed a study group on
violence and vandadism. The study group in-
cluded individuals from both inside and outside
the department.
On December 14, 1994, the study group
adopted a series of recommendations that were
submitted to the board of education in February
1995. The study group made recommendations to
the board in (1) definitions, (2) data collection,
(3) alternative education options, and (4) contin-
ued education for expelled students. The recom-
mendations of the study group are:
1. We recommend that "THE DATA COLLECTED BY
THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
REGARDING VIOLENCE AND VANDALISM ONLY
PERTAIN TO THE DEPARTMENT MANDATE AS
SET FORTH IN SECTION 158a IN THE STATE AID
ACT AND ANY OTHER STATE OR FEDERAL
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS." We recommend that the
reporting system for Section 158a be presented to the
Board in conjunction with this report.
2. We recommend to the state board of education for
action the uniform violence and vandalism definitions
to be used as guidelines by local school districts and as
part of the data collection activities as mandated in
Section 158a of the School Aid Act.
3. We recommend that the Michigan Department of
Education take immediate action to convene a task
force comprised of membership firom state and local
Departments of Social Services, Mental Health, juve-
nile and probate courts, and other appropriate agen-
cies, designed to develop interagency agreements to
provide alternative education options for suspended or
expelled Michigan students.
4 HB 5096, 1991. The proposed act and the rationale for its enactment were submitted as an exhibit by R. Zweifler.
5 HB 5096. The Education Assurance \ct,ABrtef Overview, p. 5.
71
4. We recommend to the Stat* Board of Education that
it take action to ensure that expelled students have
continued education by forming a Subcommittee of
practitioners from alternative educational and violence
prevention programs, local education agencies, colleges
and universities, state government, and private citi-
zens to review the state of alternative education and
violence prevention programs and, if necessary, make
recommendations for improvement.
A. Adopt a policy defining the charactenstics of
effective options.
B. Collect and support the dissemination of infor-
mation on local schools with model programs.
C. Compile and distribute a list of effective Mich-
igan programs.
D. Develop statewide program standards in line
with existing core curriculum, school improve-
ment, and accreditation initiatives.
E. Review existing interagency agreements be-
tween public agencies which offer programs to
insure that all students needing such programs
may have access to and benefit from them.
F. Review public funding structures supporting
current programs.
G. Compile data on student suspension, expul-
sion and referral to alternative and traditional
educational settings.
H. Review local procedures for moving students
between alternative and traditional educational
settings.
I. Determine what programs exist for youth in the
elementary grades, especially for students in kin-
dergarten through grade six.^
3. Michigan Department of Civil Rights
Special Program initiatives
In light of the Advisory Committee factfinding
meetings on school discipline, the Michigan De-
partment of Civil Rights (MDCR) has undertaken
several initiatives. In March 1995 nine depart-
ment st4iff were provided cross training in order
to be able to work more effectively between the
MDCR's enforcement bureau and its office of com-
munity services, which provides education and
training and promotes voluntary compliance with
civil rights laws in Michigan.
The MDCR has assigned one staff member to
coordinate a project on minority group suspen-
sions and expulsions. This staff member has re-
ceived training and attended institutes to learn of
discipline programs, policies, and activities which
have proven to be effective in several state sys-
tems and individual schools. Another assignment
of this staffmember has been to establish a formal
liaison relationship between the MDCR and the
Student Advocacy Center (SAC), and instruct
SAC staff on how to identify situations which may
fall within MDCR jurisdiction. The staff person is
also initiating information gathering meetings
with officials within the Michigan department of
education and educators within school districts
and at Michigan colleges and universities.^
6 MichigaiD Department of Education, Violence and Vandalism Study Group, memorandum, Dec. 22, 1994. The complete
memoraodum i.^ in app. VIII.
7 Nanelle L. Reynolds. lciu?r U. ConsUnoe M. Davia. May 12, 1995.
72
Chapter 8
Findings and Recommendations
Education of the citizenry is vital in a demo-
cratic society. Understanding this, the State
of Michigan encourages and provides for
public education in its constitution, with article
Vin devoted exclusively to education:
Sec. 1. Religion, morality and knowledge being neces-
sary to good government and the happiness of man-
kind, schools and the means of education shall forever
be encouraged.*
Sec. 2. The legislature shall mciintain and support a
system of free public elementary and secondary schools
as defined by law. Every school district shall provide for
the education of its pupils without discrimination as to
religion, creed, race, color or national origin.^
Within the provision of free public elementary
and secondary schools, it is clear that schools
must provide an environment that is safe and
conducive to learning and one in which order and
decorum are maintained.
In this report, the Advisory Committee has
examined discipline in Michigan public schools
and equal education opportunity. In 14 of the 17
years since the inception of the Gallup Education
Survey, student discipline has ranked as the sin-
gle greatest public concern regarding our nation's
schools.^ There is a growing concern in Michigan,
similar to sentiment found in other parts of the
Nation, over increasing violence and vandalism in
the schools.* School administrators have the right
and the obUgation to administer discipline. Tradi-
tionally this includes suspension and expulsion.
Recent legislation in the State emphasizes an
increased use of punitive discipline, i.e., suspen-
sion and expulsion.^ Recognizing that policies and
practices of school discipline, particularly suspen-
sions and expulsions, effect the general citizenry
of this State, the Advisory Committee offers find-
ings and recommendations regarding school dis-
cipline and equal education opportunity in four
areas:
1. the disproportionate impact of discipline on
minority students;
2. the Michigan Board of Education, the Mich-
igan Department of Education, and the
Michigan Department of Civil Rights;
3. the Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department
of Education, and the Community Relations
Service, U.S. Depairtment of Justice;
4. executive and legislative policies and out-of-
school suspension and expulsion policies.
1. The Disproportionate Impact of
Discipline on Minority Students
Finding 1(a). The Advisory Committee found
that minority students are disproportionately dis-
ciplined in the public schools. Studies from the
Law & Policy Institute and the Student Advocacy
Center, as well as independent analysis by the
1 Constitution of the State of Michigan, art. VIH, sec. 1.
2 Ibid., sec. 2.
3 See p. 2.
4 See: Pub. Act 328 (app. VII); Violence and Vandalism Study Group (app. VIII).
6 See: Beardmore comment, p. 6; IHib. Act 328, p. 97; and Mines cite, p. 59.
73
Advisory Committee support this finding.^ This
finding is further buttressed by the testimony of
teachers, administrators, and researchers.^ In ad-
dition, the Advisory Committee found a correla-
tion between student disability and the imposi-
tion of discipline.*
A finding of disproportionate discipline, how-
ever, is not tantamount to a conclusion of unlaw-
ful discriminatory treatment by school districts.
Discrimination is different treatment of individu-
als with similar circumstances and/or character-
istics based in part on the group status of the
individual, i.e., race or ethnicity.^
Even if it does not rise to the level of illegality,
the disproportionate application of discipline to
minority students is problematic for it has social
ramifications for the community at large. A dis-
proportionate application of discipline results in a
disproportionate number of individuals fi-om one
group being alienated from educational opportu-
nities. A disproportionate application of discipline
excludes a disproportionate number of individu-
als from one group fi-om a societal socialization
experience.
Finding 1(b). The Advisory Committee found a
positive relationship between the percentage of
the student enrollment that is minority and the
number of minority suspensions.'" This suggests
that an increasing minority student body in a
school may create a diflFerent milieu that threat-
ens at least some administrators and teachers.
Finding 1(c). The Advisory Committee found
some minority student behavior contributes to
discipline and punishment. This occurs, in part,
because such behavior is sometimes at odds with
behavior acceptable to the majority culture. Sul-
len looks, staring down the teacher, and other
behavior acceptable in parts of some minority
communities may result in discipline from teach-
ers and administrators, i)articularly in schools
and/or classrooms where such behavior is either
simply regarded as unacceptable or not under-
stood."
Recommendation 1. Local school districts
should collect discipline data, particularly sus-
pension and expulsion data, by race, ethnicity,
gender, and disability, and make such informa-
tion public.'^ The efforts by the Lansing School
District as noted in this report are an excellent
example.
Each local school district should examine this
disciphne data and determine if minorities are
disproportionately impacted. If minorities are
suffering an adverse impact, local districts should
learn the reasons for the imbalance, including:
• the relationship, if any, between discipline
rates in school buildings and the racial/ethnic
makeup of the building,
• the relationship, if any, between discipline
rates and the incidence of poverty,
• the relationship, if any, between discipline
rates and disability, and
• the relationship, if any, between discipline
rates and low self-esteem and/or parental/
adult involvement.
See: Law & Pobcy Ingtitute study, pp. 8-10; Advisory Committee analysis, pp. 13-14; Adviaory Committee secondary school
analysis, pp. 16-17; Student Advocacy Center survey data, pp. 17-18; Lansing school district data, p. 41; Tpsilanti school
district data, p. 35.
See: Boles conunent, p. 33; Francia comment, p. 39; Harner comment, p. 19; Gibson comment, p. 38; Mines comment, p. 59;
Rhode comment, p. 35; Scott comment, pp. 20-21; Smith-Sambe dte, p. 38; Williams comment, p. 36.
See sUtistical data, pp. 67-68.
See: Advisory Committee distinction, p. B; Mines comment, p. 59.
See: Law & Policy Institute study, pp. 8-10; Advisory Committee analysis, pp. 13-14.
See: Boles comment, p. 33; Cain comment, p. 43; Humes comment, p. 38; LasteT comment, p. 41; Pollard comment, p. 33.
12 Kenneth Mines testified that there is no Federal authority compelling local districts to maintain discipline data by race and
sex. (See Transcript, p. 108.)
74
2. Public Agencies of the State of
Michigan
Michigan Board of Education and the
Department of Education
Finding 2(a). In Michigan the local school dis-
tricts have final responsibility for the fair and
equitable administration of school discipline. ^^
Nevertheless, the State board of education and
the State department of education have the obU-
gation to provide "leadership and general super-
vision over all public education."'* This has not
been provided with respect to the issue of dispro-
portionate minority discipline.*^
The Michigan Department of Education, under
the auspices of the School Aid Act, is to collect
information on suspensions and expulsions from
all local school districts in a format that the de-
partment denotes. Such data collection has not
occurred and is still not occurring. Without data
there can be no analysis of the problem, no under-
standing, no corrective measures, and no im-
provement in the situation.'®
Moreover, the collection of such data is not an
onerous task for the department. The depart-
ment's own study group force on violence and
vandalism, in its recommendations, demon-
strated the resolve and the capacity to collect data
in this area.'^
Recommendation 2(a). At a minimum the
Michigan Department of Education must begin to
collect data from the local school districts on sus-
pensions and expulsions by race, national origin,
gender, and disability. It is an unacceptable
excuse that schools do not possess or will not
make such data available.
Additionally, such data should be available to
the public, so that independent analyses can be
conducted, particularly by researchers associated
with institutions of higher learning in the State.
Finding 2(b). The specific attention of local
boards of education, superintendents, and princi-
pals to the administration of school discipline
appears to reduce the total numbers of suspen-
sions and expulsions imposed.'^
Recommendation 2(b). The Michigan Depart-
ment of Education should analyze school disci-
pline data and should assist and work with dis-
tricts experiencing disproportionately high
suspension rates of minority students. As part of
its responsibility to provide leadership in educa-
tion for the State, the Michigan Board of Educa-
tion and the Michigan Department of Education
need to continue to inform and stress to local
school districts the provisions and need for com-
pliance with due process in the administration of
discipline.'^ Such rights routinely are most at risk
at the local level, and vigilance from State author-
ities in this regard can alleviate many of the
problems.
Finding 2(c). There has been a decline in the
funding from the State to the Michigan Depart-
ment of Education in recent years.^ The non-
staffing of the race relations and sex equity unit
in the Michigan Department of Education is a loss
of expert consulting and technical assistance at
13 See Schiller conunent, p. 27.
14 Constitution of the SUte of Michigan, Article Vm, } 3.
16 See: State authority, p. 45; State responsibility, p. 45; State data collection responsibility, p. 60; MI department of education
race relations and sex equity unit closure, p. 50; MI departtnent of education ombudsman unit, pp. 60-6 1; Schiller comments,
p. 50; Cain comments, p. 42.
16 See: MI data collection authority, p. 50; Schiller comments, p. 50; Cain comments, p. 43.
17 See: Study Group on Violence and Vandalism, 4G, p. 71 and app. VUI.
18 See: Cain conunents, p. 42; Farrell comments, p. 31 (and subsequent comments of Blair, p. 31, Foster, p. 32, and Rodriguez,
p. 31); Goodsman comments, p. 36; HaUk comments, p. 30.
19 See app. TV.
20 See: ProGt comments, p. 49; Stanley comments, p. 48; report pp. 49-60; table 4.1, p. 49.
75
the State level in equal education opportunity.^^
It was a unit ideal for foaising attention on the
issue of disproportionate minority discipline.
The creation by the Michigan Department of
Education of the ombudsman unit to assist par-
ents with general education concerns does pro-
vide parents and local school districts with some
guidance in equal education opportunity. This
unit, however, does not provide to local school
districts and parents specific expertise and coun-
sehng in equal education opportunity.^
Recommendation 2(c). The Advisory Commit-
tee recommends that a unit within the Michigan
Department of Education be given specific re-
sponsibility for: ( 1) collecting data on student dis-
cipline by race, £md (2) monitoring school districts
with disproportionate minority discipline. The ex-
istence of such a unit can serve both as a technical
resource for local school districts in the issue of
discipline and equal education opportunity as
well as demonstrate to the public the State's com-
mitment to equal education opportunity in this
matter.
Michigan Department of Civil Rights
Finding 2(d). The Michigan Department of Civil
Rights is the State agency with the authority and
responsibility to investigate discrimination in the
administration of school discipline. The depart-
ment accepts referrals from both the department
of education and individual complainants.^
Complaints alleging discrimination in the ad-
ministration of discipline have been a very small
part of the department's case load in recent
years.^ The department has been aware of the
problem of disproportionate discipline in local
school districts since the late sixties and did a
preliminary study of the issue at that time.*^
There has been no followup study by the depart-
ment.
Recommendation 2(d). The Michigan Depart-
ment of Civil Rights has begun collaboration ef-
forts with the State department of education and
local school districts to address problems of dis-
proportionate discipbne. The Committee com-
mends the department for these initiatives and
also recommends that the department of civil
rights obtain data on disproportionate minority
discipline from the State department of education
and/or the Federal government and do district
wide compliance reviews of student discipline.
In addition, it is recommended that a followup
study to its 1968 study on school discipline be
conducted. Such a study would again focus atten-
tion on this issue within the State and update the
previous study.
3. The Federal Government
Office for Civil Rights, U.S. Department of
Education
Finding 3(a). The OflRce for Civil Rights (OCR)
is the Federal agency with responsibility and au-
thority to examine allegations of discrimination
in the administration of discipline. It may conduct
an investigation upon the receipt of a complaint
or on its own initiative.^^
For fiscal year 1992-93, OCR made the school
discipline issue a priority.^^ However, in the last
4 years, no review of a Michigan school district in
the area of discipline has been conducted, while
the OCR district office with responsibibty for
Michigan has conducted three such reviews in its
local Ohio area.^
21 See
22 See
: p. 50; Profit comment, p. 49; Stanley comment, p. 48.
pp 50-51.
23 Seep 51.
24 Seep. 52.
26 See: pp. 53-64; app. V.
26 Sec pp 56-57.
27 See p. 59.
28 See p. 62.
76
OCR survey data shows disproportionate disci-
pline in the Michigan public school districts. The
schools in the survey meted out 20,702 suspen-
sions during the 1991-92 school year. White stu-
dents, who are 82.7 percent of the total sample
enrollment, received 68.4 percent of the suspen-
sions. Minority students, who are 17.3 percent of
the total sample enrollment, received 31.6 per-
cent of all suspensions.^
Recommendation 3(a). The Advisory Commit-
tee recommends that OCR examine its school dis-
cipline survey data and select at least one school
district in Michigan for a complitmce review of its
disciplinary practices. One compliance review of a
local district would elevate and bring attention to
this issue.
