School-to-Prison1

Maryland Commission on the School to Prison Pipeline and Restorative Practices

November 13, 2017

Meeting Highlights

 The Commission’s meeting was held at the University of Maryland School of Law. Key information about the Commission and its deliberations may be found as follows:

Professor Barbara Grochal opened the meeting and introduced the Dean of the Law School, who provided a brief welcome.  Delegate Alonzo Washington gave an overview of the purpose of the day’s meeting of the Commission.

The Advancement Project: Concerns about Law Enforcement in the Schools

Dwanna Nicole, the Director of Policy and Stakeholder Outreach for the Advancement Project, stated that the Advancement Project has been focusing on this issue since 1999, when they learned from parents that children were being “pushed out of school.”  She noted that three factors contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline:

  • Discipline policies;
  • Prison-like conditions in schools, including the presence of law enforcement and metal detectors in the school buildings;
  • Over-reliance on referrals to law enforcement and the juvenile justice system by school personnel.

Ms. Nicole noted the increasing presence of law enforcement in the schools was related to with the creation and implementation of zero tolerance policies in the 1980s and heightened security after the shooting at Columbine High School. These changes parallel changes at the community level; some have implemented their own policies related to broken windows, three strikes, and mandatory minimums.   Twenty states have legislation that makes school disruption and code of conduct violations in school a criminal charge/offense.  She noted that some school systems have their own police departments. For example, the Los Angeles Unified School District has a police department with 530 personnel.

She then presented the data on the rates of suspension from school, which is disproportionate for African American boys and especially African American girls.  For example, only 19% of pre-school children are black; however, 47% of the out-of-school suspensions of pre-schoolers were black. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of the juvenile arrests were black.  Likewise, when teachers call law enforcement to intervene, 31% of the students involved are black.  Data from the US Department of Education clearly indicate that race is the determining factor, even when other factors such as poverty are held constant.

1.6 million children attend schools where there is a law enforcement officer present in the school but there is not a counselor in the school. (This includes only sworn law enforcement officers, not security personnel, who do not have the authority to arrest.) She noted that Maryland data for 2015-2016 give no clear, consistent definition of “disrespect” or “disruption” (which could include verbal altercations or exchanges).  All of these poorly defined and subjectively assessed behaviors can lead to suspension.

The speaker stressed that there is no “across the board” training for law enforcement officers working in schools. For example, they receive no training in child development or special education. Policies for school personnel to contact law enforcement vary by school district.  Members of the Commission commented on the role of higher education in training both school and law enforcement personnel. Higher Education can help teachers, administrators, and law enforcement personnel re-frame the issue by changing the language and focusing on the traumas children face and have faced.

Issues were raised about the use of restraints on children and the fear that teachers have.  While several participants noted the role in training teachers they also noted the role in vetting prospective teachers and weeding out those who might be inappropriate.

While there is data on school suspensions, there is no data on in-school interventions.  Commission members noted that incidents related to formal suspension and incidents such as not admitting students for the day are either not reported or under-reported.

The presenter mentioned model restorative practices in other jurisdictions.  The goal of these practices is to build better relationships in order to create safe spaces.

Members of the group noted a need for additional perspectives from law enforcement officials and judges especially around issues of immigration and students’ fears of deportation of themselves or family members.

Implicit Bias in Schools and Communities  

Dr. Lisa Williams, Executive Director of the Office of Equity and Cultural Proficiency for Baltimore County Public Schools, noted that the data all indicate that schools are facing re-segregation at the same time children of color, especially girls, are being suspended at much higher rates than their white counterparts, even when economic status is held constant.

She noted that desegregation and integration are not the same thing and that there is an over-representation of students of color in Special Education, while there are fewer opportunities for Early Childhood Education for students of color.  She stressed that teachers, principals, and school administrators all have a role to play and that these participants do not have equal power to effect change.  Qualitative data and quantitative data on these issues are lacking.

The speaker observed that students of color being treated more severely when teachers and administrators subjectively assess behavior.  She noted the difference between playful and threatening, clever versus disrespectful.  These subjective assessments create and reinforce negative environments.

Dr. Williams had the participants engage in a group exercise associating words to show that sometimes we add “information” to an experience based solely on our expectations. She gave the example of her 14-month-old child engaging in a behavior she had never seen, which worried her until she learned from her son’s teacher that the way he was positioning his body is a yoga position he had learned in school.

She encouraged all the participants to go on line to take the Implicit Bias Test.

She noted that each school system has an office of racial equity; however, each operates differently according to the leadership of the Local Education Agency.

Thanks to MAJR Monitors Deborah Friese and Patricia N. Marks for attending the meeting and providing these notes!