Memorandum

Document Sample
Memorandum Powered By Docstoc
					                  Services for Expelled Students:
                 Overview of Research and Policy



                                                    March 2010




                                               Sara Wraight, J.D.




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates
1120 East Diehl Road, Suite 200
Naperville, IL 60563-1486
866-730-6735
http://edlabs.ed.gov/RELmidwest/

REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates prepared this report in direct response to a request from the Wisconsin Department of
Public Instruction. This work was supported under contract ED-06-CO-0019 from the U.S. Department of Education, Institute of
Education Sciences. The content of the publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of IES or the U.S.
Department of Education nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the
U.S. government. This report is not an IES peer-reviewed publication.

                                                                                                                 4360_02/10
                                                                   Contents
                                                                                                                                           Page
Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

Research Overview ........................................................................................................................ 1
           Expulsion Data ................................................................................................................... 1
           Alternative Schools ............................................................................................................ 1
           Distance Education ............................................................................................................ 3

Federal Policy ................................................................................................................................ 3

State Policies .................................................................................................................................. 4
           Services for Expelled Students in Wisconsin .................................................................... 4
           Services for Expelled Students in the Midwest Region ..................................................... 5
           Services for Expelled Students in States Around the Country .......................................... 6

Future Policy Directions ................................................................................................................ 7

References ...................................................................................................................................... 8
           Additional Resources ....................................................................................................... 11
                                           Introduction
Expulsion, or exclusion from the regular school building for an extended period of time, is a
severe disciplinary action that a school or district may impose upon a student. Typically the
consequence of violent behavior or a drug- or weapons-related offense, expulsion may be for a
period of time (e.g., a semester or school year) or it may, in rare cases, be permanent. There is
variation in the extent and nature of services that expelled students are eligible to receive during
the period of expulsion. In many cases, expelled students do not receive services at all. This brief
will explore the small body of research on services for expelled students and provide an
overview of federal and state policy activity.

                                      Research Overview
Expulsion Data
National expulsion data from 2006 indicates that approximately one out of every 476 students
(0.2 percent) was expelled from school (Planty, Hussar, Snyder, Kena, KewalRama, et al., 2009).
Expulsion policies have been criticized for disproportionately affecting minority and male
students (Rausch & Skiba, 2004). In 2006, black students were suspended and expelled at higher
rates than white, Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaskan Native students,
and the number of male students expelled was three times as large as the number of female
students expelled (Planty et al., 2009).

Rates of out-of-school suspensions and expulsions have been correlated with student dropout
rates (Martin, Levin, & Saunders, 2000). Research suggests that expelled students have a greater
likelihood of failing or dropping out of school and that time away from school may lead to
additional exposure to high-risk activity (Colorado Foundation for Families and Children, 2002;
Yearwood & Abdum-Muhaymin, 2007). A 2006 study used a matched comparison design to
examine the relationship between student suspension and academic achievement (Arcia, 2006).
There was an association between days of suspension and decreases in reading gains and with
likelihood of dropping out of school. Study findings also suggested a strong correlation between
pre-suspension achievement in reading and suspension rates, with students with lower
achievement being more likely to be suspended than students with higher achievement.

In response to high expulsion rates in the state of Indiana, The Center for Evaluation and
Education Policy at Indiana University examined state data to determine what characteristics
were predictive of suspension and expulsion rates (Skiba, Eaton, & Sotoo, 2004). The research
found states that include criminal violations as a basis for expulsion and states that permit
expulsion for incidents that occur off campus have higher rates of expulsion (Skiba, Eaton, &
Sotoo, 2004).

Alternative Schools
One common means of providing educational services to expelled students uses alternative
schools (Aron, 2006). Most research on alternative education is anecdotal, and few rigorous



REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                              Services for Expelled Students—1
studies have examined the impact of various programs and interventions. The evidence that is
available suggests that effective alternative education programs can support the educational
development of at-risk students, including students who have been expelled (Zweig, 2003,
Yearwood & Abdum-Muhaymin, 2007). A 1999 study employed an experimental design to
examine the impact of a middle school alternative school setting on academic and nonacademic
outcomes (Cox, 1999). The study found that at-risk students randomly assigned to the alternative
school condition had higher grades (but not necessarily standardized test scores), self-esteem,
and attendance than students in the control group. These differences were no longer observed
once the students returned to the traditional school.

A 2004 study of alternative programming found that 20 of the 33 states studied had alternative
schools that served expelled students and 67 percent of students served by alternative programs
of any kind across the 33 states were expelled students (Lehr, Moreau, Lange, & Lanners, 2004).