Finding 3(b). The data collected by the OCR is
survey data. It does not solicit information from
all the school districts in the State.^ In conjunc-
tion with this, the data that is collected under the
survey is not routinely used by the depsutment to
denote districts with disproportionate discipline,
or to find other relationships between discipline
and race/ethnicity.^'
Recommendation 3(b). The OCR should ex-
pand its survey to include all school districts in
the State. This would compel local school district
compliance with existing State law concerning
the collection of discipline data as well as provid-
ing OCR with a complete and valid data base of
discipline information.
In conjunction with this effort, district discipl-
ine rates should be reviewed for disproportionate
impact with respect to minority and/or disabled
students. Those districts with adverse impact
should be notified. This would alert school dis-
tricts to potential problems as well as put school
districts on notice that the administration of
discipline is an important equal education issue to
the agency.
Finding 3(c). The OCR and its mission do not
appear to be well-known to the public. Many par-
ents seem unfamiliar with the agency and its role
in ensuring equal education opportunity for their
children. This has the effect of making the OCR
complaint process unavailable to parents and
guardians.^^
Recommendation 3(c). There is a need for the
OCR to increase and/or improve its outreach so
that more of the community is aware of its exis-
tence and mission.
Community Relations Service, U.S.
Department of Justice
Finding 3(d). The Community Relations Service
(CRS) mediates conflict and is alerted to commu-
nity racial problems through "alerts" gathered
from news media reports, staff observations, or
through requests for assistance from local offi-
cials or citizens.^ The agency can assist local
schools in resolving disputes relating to alleged
discriminatory practices based on race, color, or
national origin. The CRS district office in Michi-
gan recently has successfully mediated a racial
conflict prompted by Jillegations of discrimination
in the administration of school discipline.^
The CRS does not have the resources, the au-
thority, or the mission to investigate allegations
or suspicions of disparate treatment of minorities
with respect to the administration of school dis-
cipline. Nevertheless, the Community Relations
Service (CRS) can provide a unique service in
ensuring equal education opportunity in the area
of school discipline. As a juvenile court judge told
the Advisory Committee, children are particu-
larly sensitive to issues of fairness and often need
some type of neutral forum in which to tell their
29 See: p. 14; p. 59.
30 Seep. 11.
31 See p. 59.
32 See Mines comment, p. 60.
33 See pp. 62-63.
34 See p. 63.
77
story and possibly get some justice.^ The CRS
can provide that forum.
Recommendation 3(d). The Advisory Commit-
tee recommends that the CRS increase its liaison
activities with local school districts and other
local, State, and Federal agencies. Specifically in
the area of school discipline and other related
school issues, the agency should, at a minimum,
have an active cooperative relationship with the
State's department of civil rights and department
of education and the Office for Civil Rights, U.S.
Department of Education. Such cooperation
should include informing agencies of its alerts,
and oflFering mediation service.
4. State Executive and Legislative
Policies and Out-of-School
Suspension and Expulsion Practices
Finding 4(a). The Advisory Committee notes
that recent State legislation, P.A. 1994, No. 328,
requires expulsion for certain actions and ex-
pands the scope of authority for suspension deci-
sions."*®
The Advisory Committee found sentiment that
the employment of out-of-school suspension and
expulsion practices may not be an effective or
efficient disciplinary device for producing future
citizens who are knowledgeable, productive, so-
cialized, and responsible. Such opinions came
from the superintendent of public instruction,
school administrators, representatives from the
juvenile court system, and educators. Suspen-
sions and expulsions remove children from the
learning and socializing experience of public edu-
cation— and often this is the only such process
available to the child."
The prisons of Michigan are filled with inmates
who lack a high school education. Estimates of the
number of prisoners without a high school di-
ploma ranged from 50 percent to 80 percent^ The
average cost of maintaining one prisoner for 1
year is $22,800. The averiige cost of educating one
student for 1 year is $4,000.^®
Recommendation 4(a)(1). The Advisory Com-
mittee believes recent legislation mandating ex-
pulsions for certain actions and expanding the
authority for discipline decisions will make a bad
situation worse. If school districts simply suspend
and expel students, without offering genuine al-
ternatives, we only delay, at a much greater cost,
dealing with our troubled youth. The Advisory
Committee believes it to be cost effective and
more productive for the State to give serious as-
sistance to local school districts in providing alter-
native education opportiinities.
Recommendation 4(a)(2). Elected officials at
the State and local level, government officials,
school administrators, educators, juvenile court
judges and administrators, parents, and other
concerned parties should address the prospect of
a statewide mechanism for accountability in the
administration of discipline in schools.
In addition, such individuals and groups
should make public a debate on the philosophy of
school discipline, and whether different philoso-
phies of discipline further the long-term interests
of the society at large, or short term interests.
Evidence and experiences in particular schools
and school districts should be the focus of atten-
tion regarding attempts to address underlying
issues.
Finally, the Advisory Committee strongly
urges all school districts in their administration
of discipline to have: (1) a districtwide philosophy
of discipline, (2) internal district controls asBiiring
that the discipline code is enforced uniformly, and
(3) a specific plan of assistance for the affected
student.
FranciB testimony, transcript, p. 41.
See p. 70,
■ comment, p 42, also note: Bates comment, p. 8; Beardmore comment, p. 54; Francis cormnent, p. 39; Halik
. 30; Marvellis comments, pp. 40-41; Pollard comment, p. 33; Rhode comment, p. 36.
See SchiUer
comiiient, p. 30; Marvellis comments, pp. 40-41; Pollard comment, p. 33; Rhode comment, p. 36.
See Cooper comments, pp. 53-64.
Seep. 54.
78
Finding 4(b). Recent school financing reform has connection between poverty and discipline, which
closed the per capita spending disparity among makes the issue ofschool financing relevant to the
school districts, but disparities have not been issue of disproportionate discipline.*'!
eliminated.*' The Advisory Committee found a
See: p. 44; Profit comments, p. 44.
See: Advisory Committee statistical data. pp. 14, 15, and 16; Brookover comments, p. 6; Cain comments, pp. 16 and 42; and
Vergon commeDta, p. 16.
79
80
Appendix I
Presenters at the Factfinding Meetings
Session 1
Lansing, Michigan
Wednesday, August 3, 1994
Robert E. Schiller, Michigan Department of Education
Roberta A. Stanley, Michigan Department of Education
Dorothy Beardmore, Michigan Board of Education
Wilbur Brookover, Michigan State University
Ruth Zweifler, Student Advocacy Center
Kenneth Mines, U.S. Department of Education
Michael Gallagher, U.S. Department of Education
Harry Lawrence, U.S. Department of Education
Harvey Buckhour, Michigan Protection and Advocacy
Mack Cody, Michigan Protection and Advocacy
Janet Cooper, Michigan Department of Civil Rights
Richard J. Halik, Lansing School District
Patricia Farrell, Lansing School District
Santanino Rodriguez, Lansing School District
Ann Blair, Lansing School District
Michael Foster, Lansing School District
Ricardo Martinez, MAP
Larry Scott, Parent Support Group
Wilson Caldwell, Lansing NAACP
John Pollard, Black Child & Family Institute
Vemadine Lake
Joyce Hartfield
LaQuan Hartfield
Ann Green
81
Session 2
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Thursday, August 4, 1994
Kirk Profit, Michigan House of Representatives
Duke Williams, Ypsilanti School District
John Fulton, Ypsilanti School District
Bill Snyder, Ypsilanti School District
Tilani Smith-Sambe, Ypsilanti School District
Linda Crabtree, Ypsilanti School District Board of Education
Marilyn Goodsman, Ypsilanti School District Board of Education
Herman Humes, Ypsilanti Education Association
Mary Gibson, Ypsilanti Education Association
Dave Johnson, Ypsilanti Education Association
Percy Bates, Programs for Education Opportunity
Charles Vergon, Law and Policy Institute
Nancy Francis, Probate Judge, Washentaw County
Tim Marvellis, Washentaw County
Nathaniel Reid, COPE
Margaret Hamer, Teachers Shop & Learn Center
Eugene Cain, Highland Park School District
Sharon Baskerville, principal, Ann Arbor School District
Pam Beatty Cupid
John Rohde
Leonia McKaye
Vemita Wilson
Jeanetta Jennings
82
Appendix 11
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Black
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Michigan
1,254,734
275,386
13,988
20,933
21,675
47,265
School district:
Battle Creek
6,095
2,386
30
68
180
248
Bessemer City
579
0
6
0
0
4
Harbor Beach
882
0
8
0
5
10
Bloomfield #1 SD
11
0
0
3
7
7
Bloomfield Township
8
0
0
0
0
0
Sigel Twp School 3
26
0
0
0
0
0
Sigel Twp School 4
12
0
0
0
0
0
St Ignace Area
519
0
311
0
0
0
Marquette Area
4,660
13
141
53
8
17
Ewen-Trout Creek
555
0
10
0
2
2
Wayne-Westland
14,700
1,259
132
116
71
405
Crestwood
2,494
9
6
79
19
75
Bad Axe
1,465
4
0
6
7
22
L'Anse
848
0
154
1
0
4
Superior Central
449
2
14
0
2
5
Adams Township
447
0
0
0
0
0
Addison
1,133
0
8
1
11
46
Adrian City
4,663
100
35
34
536
875
Airport Community
2,512
149
23
0
. 0
26
Akron Fairgrove
627
0
3
3
2
27
Alba
168
0
21
0
0
0
Albion
1,371
824
15
0
89
181
Alcon
1,032
2
10
0
0
2
Algonac
2,730
0
17
12
0
30
Allegan
2,603
102
6
13
4
30
Allen Park
2,573
0
7
0
28
153
Allendale
1,056
0
0
17
0
25
Alma
2,711
4
0
18
87
229
Almont
1,128
0
10
7
21
21
Alpena
5,806
0
20
23
5
29
Anchor Bay
4,262
115
0
13
34
87
Ann Arbor
10,254
2,344
73
1,161
147
357
Arenac Eastern
503
0
6
0
0
14
Armada
1,785
2
0
1
11
30
Arvon Township
36
0
6
0
0
0
Ashley
366
0
0
0
11
11
Athens
911
0
3
5
7
35
Atherton
1,108
48
12
7
6
13
Atlanta
553
0
8
2
6
10
Au Gres Sims
553
0
9
2
0
3
Autrain-Onota
117
0
6
0
0
0
Avondale
2,526
178
17
128
4
29
Baldwin
695
281
5
0
1
5
Bangor
1,361
160
25
1
135
189
Bangor
2,654
12
0
7
80
127
Bangor Twp 8
15
0
0
0
0
0
Baraga
487
0
121
0
0
4
Bark River Harris
619
0
65
0
0
0
83
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
AmkHJ
Asian
other
Hispanic
Bath
1,187
0
0
0
14
33
Bay City
10,588
226
88
112
380
760
Seal City
421
0
18
0
0
0
Bear Lake
88
0
0
4
2
6
Beaver Island
83
0
2
0
0
0
Beaverton Rural
1,699
0
10
0
9
21
Bedford
4,601
0
0
16
10
37
Beecher
1,050
2,209
33
0
130
125
Belding
2,172
23
5
4
3
21
Bellaire
535
0
8
3
0
0
Bellevue
1,159
7
5
8
0
13
Bendle
1,495
0
40
0
46
74
Bently
1,039
14
19
8
14
14
Benton Harbor
1,254
5,973
48
0
32
71
Benzie County
1,533
11
46
11
7
42
Berkley City
4,364
114
11
56
0
39
Berlin Twp 3
42
0
0
0
0
0
Berrien Springs
1,244
193
4
21
40
112
Big Bay De Noc
400
1
23
3
0
0
Big Jackson
86
0
2
0
13
13
Big Rapids
1,961
77
13
31
4
42
Birch Run Area
1,864
0
0
3
32
64
Birmingham City
6,915
104
14
324
14
88
Blissfield Community
1,409
0
19
0
24
65
Bloomfield Hills
4,647
191
0
799
27
111
Bloomingdale
1,048
132
20
2
35
82
Bois Blanc Pines
8
0
0
0
0
0
Boyne City
1,280
0
21
2
6
11
Boyne Falls
266
0
8
2
0
3
Brandon
2,791
0
6
41
18
76
Brandywine
1,433
80
7
19
0
11
Breckenridge
1,191
0
0
0
9
76
Breitung Twp
2,062
0
27
22
0
18
Bridgepon-Spaulding
2,289
1,040
14
0
279
406
Bridgman
887
0
2
2
0
4
Brighton Area
5,330
0
43
46
23
80
Brimley Area
302
2
257
0
0
0
Britton Macon
411
0
0
0
0
4
Bronson
1,523
20
2
2
22
54
Columbia
1,638
0
25
0
0
14
Brown City
998
0
12
6
2
17
Flat Rock
1,620
20
0
20
17
47
Buchanan
1,894
163
18
7
0
51
Buckley
384
0
4
0
0
0
Buena Vista
212
1310
28
10
156
166
Bullock Creek
1,582
0
15
0
40
55
Tahquamenon
1,217
0
180
0
0
0
Burr Oak
382
0
0
0
0
0
Burt Township
89
0
3
0
0
0
Byron Area
1,141
0
16
0
9
9
84
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Black
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Byron Center
1,541
5
13
5
0
6
Cadillac Area
3,554
22
32
45
0
30
Caledonia
2,432
48
7
56
7
19
Calumet
1,620
3
2
0
0
25
Camden Frontier
650
2
2
2
0
5
Capac
1,274
2
3
10
35
46
Carman-Ainswoah
4,644
714
96
175
24
96
Carney Nadeau
275
0
4
0
0
0
Caro
2,143
0
32
0
27
105
Carrollton
769
87
0
72
73
105
Carson City Crystal
1,367
28
33
3
7
51
Carsonville-Poa Sanilac S/DG 705
0
1
14
0
31
Caseville
209
0
0
0
0
9
Cass City
1,562
0
18
0
7
43
Cassopolis
1,075
438
21
21
22
15
Cedar Springs
2,534
5
19
0
25
32
Center Line
2,546
23
55
28
0
31
Central Lake
477
6
6
0
0
0
Central Montcalm
2,168
1
26
6
12
49
Centreville
930
27
6
29
0
0
Charlevoix
1,229
13
108
4
2
2
Charlotte
3,427
7
24
25
14
119
Chassell Twp
306
0
0
0
0
0
Cheboygan
2,284
2
53
6
0
15
Chelsea
2,420
22
2
16
8
21
Chesaning Union
2,362
44
36
9
58
97
Chippewa Hills
2,330
55
98
8
37
49
Chippewa Valley
8,816
15
34
76
25
114
Church School
41
0
0
0
0
0
Clare Public
1,375
2
11
6
0
6
Clarenceville
1,563
0
9
17
43
95
Clarkston Comm
5,390
38
5
9
15
66
Clawson City
1,962
3
17
25
9
33
Climax Scott
660
19
0
0
0
7
Clinton
1,201
0
0
0
0
13
Clintondale
1,674
49
44
0
0
22
Clio Area School
4,472
71
0
35
0
21
Coldwater
3,556
19
4
27
7
21
Coleman Community
1,138
1
10
0
0
2
Colfax Township IF
47
0
0
0
0
1
Coloma
1,737
5
6
8
22
25
Colon
989
3
0
2
0
0
Fairview Area
387
0
0
2
2
2
Comstock
2,204
132
4
24
24
56
Comstock Park
1,349
0
4
34
5
2
Concord
1,033
5
8
0
0
11
Constantine
1,628
18
10
6
0
2
Coopersville
2,042
0
16
12
20
35
Corunna
1,913
2
2
19
0
30
Covert
215
428
18
0
0
0
85
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Crawford Ausable
1,930
17
23
8
0
22
Cross Village
26
0
17
0
2
2
Croswell Lexington
2,184
7
8
10
52
95
Forest Park
820
0
5
2
2
11
Dansville AG
852
0
2
18
27
41
Davison
4,407
31
34
22
10
72
Dewin
1,616
7
0
0
0
44
Dearborn City
12,623
77
113
258
73
506
Dearborn Hgts No. 7
2,268
0
0
12
0
62
Westwood
1,158
1,158
23
41
81
126
Decatur
1,049
67
53
4
9
46
Houghton Portage
1,078
0
3
25
0
13
Deckerville
979
0
4
0
34
83
Deerfield
337
0
2
0
5
13
Delton Kellogg
2,114
0
0
2
18
18
Detour Area
284
0
27
0
0
0
Detroit City
19,410
157,114
564
1,401
3,323
5,523
Dexter Connnriunity
2,351
5
14
2
4
138
Dowagiac Union
2,471
305
93
7
72
161
Dryden
798
0
0
0
0
2
Dundee
1,337
28
14
0
13
34
Durand Area
2,336
6
9
0
21
33
East China Twp
4,662
0
0
9
0
52
East Detroit
6,143
4
68
88
8
60
East Grand Rapids
2,223
8
0
54
0
8
East Jackson
1,336
22
0
0
14
20
East Jordan
1,102
0
20
2
6
24
East Lansing
3,241
475
44
407
93
93
Easton Twp 6
78
0
0
0
0
0
Eaton Rapids
2,839
2
5
29
32
114
Eau Claire
505
14
10
0
18
34
Ecorse Public
1,042
914
58
8
63
189
Montabella
1,317
0
20
6
16
35
Edwardsburg
1,716
6
5
10
5
30
Elk Rapids
1,195
0
32
0
2
18
Elkton Pigeon Bayport
1,454
2
0
7
3
40
Ellsworth
280
8
3
0
0
0
Elnn River Township
42
0
0
0
0
0
Escanaba Area
3,882
13
147
17
14
27
Essexville Hampton
1,597
32
0
14
0
143
Evart Public
1,190
15
11
5
4
12
Excelsior District #1
64
0
2
0
0
0
Falmouth Elem SchI
224
0
2
0
0
0
Farmmgton
10,100
151
14
501
62
127
Farwell
1,552
8
11
0
4
17
Fennville
1,334
17
11
7
134
324
Fenton Area
2,828
21
21
28
22
32
Ferndale City
3,876
514
55
43
26
110
Ferry
227
0
12
0
0
0
Fitzgerald
2,723
74
34
49
6
47
86
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Flint City
9,403
17,712
193
114
517
983
Flushing
3,638
73
33
31
71
76
Forest Area
695
7
6
6
0
6
Forest Hills
5,362
70
13
99
2
39
Gwinn Area
2,765
103
51
71
25
79
Fowler
509
0
0
0
0
0
Fowlerville
2,051
0
67
2
0
29
Frankenmuth
1,182
0
0
2
0
15
Frankfon
495
0
15
8
0
14
Fraser
4,590
12
26
64
6
27
Freeland
1,143
4
14
8
23
55
Freesoil
220
0
0
0
0
0
Fremont
2,240
7
5
9
38
92
Fruitport
2,910
14
37
23
46
103
Fulton
847
0
11
5
4
14
Galesburg Augusta
1,214
0
27
4
2
2
Galien Township
603
2
2
0
0
0
Ganges No. 4
24
0
0
0
8
8
Garden City
5,298
62
41
60
0
61
Engadine Consolidated
336
0
46
0
0
2
Gaylord
2,697
0
12
20
3
12
Genesee
825
12
0
0
8
45
Gerrish Higgins
1,699
0
31
13
0
23
Gibraltar
3,416
0
36
36
37
106
Gladstone
1,961
0
44
28
0
5
Gladwin
1,875
8
11
4
2
4
Glen Lake
638
0
2
4
0
10
Gobies
1,047
26
2
2
6
18
Godfrey Lee
980
6
0
0
65
98
Godwin Heights
1,881
86
9
45
73
128
Goodrich
1,489
6
2
31
0
37
Grand Blanc
5,030
236
55
141
50
171
Grand Haven
5,418
19
59
21
86
106
Grand Ledge
4,449
44
34
69
21
106
Grand Rapids City
13,750
9,386
399
418
1,411
2,168
Grandville
4,213
46
24
116
82
99
Grant
1,713
5
16
4
106
141
Grant Township
18
0
0
0
0
0
Grass Lake
823
0
4
0
2
5
Greenville
3,784
0
13
6
16
94
Grosse lie Twnshp
1,709
0
0
90
0
19
Gull Lake
2,476
63
8
8
0
12
Hagar Township 6
67
0
6
0
0
0
Hale Area
748
0
3
0
0
0
Hamilton
1,948
0
0
81
49
49
Hamtramck
1,869
507
16
24
0
49
Hancock
992
14
15
0
0
0
Hanover Horton
1,222
29
0
0
0
2
Harbor Springs
828
0
27
0
2
5
Harper Creek
2,136
0
42
8
0
35
87
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White Black Amlnd Asian Other Hispanic
CitY of Harper Woods 927 18 0 0 0 15
Harrison 1,858 3 0 3 7 19
Hart 1,205 0 20 3 125 201
Hartford 1,338 2 40 0 91 118
Haaland Consolidated 2,765 0 21 19 10 31
Haslen 1,963 34 0 46 51 57
Hastings 3,204 3 15 13 6 24
Hazel Park City 4,696 11 74 136 0 47
Hemlock 1,634 0 0 3 25 32
Hespena 1,020 5 4 4 19 43
Highland Park City 63 3,888 0 5 17 0
Hillman 643 0 0 2 0 7
Hillsdale 2,502 10 40 43 40 69
Holland City 4,142 86 35 233 701 1,280
Holly Area 3,779 53 27 29 105 131
Holt 4,184 102 54 27 76 152
Holton 1,190 0 5 0 0 7
Homer Community 997 2 2 Oil 24
Hopkins 1,163 0 0 11 21 21
Houghton Lake 1,608 36 9 0 0 12
Howell 5,205 0 122 26 23 67
Hudson 1,173 3 0 19 19 83
Hudsonville 3,267 4 0 40 0 30
Huron 1,859 12 0 13 9 24
Huron Valley 9,373 6 78 20 12 140
Ida 1,648 6 0 0 0 14
Imlay City 1,779 2 2 30 65 133
Inkster City 205 2,436 0 14 7 7
Inland Lakes 707 0 36 3 0 3
Ionia 2,770 76 19 32 43 234
Ionia Twp Dis, 2 48 0 0 0 0 0
Ionia Twp Dis. 5 33 0 0 0 0 0
Iron Mountain City 1,478 0 0 0 13 21
Ironwood Area 1,554 11 5 3 0 28
Ishpeming 1,325 0 4 2 0 0
Ithaca 1,653 0 9 4 62 115
Jackson 6,352 1,590 44 73 167 263
Jefferson-Monroe Cnty 2,641 17 14 0 18 41
Jenison 4,189 8 47 68 23 68
Johannesburg-Lewiston 682 0 6 0 7 9
Jonesville 1,019 0 3 0 5 5
Kalamazoo City 8,065 4,271 106 259 357 493
Kaleva Norman Dickson 760 0 15 3 5 7
Kalkaska 2,123 3 44 4 10 26
Kearsley 3,078 27 18 23 32 93
Kelloggsville 1,746 95 19 65 31 80
Kenowa Hills 2,462 11 45 13 14 31
Kent City 1,394 6 0 4 5 34
Kentwood 6,124 544 38 225 85 215
Kingsley Area 1,026 0 18 0 0 20
88
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Black
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Kingston
679
63
7
2
6
15
Laingsburg
1,008
0
0
0
4
36
Lake City
1,182
0
12
2
4
10
Lake Fenton
1,421
0
13
0
0
0
Lake Linden Hubbell
745
0
0
15
0
5
Lake Onon
4,700
24
6
11
58
182
Lakeshore
2,606
12
13
41
0
54
Lakeview
2,901
94
0
73
0
40
Lakeview Area
2,704
0
18
38
19
62
Lakeview Community
1,681
8
20
6
32
57
Lakeville Comm School
2,689
10
24
5
24
49
Lakewood
2,604
10
15
21
26
70
Lamphere
1,953
52
54
86
39
47
Lansing
13,031
5,969
305
515
1,736
2,789
Lapeer
7,393
20
51
80
75
204
Lawrence
635
5
10
0
83
111
Lawton
1,033
14
9
6
22
60
Leiand
367
0
0
3
0
0
Les Cheneaux
288
0
62
3
11
11
Leslie
1,470
1
2
2
8
19
Lincoln Cons
2,664
411
3
37
0
27
Lincoln Park
5,618
23
75
0
77
279
Linden
2,401
0
14
0
0
25
Litchfield
594
2
11
0
0
2
Linlefield
499
6
11
0
0
0
Livonia
16,078
92
26
321
44
287
L'Anse Creuse
9,260
837
20
161
21
203
Lowell
2,917
10
2
46
6
28
Ludington
2,513
15
43
11
30
58
Mackinac Island
44
0
14
0
0
0
Mackinaw City
205
0
18
0
0
0
Madison
2,426
0
30
23
11
30
Madison District
542
0
0
0
124
190
Mancelona
948
0
13
0
2
3
Manchester
1,089
4
3
15
3
9
Manistee
1,881
5
39
4
45
82
Manistique
1,283
0
130
5
0
17
Manton Consolidated
823
0
16
3
0
13
Maple Valley
1,590
0
19
2
4
2
Marcellus
878
18
7
0
2
14
Marenisco
130
20
2
0
0
2
Marion
721
1
19
0
2
6
Mar Lee
351
0
0
2
17
22
Marlene
1,501
4
19
0
8
35
Marshall
2,334
29
0
6
15
42
Martin
856
2
6
6
3
3
Marysville
2,105
0
17
44
0
6
Mason
3,477
0
0
26
47
70
Mason Cons
1,532
0
19
10
25
117
Mason County Central
1,327
3
10
7
20
43
89
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Black
Amind
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Mason County Eastern
560
7
6
0
15
19
Manawan Cons
2,168
20
66
17
15
39
Mayville
1,320
3
10
16
0
3
McBain Rural Agr
790
0
0
2
5
5
Melvindale Allen Park
2,064
50
0
0
70
159
Memphis
816
25
0
0
0
9
Mendon
615
37
0
0
0
4
Menominee Area
2,332
6
18
16
0
10
Meridian
1,810
4
7
4
11
20
Merrill
1,101
6
2
4
5
35
Mesick Consolidated
757
0
14
2
2
6
Michigan Center
1,375
0
0
0
20
56
Midland
8,148
110
62
163
62
140
Mid Peninsula
416
0
12
0
0
0
Milan Area
1,793
138
0
0
39
64
Millington
1,961
0
9
7
0
25
Mio Au Sable
761
0
9
1
3
29
Mona Shores
3,396
39
16
46
0
98
Monroe
7,548
324
25
47
108
258
Montague
1,502
0
29
29
38
76
Montrose
1,731
59
14
0
35
41
Moran Township
2
0
44
1
0
2
Morenci
1,032
2
2
2
13
47
Morley Stanwood
1,392
9
34
0
1
28
Morrice
762
0
7
0
3
15
Mt Clemens
1,066
505
24
0
24
12
Mt Morris Cons
2,836
155
78
28
8
60
Mt Pleasant
3,333
78
229
46
27
70
Munising
899
0
81
2
0
7
Muskegon
3,978
2,672
165
0
170
344
Muskegon Heights SD
394
2,359
38
8
13
62
Napoleon
1,461
0
0
7
0
6
Negaunee
1,654
5
23
3
0
23
New Buffalo
634
61
0
0
0
43
New Haven
837
193
39
2
5
32
New Lothrop
1,030
0
10
0
12
14
Newaygo
1,381
0
10
3
21
37
N.I.C.E.