A 2007 study examined alternative education programs and found several characteristics that
were important to the functioning of alternative education programs:
    ―1. Program philosophies emphasize that it is the educational approach rather than the
        individual student that needs to be changed to accommodate learning differences
        among at-risk students.
    ―2. Program administrators and staff subscribe to the philosophy that all students can
        learn. These programs communicate and support high expectations for positive
        social, emotional, behavioral, and academic growth in all students.
    ―3. Program and school administrators are leaders who support the vision and mission
        of their programs; effectively support staff; listen to teachers, students, and
        parents; and genuinely care about their students.
    ―4. Low adult-student ratios in the classroom are considered integral to successful
        outcomes.
    ―5. Teachers receive specialized training (e.g., behavior and classroom management,
        alternative learning styles, communication with families) to support their
        effectiveness in working with students who do not succeed in traditional
        educational settings.
    ―6. Interactions between students and the staff are non-authoritarian in nature.
        Positive, trusting, and caring relationships exist between staff, and between
        students and staff.
    ―7. The opinions and participation of family members in the education of their
        children is valued, and students’ families are treated with respect.‖ (Quinn &
        Poirier, 2007)

A 1997 Texas study examined the policy of requiring counties to provide an alternative school
for students (Czaja, 1997). State law required counties with a population of 125,000 or more to
provide what were called juvenile justice alternative education programs for students, while
counties with smaller populations were not required to do so, though some did anyway. The




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                              Services for Expelled Students—2
study found differences between the mandated and the nonmandated programs in their
organization, funding, and evaluation plans.

Distance Education
While online learning may be a viable solution for providing instruction to students who have
been expelled, there is very little rigorous research on the effectiveness of online learning as a
method of instructional delivery in K–12 education (Means, Toyama, Murphy, Bakia, & Jones,
2009). Some district online learning programs are designed to provide services to students who
live within the district boundaries and who have been expelled (Watson, Gemin, Ryan, & Wicks,
2009). 1 A recent survey of district administrators found that the majority of respondents viewed
online learning as important for meeting the needs of specific student populations; although
incarcerated and credit-deficient students were discussed as examples of students served,
expelled students were not specifically mentioned in the survey report (Picciano & Seaman,
2009).

                                             Federal Policy
Federal law mandates that services be provided to students with disabilities, even if they are
suspended or expelled. A review conducted through the U.S. Government Accountability Office
found variation in how this requirement was implemented in, for example, the nature and extent
of services provided by districts (Shaul, 2003).

In recent years, Congress has appropriated funding for state grants ―to carry out programs under
which students expelled or suspended from school are required to perform community service‖
(Elementary and Secondary Education Act [ESEA], Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, Section 4126),
though this program is no longer funded. The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities
State Grants were provided to state education agencies to enter into contracts with and award
grants to local education agencies, community-based organizations, and nonprofit entities who
provide assistance to or operate programs that provide community service opportunities to
suspended or expelled students (see, for example, Indiana Department of Education, 2005;
Virginia Department of Education, 2005).

Much of the literature and commentary on expulsion policies relates to ―zero-tolerance policies.‖
Since the late 1990s, some federal funding for education has been contingent upon the
implementation of strict discipline policies on certain types of offenses. The resulting changes in
state and local discipline policies have come under scrutiny in recent years, with critics arguing
that policies have overreached the intent of the federal policy and have been implemented
inequitably (see, for example, Advancement Project, 2010; American Psychological Association
Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008; Louisiana School-to-Prison Reform Coalition, 2009)




1
 The 2009 report on online learning by Watson et al. on online learning mentions Transition High School, a
Milwaukee Public School that is designed for students who are currently or have been incarcerated, expelled,
chronically truant, or credit-deficient.


REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                                         Services for Expelled Students—3
                                           State Policies
All states have policies in place to enforce the federal requirements for services for expelled
students with disabilities, but they differ in their approaches to serving expelled students without
disabilities. Some states require that districts provide services to expelled students, but others do
not. In those states where services are not required by law, the services that students receive may
vary greatly from district to district (see, for example, Massachusetts Department of Education,
2004).

Courts have ruled that in certain cases services must be offered by the district even though the
requirement is not explicitly stated in the statute (Education Law Center, 2001, Kratochvil,
2008). In October 2009, a Dane County, Wisconsin, judge ordered Madison Public Schools to
enroll an expelled student who was under a juvenile court order to attend school (Hetzner, 2009).

Some states put the responsibility for providing services on the parent or guardian, requiring that
the student be home-schooled or educated privately. Others require the district to refer the
student to community agencies. Some of the states that do not mandate services encourage the
provision of services by providing funding or resources to schools, districts, or program
providers.

Following is a brief look at state-level policy activity related to services for expelled students in
Wisconsin, the Midwest Region, and across the country.

Services for Expelled Students in Wisconsin
Wisconsin currently does not require districts to provide educational services to expelled
students without disabilities. A student who has been expelled may receive services through
home schooling or may apply to a private school or another public school, though the school is
not required to admit the expelled student Wis. Stat. §120.13(1)(f). (For an analysis of
Wisconsin’s expulsion policies, see Kratochvil, 2008.)

The Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) has encouraged the provision of services
to students who have been expelled in its publication of a resource manual (Fernan, Parman,
White, & Wiltrout, 2001). DPI also published a report on frequently asked questions on school
discipline (Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, 2009b). In addition, DPI published a
report of district case studies in order to encourage districts to consider using alternatives to
expulsion (Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, 2009a).