1,811
0
11
0
0
0
Niles
3,731
414
51
25
37
112
North Adams
621
0
2
0
0
10
North Branch
2,100
0
6
0
7
22
Grosse Pointe
7,217
31
13
211
0
152
North Huron
711
7
0
0
0
0
North Muskegon
605
0
0
6
0
0
Northpon
181
0
23
0
5
22
Northview
2,839
57
18
0
34
52
Northville
3,845
70
0
122
3
50
Northwest
3,098
59
5
23
2
27
Norway Vulcan
827
0
11
0
0
3
Nortawa
292
9
0
0
0
0
90
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
Amind
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Novi
3,537
38
24
177
32
47
Oak Park
974
2,557
0
61
9
5
Oakridge
1,644
24
11
10
0
56
Okemos
3,450
164
8
275
29
78
Olivet
1,160
0
2
0
23
49
Onaway
974
0
8
2
0
7
Oneida District 3
15
0
0
0
0
0
Onekama Consolidated
427
0
8
0
4
11
Onsted
1,515
5
8
2
0
16
Ontonagon
859
0
27
1
0
12
Orchard View
2,272
28
30
0
13
79
Orleans Twp Dist 10
24
0
0
0
0
0
Osceola Twp
335
5
8
4
0
0
Oscoda
2,903
83
46
38
6
31
Otsego
2,296
9
35
2
6
6
Ovid Elsie
1,680
2
6
7
18
52
Owendale Gagetown
292
3
11
3
14
20
Owosso
4,627
0
30
16
57
88
Oxford
2,870
20
6
16
6
28
Palo
233
7
0
0
0
6
Parchment
1,392
106
12
5
6
63
Paw Paw
1,842
15
4
0
35
83
Peck
486
0
7
0
7
10
Pellston
690
0
40
0
6
10
Pennfield
1,496
57
6
20
0
25
Pentwater
369
0
7
0
16
39
Perry
1,912
17
41
4
0
15
Petoskey
2,106
4
38
50
7
16
Pewamo Westphalia
705
0
0
3
0
2
Pickford
427
0
43
0
0
6
Pinckney
3,571
0
25
10
0
47
Pinconning
2,369
22
26
14
18
66
Pine River
1,334
3
9
3
0
0
Pineview
95
0
6
0
2
3
Pittsford
701
0
2
4
0
0
Plainwell
2,527
24
18
12
14
26
Plynnouth Canton
14,522
193
30
629
48
190
Pontiac
6,086
7,236
175
347
937
1,611
Port Hope
119
0
2
0
0
0
Port Huron
11,459
620
46
66
252
464
Portage
7,389
310
33
173
35
135
Portland
1,977
3
0
0
8
32
Posen Cons
402
0
2
2
0
0
Ponerville
664
2
14
0
16
20
Powell Township
119
0
6
0
0
0
North Central Area
577
0
2
0
0
8
Quincy
1,391
4
6
0
3
7
Rapid River
483
0
44
2
0
0
Ravenna
1,178
6
13
0
0
16
Reading
875
3
9
5
3
3
91
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Redford Union
4,297
41
22
92
13
72
Reed City
2,095
11
15
8
17
30
Reese
1,058
12
0
2
16
49
Reeths Puffer
3,606
119
27
47
24
95
Republic Michigamme
252
0
0
0
0
0
Richmond
1,783
0
0
0
0
21
River Rouge
1,231
862
10
0
32
106
River Valley
1,507
9
4
0
0
6
Riverview
2,182
12
6
10
16
68
Rochester
10,933
147
5
390
7
166
Rockford
4,859
61
21
67
11
36
Rogers City
876
0
0
5
7
10
Romeo
4,086
40
18
14
28
58
Romulus
3,223
1,184
29
73
99
129
Roseville
6,575
130
43
81
10
107
Loucks-Roxand #12
34
0
0
0
0
0
Royal Oak
7,522
81
14
103
72
195
Rudyard
1,057
15
130
6
9
24
Saginaw
5,554
7,496
97
168
1,428
2,119
Saginaw Twp
4,647
228
9
160
103
332
North Dickinson
548
0
0
0
3
3
Saline Area
3,075
35
5
72
23
35
Sand Creek
867
6
2
6
31
66
Sandusky
1,474
0
6
4
12
52
Saranac
1,219
0
30
2
7
26
Saugatuck
455
2
7
8
15
21
Sault Ste Marie
2,677
9
779
16
8
58
Schoolcraft
879
6
5
6
0
8
Shelby
1,191
5
4
0
99
149
Shepherd
1,687
4
2
10
5
27
Sigel Twp District 6
30
0
0
0
0
0
Sodus Dist 5
17
0
0
0
0
0
South Lake
2,042
0
0
35
12
70
South Lyon
4,364
20
52
20
0
128
South Redford
3,070
51
3
24
30
63
South Haven
2,255
472
0
18
0
88
Southfield
4,367
4,332
44
264
96
116
Southgate
4,374
16
24
30
48
295
Sparta
2,412
0
17
10
16
32
Spring Lake
1,725
5
0
26
12
75
Springport
1,057
5
0
4
6
18
St Charles
1,249
12
24
5
11
55
Lakeshore
3,444
0
11
14
0
12
St Johns
3,228
6
5
0
52
148
St Joseph
2,551
28
6
11
0
30
St Louis
1,335
20
9
10
10
58
West Iron County
1,419
0
28
0
0
5
Standish Sterling
1,953
2
50
2
11
39
Stanton Twp
266
2
0
0
0
0
Stephenson
1,120
0
9
15
0
0
92
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
WhKe
Back
Ambid
Asian
other
Hispanic
Stockbridge
1,790
1
33
0
42
42
Sturgis
2,712
21
11
10
0
30
Summerfield
950
0
6
5
14
14
Sunons Bay
665
7
63
11
9
5
Swan Valley
1,556
17
0
3
2
26
Swartz Creek
4,206
65
120
19
9
114
Tawas
1,677
8
2
3
3
3
Taylor
10,899
855
85
136
141
435
Tecumseh
2,859
19
37
56
50
184
Tekonsha
489
0
6
2
0
0
Thornapple Kellogg
2,224
2
45
41
8
50
Three Rivers
2,821
270
9
19
21
30
Traverse City
10,081
52
65
103
11
147
Trenton
3,058
0
19
46
25
62
Tri County
1,750
17
40
10
4
26
Troy
9,768
231
31
902
17
133
Ubiy
838
0
0
0
0
0
Union City
1,224
0
25
9
2
23
Unionville Sebewaing
952
0
3
2
11
34
Utica
23,811
60
70
538
62
368
Van Buren
5,085
868
12
98
19
48
Vanderbilt
370
0
0
3
8
8
Vandercook
893
0
0
0
12
13
Van Dyke
4,384
0
50
124
32
116
Vassar
1,720
11
16
2
18
51
Verona Township No. 1 F
43
0
0
3
0
0
Vestaburg
637
11
0
0
0
5
Vicksburg
2,394
15
4
10
9
31
Wakefield
487
2
6
0
0
0
Waldron
507
0
6
0
6
21
Walkerville Rural
224
1
24
0
42
38
Walled Lake Cons
8,903
79
105
173
6
127
Warren Consolidated
14,369
124
60
625
32
161
Warren Woods
2,493
4
0
30
0
4
Waterford
10,377
130
142
151
63
338
Watersmeet Twp
84
0
54
0
2
3
Watervliet
1,042
6
12
0
9
11
Waverly
3,020
321
12
6
103
156
Wayland Union
2,550
9
26
0
0
36
Webberville
810
0
11
2
0
0
Wells Township
36
0
0
0
0
0
West Bloomfield
4,467
130
34
216
4
41
W Branch Rose City
2,760
0
33
2
6
30
West Onawa
4,236
36
28
246
226
443
Western
1,804
12
31
3
0
5
Westwood Heights
727
620
8
0
28
44
White Cloud
1,100
62
11
8
9
24
White Pigeon
1,179
0
0
26
10
17
White Pine
191
0
6
4
0
0
Whitefish
114
0
0
0
0
0
93
Appendix II (continued)
Michigan Public School Enrollment by District
White
Back
Amlnd
Asian
Other
Hispanic
Whiteford Agr
670
0
0
0
0
13
Whitehall
1,537
124
34
16
7
30
Whitmore Lake
1,106
84
0
0
7
21
Whittemore Prescott
1,274
5
23
8
0
53
Williamston
1,525
15
18
4
29
71
Willow Run
2,126
1,200
27
25
0
83
Wolverine
365
0
17
0
0
0
Woodhaven
4,314
114
37
145
39
132
Wyandotte City
4,631
0
42
18
46
229
Wyoming
5,006
137
39
129
61
177
Yale
1,939
0
8
3
8
9
Ypsilanti
3,342
1,977
0
133
37
79
Zeeland
3,184
0
0
31
42
77
Total
1,254.734
275,386
13,988
20,933
21,675
47,265
94
Appendix III
Lansing School District Suspension Report
StrSPKNSION REPORT
The attached report is a suimary of all pupil suspensions in the Lansing School
District for the 1992-93 school year. The individual reports should be read as
follows :
Incidents of Suspension - Ethnic by Length
1. Thas IS a sumnary of all suspensions and includes more than one suspension
per student. There are, therefore, more incidents of suspension than there
are students suspended.
2. Line one (No.) is the number of suspensions categorized by the length of
suspension and the racial/ethnic background of the student suspended.
3. Line two {%) is the percentage of students suspended for a given length of
time by ethnic code. For exan^le: 39.1% of the suspensions in the ethnic
code of 5 were for one day.
4. Line three (% of the group) is the percentage of each ethnic group
suspended by length. For exan^le: 17.8% of the total number of Code 5
suspensions were for one day.
5. There were a total of 4,434 incidents of suspensions.
Comparison of Incidents of Suspension - Bv Sex - Bv Reason - Bv Ethnic
These charts conpare the incidents of suspension by sex by reason by ethnic, for
example: There were 422 incidents of fighting by females (35.5%) as coopared to
973 incidents of fighting by males (30.0%).
Incidents of Suspension - Bv Reason - Bv Ethnic
This chart shows the number of suspensions by the reason identified categorized
by the racial /ethnic bac)cground. The totals and percentages for each reason are
also shown. For example: 1,395 suspensions, representing 31.5% of all
suspensions, were for fighting.
Suspension to Student Services
This chart shows the number of incidents of suspension to Student Services by
ethnic group. For example: There were 334 incidents (20.0%) of suspension of
code 5 students to Student Services. A total of 1,053 students were referred to
Student Services.
Comparison of Number of Incidents and Students Suspended-Bv Ethnic-Bv School^
This chart compares the incidents of suspension with the umber of individual
students susp>ended for each school categorized by ethnic group. For example:
There were 126 incidents of suspension of code 5 students at Eastern.
^ This portion of the Suspension Report is not included in the
appendix.
95
RACIAL ETHNIC COOES
1 . American Indian or Alaskan Native or
Native American
2. Black (not of Latino or Hispanic origin)
3. Asian or Pacific Islander
4 . Latino or Hispanic
5 . White (not of Latino of Hispanic origin)
96
ZVCZOXKTS or SUSPZBSXQV
CTHVZC MX UV0T8
1992 - 1993
1 DAY OR LESS
2 DAYS
Coda
1
2
3
4
5
T
1
2
3
4
5
T
no.
16
335
7
106
298
762
9
195
3
64
177
448
%
2.1
44.0
.9
13.9
39.1
2.0
43. S
.7
14.3
39.5
% of
•ach
group
IS. 8
16.2
18.9
19.2
17.8
17.2
8.9
9.4
8.1
11.6
10.6
10.1
3-S DAYS
1-3 WEEKS
Coda
1
2
3
4
5
T
1
2
3
4
5
. T
No.
63
1,322
24
322
1,031
2,762
10
154
2
48
130
344
%
2.3
47.9
.9
11.7
37.3
2.9
44.8
.6
14.0
37.8
% of
•ach
group
62.4
63.8
64.9
58.3
61.7
62.3
9.9
7.4
5.4
8.7
7.8
7.8
3 OR MORE WEEKS
TOTAL
Coda
1
2
3
4
5
T
1
2
3
4
5
T
No.
3
67
1
12
35
118
101
2,073
37
552
1,671
4,434
%
2.5
56.8
.9
10.2
29.7
2.3
46.8
.8
12.5
37.7
% of
each
group
3.0
3.2
2.7
2.2
2.1
2.7
97
nrcxaares or susrinxem - tx nxxtam ~ wx xrsxzc
19«3 - 1993
UASOM
1 3
J
4 S
T
%
Troancy
« 7» 3
34 86 30S 4.6
Tardlnasa
0 U
0
4
13
sa .6
StriiOij? T««cn«r
QUO
2 4
19
rightiaq 30 ^3
21
155
956
1,399
31.5
A...ult u 1,,
0
47
125
362
6.6
B«tr«ry
0 s
0
0
3
a
.2
V«rb«i/Kritt«n thraata j 41
0
13
22 7*
i.a
SmoJciag/Oaa of Tob*cco
1 7
0
0
24 32
-■
.7
Poaaaaaion of Tobacco
0
1
1
4
6
.1
0ru9 or Alcohol Oa«
9
0
'
5
16
.4
Druga/Alcohol Poaaaaaion/Sala
16
0
19
21
57
1.3
Poaaaaaion of Haapona - Oaa of
SI
2
12
"
113
2.5
'''■■•aaion of ri-cawurJM, ate.
c
0
1
5 12
.3
Poaa. of Illegal D«vic»a. Da* of 1
"
0
S
"
49
1.1
Krcorcion
a
0
1
a
17
.4
Thaft
44
3
12
32 91
2.1
Traapaaalng
4
0
3
4 U
.2
Violation of City fi Stata, ate.
^
0
1
2
4
.1
VandAllam/Malictoua Daatroctlon
4
0
0
7
11
.2
Araon
7
0
1
4
12
.3
Hlaconducc - Olaordarly
10
313
3
76
309
611
13. a
Paraxatanc Miaconducr
211
0
42
152
412
9.3
Dafiad Authority - laaulxjrdinata
24
236
4
a3 214
561
12.7
l.«wd/Obicana Bahartor 0
4a
0
9
21
78
tH
Saxuai Miaconduct 1
17 0
0
a 26
.6
Othar J
ao 0
29
90
200
4.5
TOTAL j^(
31
2.073 37
552 1
.434
M/uuuu TO sTUDxar sxxTiaa bt iranc
1992 - 1993
CODE
1
2
3
4
S
T
Hot R«ferr«<l
86
1,505
29
424
1,337
3,381
% Noc Rafarr*d
85.2
72.6
78.4
76.8
80.0
76.3
Referr«d
15
14.9
568
8
128
334
1,053
% Raferr»d
27.4
21.6
23.2
20.0
23.8
99
Appendix IV
Michigan State Board of Education, Guidelines to the Rights and
Responsibilities of Students
A RECOMMENDED GUIDE TO
Students' Rights
and Responsibilities
in Michigan
Second Edition
Michigan State Board of Education
100
FOREWORD
The issue of the rights and responsibiiities of students has been an
ongoing concern of Michigan educators. During the past twenty years,
we have witnessed a gradual change in both the legal and educational
views of the nghts and responsibilities of students. Legally, the issue of
student nghts has changed from the concept of "in loco parentis" to the
concept that students do not abandon their constitutional rights when
entenng the school house door. AJI parties concerned with education,
including staff, students, parents and community members, have a
responsibility to be welNnform«l regarding the rights and responsibili-
ties of students.
The Common Goals of Michigan Education and the goal statements
of almost all local school districts reflect a concern that young people
acquire the information and skills necessary to become effective adult
citizens. P-ere is no better avenue to assisting young people in gaining
effective atirenship skills than the process of respecting their rights and
educating them concerning their responsibilities.
This document provides general information concerning student
nghts and responsibilities. The State Board of Education is hopeful that
local boards of education will find this document useful as they develop
and update their policies. Michigan's Mandatory Special Education Act
along with state and federal civil rights legislation, provides special
safeguards for handicapped students which are described in A
Handbook For Parents: Planning. Coordinating and Implementing
Services for Special Students. Detailed information on the rights of
handicapped students and their responsibilities can be found in the
Admmistrative Manual for Special Education. Volumes I and II which is
on file In each school district.
Phillip E^unkel ^
Superintendent of Public Instruction
May, 1982
101
CONTENTS
Forsword
I. Introduction
II. Rights and Responsibilities ..^^
III. Issues...
A. Education Records. —...______
B. First Amendment Rights
1. Freedom of Assembly. Petition. Symbolic
Speech. Inquiry and Expression ^
2. Student Publications and Newspapers.^.
3. Patriotic and Religious Activities ..
7
11
14
C. Smoking in tile Schools..., ^
0- Dress and Grooming
E. Non-Oiscrimination
F. Corporal Punishment __^ ^
G. Search and Seizure. Interrogation and Arrest 28
H. Attendance. Grades. Fees, and Diplomas 33
I. Fraternities. Sororities, and Secret Societies ^. 35
J. School Board Liability
'V. Due Process and the Fair Administration of Discipline 40
Index
102
I. INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Michigan State Board of Education has adopted Th» Common
Goals of Michigan Education. In Goal Area It: System Responsibilities, it
states that:
"Michigan education must strive for social justice in the schools
and educational system in order to enhance each person's sense
of dignity and worth. To achieve this goal a system should
demonstrate efforts to assure that the educationally related legal
rights of educators, students, and parents are protected."
The issue of the rights and responsibilities of students remains high
on the list of concerns within public education. Schools are significantty
affected by court decisions, attorney general opinions, legislative
enactments, policy directives, and rules and regulations concerning the
rights and responsibilities of students. During our lifetime, schools have
witnessed challenges to long held precepts of the rights of students.
Federal troops ensured the right of Black students to attend formerly
segregated facili^-<«. The tradition of "in loco parentis" diminished in
favor of tt>e concept from Tinker v. DesMoines that children do not
abandon ttieir constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door.
8. PURPOSE OF GUIDEUNES
The major purpose of tt)e Guidelines is to provide information to
assist local district personnel including officials, staff, students, parents
and community members in developing, implementing, and assessing
policy and practices concerning student conduct It is not the purpose of
the Guidelines to provide specific legal advice. Persons seeicing legal
advice should contact an attorney.
The Guidelines provide two types of information. The first entitled
"Current Law and Practice", provides local district personnel with recent
information concerning court decisions, attorney ' general opinions,
legislative enactments, rules and regulations, and policy directives
concerning the rights and resporuibllities of students. The second,
entitled "Suggested Procedures", recommends positive approaches to
the rights ■and responsibilities of students within the framework of local
district policy and practice.
103
It It not the purpoM of ttm GuM%ilnm to dictsta a unHorm Mt of
rulM of conduct for studants. Th« St>t« Board of Education racognlzaa
and supports tha right of locai boards, district staff, studanta, artd
community mambara to datarmina standards of conduct for thair
community. Tha Stata Board of Education furttiar racognizas and
supports tha concapt that local diatrict atandarda muat ba davaiopad
within tha context of tha establishad rights of studanta. TTiarafora. ^ttt^f
tha law is daar regarding specific rlgtits of students, tha Stata Board of
Education expects that locally-adoptad atandarda of student conduct will
be compatible with legal prindpla.
C. 7H£ DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL STUDENT CODES IN MICHIGAN
The State Board of Education, under Ks leadership obllgationa.*
believes the issue of students' rights and raaponaibllltiaa to be an
important matter but orte bast admlniatered by local achool boards. The
State Board to this point haa rastrictad its official action in this area to
simply requesting local districts to adopt wrtttan codca of student
conduct The text of tha Board's resolution followa:
" —Khool districts be nquind, by April 1, 1071, to mttty ttw
Ststa Bosrd ot Education that tho locai board of aducation has
adoptad, or Is adopting, a Coda at Studant Conduct which coda
idantltias eategoriaa of misconduct, daflnas tfta condltiotts
undar which students rrmy be suspended or expelled, and
specifies the procedural due process safeguards which will be
utilized In the implementation of the locally-adopted student
conduct codes. . ."
0. ALrTHORITf OF LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS
Section 1300* of the Scftool Code requires each local school board
to"mal(e reasonable regulationa relative to anythir>g necessary for the
proper establishmerrt. mainteranca. management and carrying on of the
public schools of ttM district indtidlng regulations relative to ttie
conduct of pupils concerning ttieir safety while In attendance at school
or enroute to and from school."
This statute unquestionably provides local boards of education with
ttie authority to establish student codes of conduct attendance policies,
artd any ottter policies deemed r>ece3sary and appropriate. However, aa
local school t>oards and school officials adopt ar>d carry out rules that
strive to maimain an environment conducive to learning, they must also
consider other criteria such as ttw autttorrty of ttte State Board of
Education, and ttie rights and responsibilities of ttie students.
■ MCM. CONST. 01 t. I 3
■UCLA 3M.1iaO: MBA iMiaOO
104
£. SUMMARY
TTm Stat* Board of Education, in providing generai leadership to
education in the state, publishes 77ie Ga/tfe//nes (o ttm Rights and
R»sonsiblHti«s of Students. The Guid^ilnmM contain the most current
information available concerning ttiis issue. TTie State Board of
Education's purpose in publishing the Guidelines is to provide
information which locaJ district boards, staff, students, and community
members can use in adopting, implementing, and assessing local
standards of student conduct.
105
IV. DUE PROCESS AND THE PAIR
ADMINISTRATION OP DISCIPUNE
CURRENT LAW AND PRACTICE
1. The U.S. ConstlttJtJon
The Fourteenth Amendment of the VS. Constitution protects the
rights of person^ against arbitrary and unreasonably imposed govern*
merit deprivations of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
In Tinker v. Des Moines, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the
applicability of coristitutionai safeguards to students while attending
public school.** In Goss v. Lopez, the U.S. Supreme Court found tfiat
students had a property irrterest in educational benefits and a liberty
interest in ttteir reputations, both of which qualify for Fourteenth
Amendment protection." Therefore, it is dear ttiat due process follows
students to school.
Due process is a broad cortstttutional concept relating to substance
and procedure. The essence of both sutjstantive and procedural due
process in the area of student discipline is to protect students agairut
arbitrary and capricious rules and actions of school authorities.
Substantive due process demands that a school rule must be reasonable
and fair. Procedural due process requires a just and orderly proceeding
when a student is charged with a violation of a school rule. Due process,
in either instance, is a flexible concept. The standards required depend
upon tUt seriousness of the allegations and the possible punishments
tftat may be imposed.
*. LOPM. 41t us a«; fl» S a 72>-. 43 L H « TS (IffTS)
40
106
2. Auttwrity of School Code
By th« •uthonty of S«rtion 1311 of th« School Cod; local school
boards:
"may urthoria or ordv tht suspension or sxpulsion from
school 0/ a pupil guilty of gross misdsmosnor or persistsnt
disobsdhncs. whon in tho board's judgmont tho intenst ot the
school msy dsmsnd the authorization or order ..."
Tha LagisJatura in anacting this law did not dafma "gross
misdamaanor" or "persistant disot)adianc«.''
SUGGESTED PROCEDUttES
As mantlonad aarOar, "Subatanllve" Am procaaa la coneamad
with tha aatabliahmant of rulaa and ragulationa. K raquiraa that ruiaa
baar a raasonabia raiatlenahJp to prapar govammantal purpoaas — In
tha eontaxt of acheola; aducationaJ purpoaaa. In ganaral, rulas must
not go ao far bayond aueh purpoaaa aa to eonstltuta an abuaa of
govamniantaJ authortty and thua viotata dua procaaa guarantaaa.
In davaloping a policy govaming aehod rulaa and ragulatiena, tha
following lagai principlaa ahould ba kapt In mind:
1. tha policy muat provida notiea of what conduct la prehlbltad or
pamittadt
2. tha rulaa muat ba raaaonably undarstandafala to tha avaraga
atudant;
3. tha rulaa must ba rationally raiatad to a valid adueational
purpoaa;
4. tha fulaa muat ba pradaa ao aa not to prohibit conatttutionally
protactad acthrttiaa;
5. tha policy muat provida atudants wtth notiea of potanHal
eonsaquancaa for violating spacffic rulaa;
L the typa of purtiahmant spadftad In tha policy muat ba within tha
azprasaad or Impilad authorfty of tha achool district to utOlza;
7. tha puniahmant must t>a of raaaonabia aavarity in raiatlen to ttM
aariouanasaa of tha miscor>duct or tha numbar of tlmas tha
miaeanduct waa commtttad.
1. A copy of tha rulaa and procaduraa muat ba dlaaaminatad to all
atudanta.
Procadurai dua procaaa can be bast charactarixad aa a lagal
atandard of varying, minimal procadurai aafaguarda daaignad to insura
41
107
that a ttudant it aflordad avary opportuntty for a fair and raaaonabia
datarminatlon substantiatad by avidanca that cauaa azlats to Juattfy an
ofDdal aeftooMmposad sanction.
Partiapa tha most Important eharactaristlc of proeodurai dua
procaas is its variabia natura. Notwitttstanding ttta daaira of settools to
iiava a simpia and succinct dafinition of dua precaaa wtUcb covars
avary concalvabia situation, ttia vary natura of dua procaaa rafacts
suefi a rigid approach.
In tha school contaxt, procadural dua procaas raqulramants wffl
vary dapanding on ttia langth of ■ suapanaion; a.9^ a short'tarm
suspansion varsus a long-tarm suspanaion or axpulaion. indaad. In
Michigan schools, axpulsion as tha most sarious aehooHnHiatad
punishmant, should ba daddad upon by tha board of aducation upon
racommandation of tha auparlntandant and Ma/har subordinatas."
Also, school officials should not bi axamining various dadalons,
conciuda that tha raquiramants wittttn thoaa caaaa raprasant tha
totality of safaguards which can ba affordad a studant School ofttdais
ara fraa to go bayond tha minimum and afford procachiral aafaguards
in aO dladpiinaiy procaadings aa a mattar of ganarai policy.
Tha following ara soma of tha atamants of procadural dua procaas
which ahouid ba eonsidarad:
1. Tha timaiy and spaciflc notica of ehargaa agalnat tha studant
2. Tha studenf s right to quastion aach mambar of tha profassionai
and school staff or studant Invoivad in or witnass to tha
IncidanL
3. Tha studanf s right to prasant avidanca in Ilia or liar bahaif.
4. Tha studanf s rigiit to an Impartial haaring.
5. Tha studant's rigiit to rabut u&n^rf taatlmony.
6. Tha studanf s rigiit to ba raprasantad t>y quaiMad counsal at tha
haaring.
7. Tha studanf s rigiit to a racord of ttia haaring.
t. Tha studanf s right to appeaL
Tha alamanta noted ibova ara tha amt>odlmant of tha concapt of
procedural due proceu charadarired aarilar. Thara Is ot>viousiy a
natural dlfferenca between a ona-day suspanaion for l>alng mildly
insut>crdlnate end an extensive suspension for sarious misconduct A
iiian: MSA 1141311
42
108
•tud«nt In danger of b*ii>g suspended for ttis rest of the tsrni a*ght
wsfl aspect to receive sB or most o( the elements listed above prtor to
such actions.** Indeed, one ease" tried In U.S. Olstrtct Court ordered a
Michigan school district to ghre an expelled student a hearing in
accordance wtth the gtildellnes laid down In an earfier Federal ease."
Those guidelines, the court noted, included "notice containing a
statement of the specific charges and grounds which. If proven, would
Justify expulsion under the regulations of the Board of Education; a
hearing affording 'an opportunity to hear both sides In considerable
detain preserving ttte rudiments of an adversary proceeding; names of
witnesses against tfie student; and the opportunity to present to the
Board his own defense.'^ A student being suspended for a short
period of time, on the other hand, might receive adequate procedural
due process by an informal conference wtth the principaL Indeed, in
Goss v. Lopmz decided by the U^ Supreme Court ttie court
enumerated the due process protections to be afforded in connection
with a suspension of 10 days or less (Ohio's definition of short-term
suspension). The court required that tfie student be ghren at least
"... written or oral notice of tfte charges against Mm and. If he denies
them, an expi* latlon of the evidence the autfioritles have and an
opportunity to present his side of the story . . ."*• Further, the court held
ttiat ". . . aince the hearing may occur almost Immediately following tfie
misconduct, it foOows that a general notice and hearing should
precede removal of tfte student from school"" However, the court did
recognize tfiat there are aituations where a student's presence poses a
continuing danger to persons or property or an ongoing threat of
dlsruptlDg the academic process. In such situations, tfie court held that
such a student could be summarily suspended wtth notice and hearing
occurring within 72 houra."
It la strongly recommended ttist local school districts dssslfy
suspension and resutting due process In a uniform, districtwide
fashion. For example:
■■«M( *. Bef« d fduoDon a/ taramoutn Settee! Dmma. 3M f SUf* SK. (DM1 1173)
"WBMjnr «. Mn aurwi AaWie ScMoa. 309 F SU^ 13M (ED MCH 1«W|
■Oiaon «. AMOTM. 3M US nO. 6 S Cl SM: 7 L Ed 2d m (IMI)
■Mawpnr «. Mm Bimwi futue ScnooM. 309 F SUP^ 13M (ED MCH. 1«W)
■Ooat «. Loom. iuon.
•Laou *. wmmm. 372 f surr rzn (SO 0»Mk if73)
43
109
L»n9tti at
Wbe
Suspttaion
Sutp«nd9
Short 7tm
Building ad-
minlstrstor or
porson dMig*
natod
L«ng Tonn
Buiiding ad*
minittrator or
parson daaig-
natad
Expuision*
Proe9durai
Oua Procan RmqulrwmmntB
a. Informal maating wtth building
administrator prior to
auspanslon
b. studant praaantod srWi ehargas,
avidanca and wttnassas, if any,
■gainst him/har
e. studant givan opportunity to dany
diargas and rabut avidanea
d. dadslon may ba appaaiad
a. Informal haaring «Wi supar*
Intandant or parson dasignatad
by tha local aehool beard
b. studant piaiaiitad witti ehargas,
a»Wanca and wttnassas. If any,
ag^nst Mm/har
e. studant ghran opportunity to dany
ehargas and rabut avidanea
d. studant antftiad to prasant own
wttnassas and to ba raprasantad
a. dacision may ba appaaiad
Board of Ed- a. formal haaring bafora board of
eation upon aducstfon
racommanda- b. wrtttan, prior notica to
tlon of auparin> atudant and parant or
guardian If tha studant is lass
than IB yaara old
e. studant prasantad with ehargas,
•vidaf>ca and wttnassas. If any,
against him/har
d. studant givan opportunity to dany
ehargas snd rabut avidanea
a. studant antltlad to prasant own
wttnassas
f. studant may hava raprasantation
tandant
I pnor to viitMBnQ wulMon. ■ s moM
ha bMn awimiao MnowaooaO- purmmM to mm ruMo o* Vm SUM Boar* ol ftturmitttn. m ■iilii»nm
■■ni ■iiiii«l pMnvng uomiwtu* muM b* miriiaa oner to OM aoien m tna am nanotcaopad BuOataa
mgiBliai lor •eaoal «uu>jiKir< twuiyna and nr iiaa can ba ri ■■■ ma mro — ■ili fxmoaa mat
fmn ■ m • mora tcorotnmm apocul aoucaBon propnw or ■awioa tnai roia» oa piuotoao M Umi of
110
Appendix V
Michigan Civil Rights Commission 1968 Report: Discipline and
Suspension Policy and Practices in Michigan Public Schools
DISCIPLINE AND SUSPENSION POLICY AND PRACTICES IN MICHIGAN POBLIC SCHOOLS
Seport of the
MICHIGAN Cim SIGHTS CCMMISSION
lebmarj 29, 1963
111
DISCIPLITifc AiVD SZE7ZIIS1CU FCLIC" .Mdi PRACTICED IN MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Bacial tension and disturbances between students and facultj have
reached the crisis point in several Michigan school districts. The situa-
tion in some of these schools has become known to the public and in others
it has not. A realistic appraisal of the school anrf cooDunity environment
in which tension has occurred reveals numerous underlying factors. Among
these, usually, are the questions of how policies of discipline and suspen-
sion are formulated and hov they are applied.
In order to highlight the seriousness of this problem, the Michigan
Civil Rights Commission has reviewed several situations in which its staff
has been directly involved.
Dearbora School District No. 8
In Nove«flber 1967, news media reported that a large group of Negro
youngsters had been arrested and later released to the custody of their
parents as a result of a rock-throwing incident at fiobichand Senior High
School in Dearborn No. 8 School District. T^-i* larger incident had been
precipitated by a fight between a Negro male student and a male physical
education teacher at the high school.
Die school responded to this fight by suspending several young Negro
students. Cie teachers indicated that they would not return to school until
the 3ocrd and administration established firm guidelines on the questions of
student conduct and discipline piocsdures.
In this situation, the students involved raised the question of an
unclear discipline policy and racially biased judgments by individual faculty
members, lie teachers deplored the fact that the students h^f^ no firm guide-
lines which would set out, for all parties concerned, what behavior was appro-
priate, and what acts would incur what discipline. The administration has
subsequently re-admitted the student involved in the original incident and ap-
pointed a stuc'-nt-faculty-administration committee to develop a code of conduct
and reccmn-nd' standard procedures.
Taylor Township
Tht situation In Taylor Township Senior and Junior High Schools was
reported to the MCRC throojh formal complaints in November 196?. Biese
alleged, among other things, the unequal application of discipline and sus-
pension standards based on the race of the students involved. As part of
the final disposition of the czsis, it was agreed that the Taylor Township
School administration would work with the Michigan Civil Eights Commission
to solve problems of this nature. Subsequently, the Superintendent and hi -5
administrative staff stated that there was no system-wide code. It is the
school administration's contention that it is the best policy for each dis-
ciplinarian - (school administrator or classroom teacher) to administer.
punishment according to >'-i^ own standards, taiHw^ the students' Individual
dl/ferences into account.
112
Discipline and Suspension Policj (Cont.) Pag*
River Rouge
In January of 1963, Negro students at Biver Bouge High School walked
out protesting conditions withia the school district. Among their grievances
was unequal application of discipline. Bie situation in Hirer Rouge reached
the attention* of the public. School was closed at the senior high school for
a day in order to give the faculty the opportunity to be confronted by the
students' allegations. Demonstrations continued before school began in the
morning, and at the lunch hour for a week.
Among the steps beins taken by the administration is the establishment
of a faculty-student committee to review existing discipline policies and to
make recommendations regarding the formulation of a more np-to-date version.
Ht. Clemens
Negro students at Mt. Clemens High School organized a walkout in
October 1967. Unequal treatment in discipline practices was high on their
list of complaints. HCHC staff met with students, concerned citizens, school
administrators and the Schcol Board regarding problems in the high school.
"Qie students returned to their classes as school officials promised to in-
vestigate and correct any inequities. Student and faculty groups were estab-
lirhsd to facilitate the probles solving.
Subsequent to this action, a number of Negro students have been sus-
pended, placed on probation, or have dropped out of the high school, including
seniors to graduate in June 1968. All of these students participated in the
October walkout. A particular concern is the practice of requiring high school
students to sign agreements which state that they will voluntarily withdraw
from school if they violate prescribed standards of conduct. Biia agreement
may become binding if tha student is involved in any further discipline matter.
Negro parents feel that this procedure is being applied in a discriminatory
fashion.
Oak Park
On February 21, 1963, some 300 adults and youth from the Royal Oak
Township area of Oak Park Schools met to discuss problems encountered in
the junior and senior high schools. Reports of unequal and unfair treatment
were related during this m-eting. While acknowledging that this public testi-
mony was not verified, the residents argued that a critical problem existed
and directed telegrams to the Michigan Civil Sights Commission and the State
Board of Education, requesting an investigation of "a racial crisis".
Rumors of a major racial confrontation among students are widespread
in the Oak Park District and absenteeism was high during the week of February
19. "Hie rate of Negro and white student expulsions is also greatly increased.
The MCBC staff is conferring with citizens and school officials to
clarify the facts and identify the central issues in this natter.
113
Discipline and Suspension Policj (Cont. )
Kala/na;oo
Pa
ee
Central Cants n,,-(n» v '^e^ua-L treatment of Negro students at Xalanaioo
crests ..r. .ad., «,d • n^ber of stad.nS «!.^t,!^J ? ^ ^?°^'
«... ^on..uii°t'^iii^^^r^^^:'^^^- """"^ '— °' *"
Board Of Education "IVstcrl l^v I^ oSj ^'^"i'" '^" "^ **• lt«i««"o=
di.cipll.ar. ..a^., 2=\\°IL5^"'nSrJf:"1l^:„^rL'Sti°L%'^?.
action, th. Board also r.cco..nd.d stn-al oS.^^H^ u •f*','"" «» ""a
».Cro M=tor7 into ti. curSSl a^d tt. adSSon S' " "=l"ion of
=rd.r to r.U.„ th. underl^ns rao"ia1%.1»';'jS„:^^r-'^ '•""' '"'' ^
Other Districts
yarding tflS'iJd ^".^SL'Ion'ScSi'oTof'd?""?"' """•• •^'^.tion, re-
Battl, Cr..k Detroit Sfik^'-T'S^.' diaciplin. hav. also bo.n nad. in
Tp.i.anti,L.^:?>^'tSf^,L-;.-i:n!S°i;d^So'.'-:;rJ:if--"^
School PopulaH nn
occurred''LTf':S;sf "^^ "'*'°' "^'^'''^ ^ -^'■"^ "»«« ^"'^""t,
neighbo^'In'c^l" e^inLt^r* £e^ Sjf^* n" '"r*''" ''^^^ ^^- ^■^-
population ort.: ^oT^^^, ^^^l^tTtll^s'^C^'' ^^%^!!^ S^'=^
population or the school district is ap.Sroxi..t"l^^ ^3^^ tS%Sd';nt'p1^S:.
popuiati'^n^^": i::^\r^is%ir^T.ni:'^^ ^Tr "^Lr^" -^-^
^ ^rlor is less than 2^ of th;^tS^^opS;tio^ ^° '""'"' population
^,000 sSi:ntf 2; ^e'SeS:"''"?":? '"'^' ^""^- ^' ^ approxi^ately
=cuQents and the Negro population is approxiaately 56%.
achooi °^ fr*" ^ * "^"''^ district located in Oakland CountT It^ tai-.i
-^k -, ^°°^^^ i-3 * school district located in Oakland r.««„*^ t^ * ^ ;
echool population is approxiinately 17 000 S.T^ County. Its total
-presents approximate!? 253^ of tJe'^^S'sch^V^'I^u:. '"' ''°P'^^"«
114
Disciplir.e and Suspeosion Policy (Cont.) Pag-
The City of Kalamazoo has a total population of approrunately 82,OCO,
and of that population approxi^iately S.JH are Negro.
Status of Present Law
The authority of school boards to authorize suspension or expulsion,
and to oake reasonable rules and regulations regarding discipline is granted
under Public Acts cited in the School Code. Section 613 of the School Code
authorizes suspensions for the following reasons: (1) gross misdeameanor,
(2) persistent disobedience, or (3) habits or bodily conditions detrimental
to the school. Guidelines set by the State, although controlling, leare rooa
for broad interpretation by individual school districts.
There is a wide-spread problem with respect to the riolation of the
rights of public school children through the absence or inadequacy of safe-
guards for due process of the law in the procedures followed by many school
districts in iiuplementing suspension and expulsion authority, Ciere is, in
fact, accunulating evidence that this deficiency affects, most acutely, Negro
and poor children.
Disciplinary action, which takes the form of suspension or expulsion,
generally falls into three basic categories:
(1) short-term suspension which does not usually exceed
five days
(2) suspension ranging from five days to Tarying lengths
of time and,
(3) permanent expulsion or e:cclusion.
Bie most severe form of discipline administered by school officials is
expulsion. Any student subject to this action is in fact deprived of his
right to a free public school education as guaranteed in the Michigan Constitu-
tion.
Underlying the racial tension which has erupted into open confrontation
in numerous Michigan school districts this current year is the question of un-
equal application of discipline as seen by Negro students at the secondary level.
The matter of the unequal application of discipline raises the question of what
action can be taken at the State level to aid in the solution of this problem.
State Responsibility
Michigan Constitution and laws guarantee every citizen the right to
equal educational opportunity without discrimination. Die State Board of
Education is vested by the Michigan Constitution with "leadership and general
supervision over all public education ..." Bie Michigan Civil Rights Commis-
aion also shares responsibility under the Michigan Constitution -for securing
the civil rights of all citizens. The Michigan Civil Bl^ts Coomlssion and
the State Board of Edocatioa have acknowledged their dual responsibility is
115
Discipline and Suspension FoLLcj (Cont.)
«^t»t-— ^-,■ * ^ t *prii. of 1966. Itis dual resuonsibilit-r oeee«-
o"t^: iJiJe." ° '" ""* ^"^"^ "'^ developi^ uniro« pollcie; "t^ou;^.
. .,.^ ?*' followiflg recommendations are made ia lirht of th- Stat. ^
c nicnajan tivox Hi^ts Coooission must take joiat action.
Preface
15 ^1^?!„S^°°^ ^* °^ ^' ^*^^* °^ Michigan, Section 3^0.613 (MSA
15.3613) authorizes suspensions for the following reasons: *
1* gross misdeaeanor
2. persistent disobedience
3. habits or bodilj conditions detrimental to
the school.
of Education u« ^^^e^aSn^L*^?^ ! recommendation that the State Board
«iistricts miv^ollof fTH!^^ au^orxty to set a standard that local school
Of loca^ SfoTdfsSc?:'':? Sm"^s TS"^""' '! ^^^ovledge the responsibility
scaooi districts, at times, to suspend or exclude a student because:
1. of behavior that infringes on the riAts of
other c.iildren to an education or
2. because of the student's inability to be
educated in a "nonnal" school enrircnment.
-ch^^ude'nt^.'^*''' '"''-' ^'^ Constitution,has the responsibility to educate
*n the .afe^ards of due oroces^ of ^e ll^ sSld*.."^ 1^^ ~ * fr'^*^^^ iil^
1. right to counsel
2. right to call witnesses
3* right to cross examination
H.. right to remain silent
5« right to appeal
116
I
Discipline and Suspension Policy (Cont.)
Page
rollowe?2%!J!/!r'=""?*'^°"/° ^°=«^ «"°ol districts which should be
and S;:pe^i°l''- """" '^'°"' P'^^*" '*' *=^«-« "'^ *?-=i7 discipline
1.
Each school district should reriev its discipliiie and susT^easion
practices in light of thr — '—■•—•- . • • - • °
in public schools today.
practices in li^nt of the underlyins seaeral and racial tiasicns
lools todar.
2. Administrators, teachers, students, and parents, should be
incluaed in the review and re-definition of this discipline
ma suspension ■oolicy.
3. The local policy should contain the following elements:
*• system-wide notice - local school policy
and the procedure for its iiirolenentation should
be widely prooulgated, so thkt all parties in-
Tolved - parents, students, teachers, and ad-
aiaistrators, know what conduct is ejtpected of
them in their local school districts.
*>• individual notice - prior notice, where
possible, should be given to students and
parents regarding pending discipline or
suspension.
c. when prior notice is not possible,
parents should be notified fully of ;
i. school policy
il. the full nature of the student's grlevance
ili. school action
iv. parental action. If any, necessary to regain
the admittance of the student
T. what avenues are left open to parents when
they disagree with the action taken by
school authorities in the case of perma-
nent exclusion? Zixe appeal process should
be formally communicated to the oarents and
should afford the opportuiilty for a hearing
before :
(a) the State Board of Education
(b) the courts.
Education Division
PJ
2-29-^
117
Appendix VI
Letter of Understanding Between Kentwood School District and
Concerned Students and Parents
LSSTXB oy aDBBJR&XDZVS
IMTIUOD ICXOOL OZATJUCOS •
CtHH'MUtMI> STUSarTf MMO PJUUBTS
FoUovlog « sarlM of rtudant oos£liets vltb rmcial
onrmrtaamM vhicfa culmiaatad is th» wqnzltfion tram school of
eve XtrLezn Aaarlean »end«nt»»th» CoaaiinitY S*laeiens
Sorvlca of tha tZhitad fltAtas D^pmr^mnt of Jtutlca eoavmnmd
« number of disoossion ssssiaBa with raprvssntativma frea
thm Xcatvood School District Is JHchigan Mod stadsnts,
parents snd eoniaiinity rsprsssatstives of two Ifriesa
Aasriooa organ itstloas.
Ths school was raprassntsd bf Mm* Linda David, Prssidsnt of
tha Xantwood S^iool Board; Dr. Ktry LsJksr, Soparintandant;
Ms. Boaaaary Xrrina, Assistant Soparintandant for
corricolna/ Znstmction; Mr. Bebart OaVrias, Assistant
guparint andant for Busan Basoorcaa; and Or. Larry Corbatt,
Principal of East Xantvood High flcfaoel, Raprasaating tha
Copcamad Parent croup varat Ms. Linda Eitsfaoocde, Mr. Kaaaa
Eosay, Mr Billy Taylor, and Ms. Barbara Blasslagaaa
(parents) ; Ms. Bailie Blue (BAAC7) ; Mr. Rodney Brooles (Turban
League) ; and Ms. Tia Bates, Mr. Anthony Barvay, and Mr. Curt
Agard represented the students.
Through a mTwber of cfiesnulty foruas, ,the above naaed
parsons had been selected to represent the concerns and
issues of interest to the Afriean AaerdLcan ooBanaity. A list
of discussion topics vers sabaiittad to oa, as a basis for
the negotiations that took place on 31/39-11/30/93 and
conrinued on 1/ii/B4, a/l5/94, 3/1S/94 and 4/13/94.
The foUovlag is a suBBary of the conclusions and concensiu
reached dm-in^ the coi^rse of these eastings.
1) . The rnwimnity requests a thorough investigation of the
alleged existenca of vhlte suprseacy groups vithln the
Xantvood School Syetea.
A.) Thm school district has retained the servioes of a
private investigacioa fira from another part of the
state to invefl-tigate the possible aacistence of such
a group.
118
B.) tbM high aeheel principal vlU providm tha
»«gotl«tlng ea«iatt«« with • copy of tha
*gvMtig»tlon report vhlch ia axpactad to ba
""laittaa vill, in tarn, raviav and BaJca lt« own
»od/ar vlthla taw vmrnkm of racaipt of tha abova
raforanead raport.
^♦^S"^^,"'"**^ ^^* policy anneuncaaanta ba
thatracial .lura vlll not ba tolaratad and that an
•Mandua to tha atudant handbook ba indodad that
<i«talla that policy. «»*«««» ««^
*.) »• ■chool aystaa haa alraady ondartakan som action
«y MXing public addraaa announcaBanta, as vail aa
including aantlen in tha atodant ballatlna of aaro
tolaranoa to racial haraaaaant.
B.) »• •chool district agraad to davalop a draft of a
P*»if°y *V 13/9/93, praaant it to th« group for
raviav and raapenaa, and to inolada tha policy as an
JddMto to tha East Kantvood High School studant
^outl/aJyJi^ «»• and aasMtar ragiatration on or
^'^ ^tH'^^^ **" sgraad to incorporata saxual and/or
JJoijlharas««nt aa pjrt of Ita. 13 in stud«rt^'
handbook, iha policy irlll raad as foUovsi
J««*i «nd/or Racial haraaaaant: Saxual harassaant
iMludas, but is not ll«ltad to, any umralcoaTS^
™«t^ saxual advancaa, or othaTJaSS^^tSn
or physical conduct of a saxual natura that is
onvantad by or tmvalooBa to a stodant. Racial
Jfraaaaant, vhich Ineludea, but is not llaitad to
T!f J!^J^°"' «*»9r«ding ramarJcs and coamnta of 7n
incltaful natura. Xaeh offanaa aay rSSt S
P«r«otal contact, poaaiblaona to tan days
w«P«sion poasibla poUca contact, posiibla
*^«»aadad axpulalon. ' •^■"'*"
^ S^i^T^^J ITF^^*^ ^^^ ■ 'o™*l "oial harasssant
poUcy ba astabliahad by tha Board of BduMtlon/^^
A.) '^^twooi School Board has baan raviawing tha
nj^or «ch a policy with thair lagal coSaS? At
praaant tha lagality of tha wording to involva
racial slnra haa dalayad tha finaliriag^J
r?S?!"^^* TT^'^J^ violat. rirstlaandBant
rights. Tha policy draft has bacn subnittad S tha
Offica of Civil Rights in Dacaabar for thairlavllv.
119
■chool dUtrict irith postfUala aedds of •xl«tlap
*atl-dl»CTi«ljuUo« pollcl*. th*t iuv Mt 1^
r«vl«f «ad/or Supr«M Coxrrt opinions. Th«
•^•rlntandmat agraas to contact tho wyoaina School
Sr^i^jT^.'^'^rr^^ "^y ^^^ in pinrnoTSir
n^.tiK{l^i.^- ^^^^y Taylor ifill b« thm commuxlty
m^^^J^ vill provido ut«riml tro. tbo KiS^^
2^2.2^ ^ ^ ■«P«rint«nd«jit r«l«tiv« to r«cUI
baraMMiit, conflict TMolution, and hat* group*.
4.) Tho studenta feai that thay ara not aDla to achlava
^*^ S5 i?-rS!f "^^"^ council ia alactad at larg.
and alao eonpoaas a claaa as a group. Tha high
•e^l principal daal. with a cSJtt.rofrtud.nt
council advi«ar. in addraaaing atudent concera.?
■•' ^r^^^'i^i ■'^!*' ^^ wtabliah a co«mitta.
^oaed of 2 .tudant council adviaora, 2 »ajority
JS?rS^^ ^ minority atudant* vith 4ha "iSa to
reviav tha preaant atructur* and naka aooroDrll?-
to anaura that ainority atudanta hava a voie. 2« '
propoaal. vhich 1. an on^^^SS'pJScSjrT '*^"*^-"^
**^ S^*^n'^'^v?*^2f^ •^ -inidwita fael a n.«l to
hava^an aaa«Bbly by grada lav.l to diacua. riSiar
*"^ 2'nSJ^^S!^ ^°** ~^ ""*^ ^^^ Maaably by grad.
iJv^2^ J!**"" °' ^ l*^« "^"i^' of atuSmS
iSTiT^'.Jf^? ^? tpproxiMtaly 2.000 atudwtTin
tha high .chool which tranalatw roighiy S^S
ss°.srir^sf'of^•s??'s;'.s3aS;'' 'p^"-^-
"*^ 35! r"^~^P*i '^••* ^ ^"'^Jt ^ith a coaaitt.. fw
JJ* if2f*^" ^"^ *»»ving racial ia.J.. JcSviS^.r
tha high .chool. Tha coinunity UaiwJ, Si S ^
J«ln.y arooJca .jvi m.. R.lii. Jiua 2 SlaSno.^
d.v.lop foraat and approach. AdditionTlfj 2!
S"^:2uSt"^- ^°^ ''^^ di^^T^'olAt'trtt^r
to coaaunity rMourc.. «ioh a. iric iriii«-«-
|r^id.nt Of X.J. William* *^Sr.Sit^S^:
fi*in«, Prwidwt of Oain«a, irinfl.irJASroJiata.;
120
Txnn Oalton, Xducatlon Chalrpcrcon of Cultnr&l
Oivanlty N«tvork; Mary Idaond, Partacr of
BtflActiona Onlimitad; «ttd Or. Char 1m Varflald of
INstcm Xichlgan Onlvuraity; ato.
It la baliav^ that aa intaractiva axareiaa la
thought to b« mora affaetlva hacauaa It'a a handa-on
approach and provldaa mora of an opportunity for
dlalogua bafora and aftar which ia what tha atndanta
want to aaa happaa. It la iaportant to acta that va
atrongly baliava all atudanta in tha diatrict ahould
ba involvad ia anch aa aoeivity.
Tharefora, tha Aaaiat^ant Suparintandast ia charga
of iastructioa, lU. Irvlna, vgraad to davalep and/or
iaplaaant an aaaashly at aach achool ia tha diatrict
ntilicia? axisting raaouroaa vhara poaaihla aad/or
availahla. Ms. Blna and Mr. Breoka, vith tha
coaaunity negotiatinn taaa, vill halp to coordiaata.
C.) Tha STAK orgaaizatioa ia eomposad of African Aaarisaa
atndanta who want to ba allotrad to participata aa a
raeogniaad caapua group. STMl atanda for aTUUKVTS
TOGZTHZR ACJLXX8T lU^CZSM and do«s not prasantly hava a
faculty spoasor(a) .
A.} Tha priacipal has ao objaction to tha greop'a
axirtanca or participation in achool activitiaa,
or ia advartiaiag through channala; hovavar, all
achool sponaorad cluba suat aaat eartaia critaria
and agraa to achool ragulatioaa.
B.} Tha principal providad tha atudanta (via Aathony
Barvay) a liat of all aehadula B af filiatad achool
eluba, but failad to provida thaa vith partinant
ragulatioaa and/ or raquiramanta for bacoaiag a
achool apoaaorad club. Upoa raoaipt of tha abova
aaatioaad ragulatioaa -aad raffuiraaanta, tha atudaata
agraa to apply for achool apcnaorad affiliation and
eoaply vith district rulaa.
C.) A barniaiag uait iaaua vaa axpraaaad by tha
diatrict aa to vhathar or aot thay vara obllgatad to
effar th« poaitioa of apoaaor to a aaabar of tha
faculty or vhathar a parant aad/or voluntaar oould
aarva la that capacity. Aa a raault of that
diacuaaioa. Dr. corbatt vill inqair* aaong high
a<diool ataff if anyona haa an intarast in baing a
faculty aponaor for STAlt. Additionally, tha
diatrict vill raaaarch other Miehigaa diatrieta that
Bight eurrantly utilixa vol\mtaara in Schadula B
cluba that doaa not opan tha district op to all
121
Mc^i ot yi uups •
Drs. LaDcat uvi Corbatt, mlooq with coBmmity
a«Bb«rs Blas«ingftaa &nd Taylor, vlll verk as «
sab-comlttaa to davslop acMptabls lariTua^a
n^arliag thm STAR group aa a racognixad school
q?ottserad einb, and tha uaa of a faculty, and
parmnt aponserahip.
7 . ) da nagotiatlng taaa f aals strongly that tha prasent
currieuluB doaa not halghtan recognition, avaranass and
appraciatioa for tha contrlhutions of sinoritias in
Aaariean soclaty.
A.) Thm school district faals strongly that in tha last
two yaars, substantial progress tUiB b^mn sada In tha
expansion of course content, in tha acquiring of
sxtanslvs Bultloultural Batarlals, mnd in tha
la^iuvwnt of taaehar a%raranasa and cospliance
vlth Public Act 25.
B.) Tha Assistant St^arintandant for Curriculua agrees
to provide, to Kr. Billy Taylor, a coapleta list of
prasent available raferancas and resources and tha
extent of their utllitation by facultY *^
students. The casmlttee agr aaa to review and Bake
reeoKBandatlons of other reference saterials the
district say consider including.
C.) The principal agrees to ravlev the present class
trips planned, the expected lect\irera aeheduled, and
the level of funding available for possible short-
tars efforts to isprove the sultioultural
exparianoes for all students.
D.) The principal vill convene a saeting of his
sulticiiltural cosBittae (Concerned About Our Kids)
and invite Mr. Bossy and Mr. Taylor to participate.
Tha CfiBBlttee vill develop updated plans and
recoBsandatlons by 1/22/94.
8.) The concerned parents and students are opposed to the
establi«haant of a D«as of Students position that does
not have the responsibility to insure change.
A. } Tha Bup«rintandent had begiin tha procaaa of securing
authorisation to hire a person and bad already
conveyed to tha Board of Kducatlon a specific
recnraendation for the job to be considered at tha
next scheduled board Bavting.
B.) Because of the coBsunity concerns regarding the
aasignmant of that position to the high school, as
122
oppo^^d to tha antral of£ie«, th« npcrlstwidant
agr— to vlthdrav h«r raeoaaaodationa «t tha
raqoMt et ttaa nagotimtlng eeiKittaa paadiag
ravlav of tha job dascriptlon, and consult
fnrthar vltH tha naTOtlatiag eoaaittaa and bar
adsiniatrativa staff baf ora mMklng « filial
racoooMBdatlon to tha school board.
C) Dr. Lalkar indlcatad that thera was no consansus
that this voold ba a distriot-vida position
varsus a building- laval poaitioa. Sha also axpraaaad
a ooneani that funding <»uld ba a problaa and
raguastad tha halp of tha niminiiiiity nagotiating
ooKAittaa ia *vrastling vlth tiiis importunity.*
».} Tha comittaa faals strongly that thera appaars to ba a
lack of cultural sacsltlvlty by tha faculty and staff of
tha Kantvood School District. Tha eoasittaa raquasts
that a coaprahanslva divarsity training packaga ba
davalopad that would involva tha latast up-to-data
inatruction possibla.
A.) Iba auparintandant has undartakan axtansiva af forts
to provida aultioultural avaranaaa training in aany
foras. Tha dirtrict has schadulad all staff for
inaarviea that includas tha World of Diffaranea
Training. All staff is tha antira district
should hava coaplatad tha World of Diffaranoa
inaarviea by 2/94. To data tha high school
oooplatad tha training on 11/10/93 and tha middla
schools should ba dona by Dacaabar 1993. on 3/34
aaka-up saaaiona irill ba conductad.
B.) Bacanaa tha coanunity faala strongly that tha
affaetivanaas of tha training should ba danonstratad
by parforaanca, soma accountability should ba
raflaotad ia parforaanoa avaloationa. fha
auparintandant concurs that soma avaluata aachanism
naads to ba davalopad. Xs. Sallia Bins and Xr,
Iiodnay IreoXs vlli provida, axlsting aodals
prasantly in placa in otbar districts to tha
assistant suparintandent of curriculum by 3 /IS.
10.) Qia Coaaiifllty Hagotiating Taaa baliavaa that thara ia a
lack of visibla minority rola aodals dua to tha lack of
suff iciant ainority faculty and adBinistrators that
contrihuta to tha inability of African Aaarican
atudanta to ba an idantifiibla part of caapus lifa.
A.) Tha school syataa acknovledgas tha naad for bettar
minority raprasantation at all lavals of tha school
anvironaaat.
123
B.) Thm •;9«rin't«nd«nt agr*** to \ind«rtAk« a n««da
•■•«ssmant by rsviavlA? tha Z.I.O. raport. T&a
aehool diatrlct vlll idasrify all araaa vtiara
minoritlaa ara undar utilizad and prlarieisa thoaa
araaa tor aggracalva racruitaant. Tha aebool tfyrtaa
vlll attaspt to asa all availatala raaourcaa for tha
idactlfication of casdldataa lncara«tad la vaxXiag
tar tha Xantvood School Oiatriet, to Ineluda
natlonAl aaarchaa vtiara naeaasary. Thm district
vlll ratals tha aarvieas of 4 minority aaarch fira
vhan naadad and ra^uaat Inpat and rafarrala froa
tha nagetiatlng oonlttaa.
C.} Tha Oiatrict agraaa to ijqireva Klnorlty
raprasantation at all elaaaifleatleaa of
aaployacnt vithln tha district. Tha districts 9oal
is to prioritlza avallabla high prefila poaltlona
for quallf lad alnority candidatas and to insura
that aach hulldin? aball hava appropriata minority
raprasantation at all classifications of aa^loyxant
vithln tha district.
D.) Tha district a^reas to provlda tha negotiating
comaittaa vith a list of ainority saarch firms
that hava baan or vlll ba contactad by tha aehool
district. Tha Assistant Suparintandant for
Instruction vill ba rasponsibla for providing tha
Coaaittaa vith tha list by 5/lfi/94.
124
11.) ThM K«gotiatln9 Candtta* r«qu««t tlut th«
•diOaistratlon ratJLin thm ■arvlcms of an euuid*
eonsoltast (fixm^groopror individual} to
facilitat« tha iBplaawxtarion of a BUltieultural
currioilm. dia can«ultant aha 11 hava
provvn ability to IjqpiaoMnt such a prograx.
A.) A liat ot caodidatAS for conaidaration
•ball ba providad fay tha coaannity nagetiatiag
caBBittaa to tba acbeol adainiatration by
4/33/94.
B.) Cia district «d.ll utilixa outaida raaourcas
inoloding Verld of Oiffarasca, othar
eonaultanta, eooBBunity maab«rs, and or a liat of
candidatas suhaittad by tha ctaBunity
nagetiating eeaadttaa for poaaibla naa ia tha
area of onrricalua. 9m actual consaltaat or
aaaiatant to ba usad for azxy salticnltaral
carrienluB daeision naada to raaain a
daoision by tha Aaaistant Suparintandant for
cuxrieulua Council. Thia is eonsiatant vith tha
agraoBaot in tha taachar'a contract for
eurrieuluB iaplaaaatation (aaa attachad Master
Jigraaaaat - Artiola 12) . In addition, any actual
aalactien of a parson to assiat tha diatrict
would ba ultiaataly rasponsibla to tha Board of
Sdnoation.
12.) Tha Hagotiating CosBittaa baliavea that tha
adainiatration ahould rst«in tha aarvieas of an
outaida consultant (f ira, group* or isdivldnal) ,
undar tha direct suparvision of tha Diraetoor of
Multicultural Davalopmant,to diraet tha Ixplaaantation
of racisa/athnie diversity training for all achool
sBployaes. This consultant shall hava proven ability
to iaplaBant such a progrea.
JL.) X. liat of candidatea for conaideration shall ba
provided by the c.iriBii unity negotiating eoaaittee
to the school adainietration
B.) The District agrees to utilize outside resource
vith the saae aethodology aa outlined in aeetion
II above.
13.) The Negotiating eoaaittee feela that tha aohool
district should identify all araaa vhera ethnic
ainoritiea are under-utilised and prioritise those
areas for aggresaiva recruitaent.
125
JL. ) shia «r«« of eeneam va« thoroughly diaonssad
imdar 8«ctlos lO) dealing vlth Xlaorlty
BipleyBsnt vlthla the Xantvood seheel District.
B.) the K«9oti«tiji9 CoBaittee requests the inclusion
of elnerity (zian<»«chool personnel) oo^ranlty
■eabers (prefarmble Beaber e£ professienel/
eoBBunity organisetion) on the selection,
screening, end intarviev coHBittee.
The District agrees to include any parent and/or
roBBiiinlty ninority Beabera to offer suggestions
for the interviev eoBmittee to consider as veil
es a list of attribtztea the candidates should
possess.
c.) The CoBBittee requests that for each Binority
candidate who was intervieved but not hired, the
ads 1 nistra tion shall document trtqr the cendidate
was not hired.
3be District agreee thet vithin the legal
persBeter that protect the privacy and
confidentiality rights of the individual
applicants the oosBittee will be provided status
r^orts.
D.} nie CoBBittee requests the reessessaent
building aeeignaents of ainorlty staff
to reflect ainority student
enrol laent throughout the district.
Thm Superintendent egrees to require all School
Buildino Adainistratora to evaluate their
fiespectiva XXO Reports and set appropriate goals
per building to hire or tranafer Klnorities as
opportunity and needs becosle evident. This
expectation of all Building Adainistrator vill be
iaploentad for 199j4-1999 School Teer.
2. } The eoMiinlty requests that all publicised
advertiseaaata for cpan positions shall include
the stateaent "Minorities era encourBgad to
epply",or elailar language in addition to the
standard Z.O.I, etateaent.
She District agraaa to this request.
r.) Tha CoBKunlty would like to eee the District hire
a Xinorlty Supplier Developaent Coordinator to
eneure that opportunitiee exist for the school
district to utilite the servicee of ainority
contractors and s\tppliers.
126
Ih«r« iM BO pocition of thim typ» vithin tbm
district «t tbi* tiam. Smm dotlM at* handlad
vlthin th« »uMin»*a Mpartaant. 9a« caBSunity
vlll b« proridad vltb th* prap«r contact parmon.
14.) Th« Cegmunlty rwju**^ ^^ School District hlr^ a
Schools, tbi* p«rsen Bhsll hsva at laast thm follovlag
raaponsibllltlafl :
1. Sarvs as tha first contact for all athnie/raclal
Issoss, oonesns, problaas/ aad Incidents vlthla
ths school district; Invsstigata all such raportad
issuss, concama, prohlass and Incidanta, and
racoBiMnd approprlata oorractlvs action to
approprlats paraenasl.
2. Actlvaly partlelpata in tha davalopaaat and
ijq^lsmantatlon of prograstf and prooassas vhioh vlll
snhanca staff and faculty davalopsast and ancouraga
avaranass and raspaot for tha eultioral dlvaraity
vithln t2ia school and eoBHonlty.
3. Chair an on-^olng district ^vldo aulticultural
support groi^ oosposad of studants, cosBunlty
BOfBhers, school staff, and adMlniatratlon.
4. JLttand Bsatlngs, claasaa, vorkshopa, and saminars
to stay atoraast of tha lataat davalopaants and
advaneas for paf sonal and profassional growth.
5. it*i«^j4n dociatantatlon of all raportad athnlc/
racial coneams, iamaea, problans, and incidents;
decuaant tha raoossandad ixplaaantad corractiva
action.
6. Adviaa tha adnlnlstratien or Principal ragarding
tha lapact of policies and procaduras open
stndants, ataff , and faculty of color.
The Adalnlstratlon agraaa to astabliah tha position
for Director of KultlColtural Oavalepaant to be in
place by sid June 1994. in raferanea to the areas of
responsibility for a position to vorJc as district-
vide faollltator for all students in the district,
the areas 2,3,4,6, and i veuld fall vithln the
responsibility of such a position. In reference to
Buaber 1, the boilding level Xesistant Principala
met continue to serve as first contact for any
oonoem or Incident vithln their eohool eetting. it
127
i» thm rccpenslbility of thm laB«di«t«
idainlctrmtora to Jjiyvsclgata any ktm of conoem
and racoBsaad apprupriata action. It is appropriata
^o axpttct a paraon in tba oapaclty of district •
vida facilitator to sarva in an appaals procadura
capacity.
B.) itis coB<taa racoasand that this parson shall
hava at laast tha folleving qualifications:
1. KlntBia of a bachalors da^raa (prafarahla
■astars Oagraa) , or aquivalant, in poblie
administration, aducation, or ralatad fiald.
2. Xxparianca in trorking vithin a BUlticultural
anvironaent.
3. Strong oomnmioation skills- ability to
cooBunieata affactivaly with studants,
faculty, staff, and adainistration, as vail
as staff.
A, Avars of axtamal conninity rasourcas vhich
can provida a diract linkaga vith tha school
for tha banafit of tha studanta and faculty.
S. Provan organixational and parsonnal
aanagaxant skills.
«. Prafarably an activa participant in
profassional/eoBBunity organizations.
?• Parsonal ajq>arianca vith raspact to
conflict rasolution pertaining to racial/
sthnic issnas.
Tha District agraas that in raf aranca to tha
qualifications for this position itass 1 through
7 ara supportad by tha district vould dafinitely
axpact a parson to havs axparianca and
nndaratanding in dealing vith racial /athnic
isauas.
IS.) Tha Hagotiating Taan faal that tha Adalnistration
■hould conduct pariodio coaaninity foruas to infora tha
public of vhat is going on vithin tha school diatrict
*nd to offsr tha public tha opportunity to infomally
«« qua«tions and axprmaa oplniona and racaiva
iaaadlata rasponaa froa achool raprasantativaa. Thia
torxMt vlll ba antiraly dlffarant than that usad at
tha achool board »*«tiixg«. Thaaa B**tings ■hmiij ba
bald at laa«t thTm9 ti»aa par yaar on tha first Monday
of Kay and October.
128
A.) Th« Di«t=rict will a9r«« to two public
iff?^* tJ**^ provided thm negotiation Twub i«
part of th« foniM to insup* th« •VMt« «r« of
a con«tructiv« natura. Tha da^aa for thasa
K^iL'ffTT* "^^ ** •omatima La octobar 1994
anc Miy 1995 .
"■^ 2!uS^r^ beliayaa tha l.val of aacurlty ahould b.
SSS^?1.^.°*"T^ <?":?'*^*^ l«vala. Thoai parsons
?if^^5f Mcurity ahould raflact tba divaral^ of
taa atudaat population. '
Tha Diatrict agraa to conf ar with tha Security
SS*C]'-f!?*^r* *T ^' **=*'®*'^ Dirtrict to iniur.
SS^^T^I^^* Mi^o*-!^ Security Paraonnal during
■chool hour* ar* available.
A..)
iL^ .J2 V^* ^* in*^«^ity of tJiia agreeaent th«
bS !?--'"• ^ '"nc^on as a aelf enf orce«ant aaSSiiS
hSSiJ S'J'^'*.^*' Mnitor l-pl«m«itation of the wSiJiS^
is i?*!^ availabi. for aeeting raque.ted by either .iSI
that^^ght reault during the i-vl««ntation pha.^e ?f JiS
L^SS^^kiS^IIJS?^ "** underataadUig cont«in«l in thi.
partl1?'Sd.S*t^"^*^.."SS' tS'*«S^^P^^*'°!- ?•
Lattar a^ rTnrtmV7r_ _.7r^ •9«^ee -cnat tAe duration of thii
». thirty .ftU o«p .Ipaturw tlu..:!^d.y ccUL^, i„.
KENTWCXJD PUBLIC SCHOOLS
*DnV0O0, laCHIGAK
129
KUT XBTTVOOO SISH SCHOOL
cuHss Toraaszp, kxcsicam
iktxy mS
COMXTTTZE OF COHCZRNZD CITIZZNS
JAiy^uwr^j
Coininmtty lUprasantatiws
q.s pgPARiKDrr of obstick
C0NNUHXT7 XSIATIONS SSKVZCZ
DETROI
Wltziess :
Ousravo
isravo G«yn«oc, Olractor
□irac
130
Appendix VII
Public Act 328
STATE OF MICHIGAN
87TH LEGISLATURE
REGULAR SESSION OF 1994
Introduced by SenBtora Gongeon, Dunaakin, DINeUo, SteU, Clsky. Boadianl, Dillingham mnd Emmona
ENROLLED SENATE BILL No. 966
AN ACT to amend section 1311 of Act No. 451 of the Public Acta of 197G, entitled as amended "An act to provide a
■yatem of public instiuction and eJementary and secondaiy achoob; to reriae. exMiaolidate, and classify the lawi relating
to elementary and secorulaiy education; to provide for the dassiflcntioo, organiratioa, regulation, and maintenance of
schools, school districts, and intennediate school districta; to prescribe rights, powa, duties, and privileges of achoola,
school districts, snd intermediate school districts; to provide for the regulstion of school teachers and achool
administrators; to provide for school elections and to prescribe powers and duties with respect thereto; to provide for
the levy snd collection of taxes; to provide for the borrowing of roon^ and issuance of benda and other evidences of
indebtedness; to establish a fund and provide for expenditures from that fond; to provide for and prescribe the powers
snd duties of certain state departments, the state board of education, and certain other boards and oCiriah; to provide
for licensure of boarding schools; to prescribe penalties; and to repeal certain acts and parts of acta," aa amended by AA
Na 335 of the Public Acts of 1993, being section 380.1311 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
The PeopU qfUu Stale o/Mietugan tnaet
Section 1. Section 1311 of Act Na 451 of the Public Acts of 1976, as amended by Act No. 335 of the Public Acts of
1993, being section 380.1311 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, is amended to read aa followc
Sec 131L (1) Subject to subsection CZ), the school board, or the school district superintendent, a school building
principal, or another school district ofEdal if designated by the school board, may authorixe or order the suspension or
expulsion fnr.. ^^^ of s pu(.n guflty of gross misdemeanor or persistent disobedience if, in the judgment of the school
board or its designee, as applicable, the interest of the school is served by the authorization or order. If there is
reasonable cause to believe that the pupil is handicapped, and the school district has not evahiated the popO in
accordance with rules of the state board to detenmoe if the student is handicapped, the pupfl shaO be evahated
immediately by the intermediate school district of which the school district is constituent in accordance with section
1711.
(2) If a pupil possesses in a weapon free school zone s weapon that constitutes a dangenms weapon, or commits anon
in the school building or on the school grounds, or rapes someone in the building or on school grotinds, the school board,
or the designee of the school board as described in subsection (Don behalf of the school board, shall expel the pupil from
the school district permanently, subject to possible reinstatement under subsection (5), unless the pupil establishes in a
dear and convincing manner at least 1 of the following:
(s) The object or instrument possessed by the pupQ was not possessed by the pupil for use as a weapon, or for direct
ur indirect delivery to another person for use ua a weapon.
(b) The weapon was not knowingly possessed by the pupiL
(c) The pupil did not know or have reason to know that tlie object or ianrument possessed by the pupil constituted
a dangerous wea|x>n.
(d) The weapon was possessed by the pupil at the suggestion, request, or direction of, or with the express permission
of, school or police authorities.
131
(3) If in individual '» expelled pumuint U) tubMdioB OX the expellinf •dwoJ dotriet tJafl enter on the indiwluari
pemwnent reconi that he or she hw been expelled puroumt to suhweetxjn CX Except if > "e^ di«tnet opente* or
partJci pales in a program appropriate for imliniluais expeOed pursuant to subsection (2) and in its diacretMn admits the
individual to that projfron. an individual expelled pursuant to subsection (t) is expeDed from sH public sehoob in this
state and the orTidais of a school district shall not allow the individual to enroll in the school district unless the individual
has been reinstate*! uwler subsection (S). Except as otherwise prorided by law, a pn»gram operated for individuals
expelled pursuant to subsection O) shall be operated in facilities or at times separate from those used for the fenerai
pupil population.
(4) If a school board expel'* an indiviilual pursuant to snbMCtion (2X the school board shall ensure that, within 3 days
afler the expulsion, an ofTtcial of the school district refers ti>e individual to tiie appropriate county department of sodal
services or county community mental health agency and notifles the individuaTs parent or legal guardian or, if the
individual is at lenst age IS or Ls an emancipated minor, notifies tJie individual of the referral
(5) Tlie parent or legal guaniian of an individual expeDed pursuant to sabaection (2) or, if the individual is st lesst
age 18 or is an emancipated minor, the imiividual may petition the expelEng school board for remstatement of the
iwiividual to public e«Uication in the school district. If the expelling school board denies a petition for reinstatement, the
parent or legal guaniian or, if the individual is at least age 18 or is an emancipated minor, the individual may petition
anotlier sdiool board for reinstatement of the indivi<lual in that other school disthcL AO of the following spply to
reinstatement under this subsection:
(a) For an individual who was enrolled in gnule fi or hi»Wnv nt th«. time of the expulsion, the parent or legal guardian
or, if tiie individual is at least age 18 or Ls an emancipated minor, tite individual may initiate a petition for reinstatement
at any time after the ex[)imtion of GO school days after the date of y rpiilmnn- For an individual who was in ggde 6or
_above at the time of expulsion, the parent or legnl guardian or, if the individual is at least age 18 or is an emancipated
minor, the individual may iniOaie a petition for reinstatement at any time after the expiration of ISO school days aftg
the date of ex|MiLsion.
(b) An iwlividual who was in ^rade 5 nr below at the time of the expuisioo shaO not be reinstated before the
expiration of 00 school days after the daie ol WDUlMChTAn iwlividual who was in grade.S or above at the time of the
expulsion shall not be reinstated before the expiration of 180 school days after the date of exputsion.
(c) It is the responsibility of the parent or legal guardian or, if the individual n at least age 18 or is an emancipated
minor, of the individiuU to prepare ami submit the petition. A school boaiti is not required to provide sny assistance in
preparing llie iietJtinn. Upon request by a parent or legal giiardian or, if the individual is at least age 18 or is an
emancipateil minor, by the individual, a schniil boani shall make available a form for a petition.
((I) Not later than 10 school <lavs after receiving a petition for reinstatement under this subsection, a school board
shall appoint a committee to review the petition and any 8up)wrting information submitted by the parent or legal
guardian or, if the imiividual is at least age 18 or is an emancipated minor, by the individnaL TV committee shall consist
of 2 school boanI members. 1 school adminLstrator, 1 teacher, and 1 parent of a pupfl in the school district. During this
time the su|>ennten<lent of the school district may prepare and submit for consideration by the committee information
concerning the drcum.stances of the expulsion awl any factors mitigating for or against reinstatement
(e) Not later than 10 school <by« after all members are appointed, ti»e committee descnbed in subdivision (d) shall
review the petition and any supporting informatiim and information provided by the school district and shall submit a
recommendation to ti>e school board on the issue of reinstatement The recommendation shall be for unconditional
reinstatement fnr coiulitional reinstatement, or against reinstatement, and shall be accompanied by an explanation of
the reasons for tTie recommendation and of any recommended conditions for reinstatemenL The recommendation shall
be based on consideration of all of the follouing factora:
(0 The extent to which reinstatement of the imiividual would create a risk of harm to pupils or school personnel
(lO The extent to which rcin.<<:tatement of the individual would create a risk of school district or individual liability
for the school boani or school district personnel
(iiO The age and maturity of the individual
(iv) The indiviiluaTs school record before the incident that caused the expulsion.
(v) The individual's attitude concerning the incident that caused the expulsion.
(tn) 7>>e individual's behavior since the expulsion .-umI the prospects for remediation of the individual
(riO If the petition was Tiled by a parent or legal guardian, the degree of cooperation and support that has been
provi<led by the parent or legal gxianlian and that can be expected if the individual is reinstated, including, but not
limited to, receptiveness toward possible conditions placed on the reinstatemenL
132
(f) Not UUr than the next regubuiy i«che<luled boarri meetmg after receiTing the recoounendation of the eommittee
under subdivision (e). i school board shall make a dedsioa to unconditiooaDy reinstate the indiridual, conditionally
reinsute the iwlividual. or deny reinsutemenl of the indiriduaL TTie dedaion of the school baud it ftnsL
(g) A school boani may require an individual and, if the petition was filed by i p«Pent or lesal guardian, his or her
parent or legal guartlian to agree in writing to spedfic conditions before reinstating the individual in a eondiUonal
reinsUtemenL The eondiUons may include, but are not limited to, agreement to a behavior eonti»ct, which may involve
the individual, parent or legal guardian, and an outside agencr, participation in or completion of an anger management
program or other nppropriate counseling; periodic progress reviews; and specified immediate consequences, for faihire
to abide by a comlilion. A parent or legal guardian or, if the individual is at least age 18 or is an emancipated minor, the
individual may include proposed conditions in a petition for reinstatement submitted under this subsection.
(6) A school bfwnl or school administrator that complies with subsection (2) is not liable for damages for expefling a
pupil pursuant to sub.^ection (2), and the authorizing body of a public school academy established under part 6a is not
liable for damages for expulsion of a pupil by the public school academy punuant to subsection (ZU
(7) Not later than 90 cLiw after the e/Iective date of the amendatory act that added this subsection, the department
sitall develop an<l dwtribule to all school districts a form for a petition to be used under subsection (5).
(8) SubsecUon-s (2) to (7) do not diminwh the due process righU under federal law of a pupil who has been determined
to be eligible for !>pectal c<iucalion programs and services.
(!)) A» use<l in this section:
(a) 'Dangerous weapon' means that term as defined in section 1313.
(b) -Schoiil bonnl" mcare< a !«Ht.«ol lianni, intermediate school boanl, or the boanl of directors of a public school
academy establwlic<l umler jart 6a.
(c) "School (lu«trirt" inc-uw a xchool «lL«trict, a local act school district, an intermediate school district, or a public
school academy e5t.-ibludied under part Ca.
(d) "Weapon frcp school znne" means th.nl term .ts denned in section 2rr7a of the Michigan penal code. Act No. .128
of tiic Ihiblic AcU« of 1!EI1, Iwing Mdinn 7&(l.2T7a uf the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Section 2. Tlii.< .-iniemLilnrtr act slvill tnkc ofTcct January I, I99ri.
Tliis act is unlered to uke immeiliaLe effect
O-^
L» v..
Secretary of the Senate.
Co-Clerk of the House of Representatives.
133
Appendix VIII
Violence and Vandalism Study Group Recommendations
■©•"■rr g. scxnxxji
WTATtar
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
fTATC KUNO Oe DUCADON
LwtsotQ. mehtgm 4CMI
December 22, 1994
GOvncaoa lOM* ctcux
TO: Julie Allen
Alex Bailey
Jim Ballard
Qaude Brittinghani
Thomas Carnegie
Patrick dark
David Oabuesch
Rudy GsUins
Gary Faber
Slghd Grace
Seymotxr Gretchko
Teny Langton
Mirda Leone
Wmiam Mays
Roy McNeal
Michael Seltz
Charles Sturdivant
Ruth Ann Zeigler
Ruth Zweifler
FROM:
Ivan L Cotman
J"C-^Wv
SUBJECT: Violence and Vandalism Draft Recommendations
to be Submitted ro the State Board of Education
Attached is a draft of the recomjnendations which were adopted at the Violence and
Vandalism Study Group meeting on Decervber 14, 1994. Please review them and
return your corrections or additions to me by January 3, 1995 at the following
address:
Dr. Ivan L Cotman
Michigan Department of Education
P.O. Box 30008
Lansing, Michigan 48909
The Study Group recommendations are expected to be submitted to the State Board
of Education at its uieeting on February 8, 1995. After reviewing your comments, I
will incorporate them into the State Board of F.d»raHon format with background
information covering the many discussions, presentations and agenda items which
led to the final Study Group recoxrunendations. Tba State Board of Education
materials will be sent to you and other Study Group membexs prior to the
presentation date.
134
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE STUDY GROU? OH VXOLaTCE 6 VANDALISM
Subcoasniccee Reconnnendacions Co be Submitced to
State Bojurd of Educaton on February 9, 1994
We reconmend that 'THE DATA COLLECTED BY TEE MI^IIGAK
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCXTICN SEGAREING VTriENCE AND VANDALISM
ONLY PERTAIN TO THE DEPARTMENT MANDATE AS SET FORTH IN
SECTION ISaa IN TEE STATE AID ACT AND ANY OTHER STATE OR
FEDERAL LEGAL RECDIREMENTS . ■ We recsnanead Chat Che reporting
system for Section 158a be presented to the Board in
conjunction with this report.
He reconmend to the State Board of Education for action Che
uniform Violence and Vandalism definitions Co be used as
guidelines by local school districts and as part of Che
data collection activities aus mandated in Seccion 158a of the
School Aid Act.
We rscoreaend that the Michigan Departaent of Education take
immediate action to convene a task force comprised of
membership from state and locail Departments of Social
Services, Mental Health, juvenile and prcbace courts, and
other appropriate agencies, designed to develop interagency
agreements to provide alternative education options for
suspended or expelled Michigan students.
We recommend to the Stats Board of Education that it Cake
action to ensure that expelled students have continued
education by forming a Subcommittee of practioners from
alternative educational and violence prevention programs,
local education agencies, colleges and universities, state
government, and private citizens to review the state of
alternative education and violence prevention programs
and, if necessary, make recommendations for improvement.
A. Adopt a policy defining Che characceriscics of effective
options .
B . Collect and support the dissemination of information on
local schools with model programs.
C. Compile and distribute a list o^ -•Effective Mich i gam
programs.
D. Develop statewide program standards in line with existing
core curriciiluffl, school improvement, and accreditation
initiatives .
E. Review existing interagency agreements between public
agencies which offer programs to insure Chat all students
needing such programs may have access amd benefit from
them.
135
F- Review public funding scruccures supporring curxenc
G. Compile daca on scudeac suspension, expulsion and
f!r!""*~ "^ a^-ar=acive and traditional educational
sec ..nCS .
H. Review Iccsl rrccsdures for moving students between
axcsrr.a-ive asc irsditicnal educational settings.
I. Detarmirs whar ?r=crsms exist for youth in the elementary
-S*^'..''^'""*"""^ ^'" students in Jcindergartgen through
136
U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS
Midwestern Regional Office
55 West Monroe Street
Chicago. IL 60603
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11