From 2003 to 2005, Wisconsin provided funding for community services programs for expelled
students for six districts through the federal Title IV, Part A, Safe and Drug-Free Schools
program. A group of districts dealing with large numbers of habitual truants, dropouts,
suspensions, and expulsions continue to meet as a peer consultation network to share experiences
and develop strategies for serving such students.




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                                Services for Expelled Students—4
Services for Expelled Students in the Midwest Region
Table 1 summarizes state policy on services for expelled students without disabilities for the
Midwest region states. State policies related to admission of students who have been expelled
from other districts are also summarized.

                       Table 1. State Policies on Services for Expelled Students
                            Without Disabilities: Midwest Region States
    State                                 Policy on Services for Expelled Students
                Districts are not required to provide services to expelled students and may adopt a policy
                not to admit students who have been expelled from any school (public or private) in
                Illinois or in another state (105 ILCS 5/10-22.6). Statutory language encourages
Illinois
                alternatives to suspension and expulsion: ―Administrative transfers may prove more
                productive for dealing with disruptive students than out-of-school suspensions or
                expulsions, which have been the subject of much criticism‖ (105 ILCS 5/13A-1).
                Indiana law explicitly states that students who are expelled are not in violation of the
                compulsory attendance law (Indiana Code 20-33-8-31). The parent or guardian of an
Indiana
                expelled student may not enroll the student in another district without disclosing the
                expulsion and the consent of the district (Indiana Code 20-33-8-30).
                Districts have no obligation to provide services to expelled student and are not required
                to admit students who were expelled from another district until their period of expulsion
Iowa
                has ended (Iowa Code Section 282.4). The Iowa Department of Education provides a
                summary of options for expelled students.
                Michigan places the responsibility of providing services to the expelled student on the
                student’s parent or guardian. The department must compile information about available
                educational alternatives and provide it to districts to distribute to the parent or guardian
                of expelled students (Michigan Revised School Code §380.1310). Michigan law
                explicitly states that students expelled for certain offenses are expelled from all public
                schools in the state and restricts districts from admitting expelled students without a
Michigan        reinstatement order. Districts may provide services through appropriate alternative
                programs, arrangements with other districts, or home-schooling supports, though they
                are not required to spend more than the per-pupil amount allotted through the foundation
                allowance. The district must refer a permanently expelled student to the appropriate
                social services office within three days of the expulsion.2 Prorated per-pupil funds must
                be provided to the alternative program or public school academy that admits the
                expelled student (Michigan Revised School Code § 380.1311 and 380.1311a).3

2
 See this Jackson, Michigan, online article from August 23, 2009, which describes the referral process in one
Michigan district.
3
  In 2007, Michigan initiated its ―Seat Time Waiver Program.‖ Michigan issues seat-time waivers to districts
operating alternative education programs for at-risk students. The Michigan seat-time waiver program is designed to
dissociate student seat time with learning requirements and the full-time equivalent (FTE) state school aid funding
model that Michigan uses to reimburse public schools for educating Michigan children. Some districts have used
seat-time waivers to provide online learning and credit recovery to expelled students. The Michigan Department of
Education requested that REL Midwest conduct an evaluation of the program. Interview and survey data indicate
that state, district, and program personnel perceive the program as effective in providing options and flexibility for
at-risk students. Additional analysis is necessary to understand the impact of the program on student achievement
outcomes.


REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                                           Services for Expelled Students—5
   State                              Policy on Services for Expelled Students
              Schools are responsible for the continuing education of expelled students, and expelled
              students have the right to alternative education services; the services ―must be adequate
              to allow the pupil to make progress towards meeting the graduation standards‖
              (Minnesota Statutes 121A.55). When one district expels a student, the student is not
              automatically expelled from other districts; districts may, however, go through a process
Minnesota
              of ―excluding‖ the student. When an expelled or excluded student is admitted to a
              school, the school administrator must prepare and enforce an admission plan, which may
              include provisions for helping the student make a transition and succeed in school
              Minnesota Statutes 121A.47). The state’s compulsory attendance law is not applicable
              during the period of expulsion (Minnesota Statutes 121A.52).
              Ohio allows but does not require districts to provide services to suspended or expelled
              students, and districts may deny admittance to a student who has been expelled from a
Ohio          school in another district or state (ORC 3313.66 and ORC 3313.661). Ohio also provides
              for ―permanent exclusion‖ in very serious cases where the student is 16 years old or
              older (ORC 3313.662).
Wisconsin     See ―Services for Expelled Students in Wisconsin.‖

Services for Expelled Students in States Around the Country
Following are examples of state policies and initiatives related to services for expelled students
without disabilities. The potential impact of the policies is discussed in those cases where
commentary or evaluation data was available. The more recent policies discussed have yet to be
tested.

California

Pursuant to Section 48926 of the Education Code, California requires countywide plans for
expelled students. The statute provides that ―The plan shall enumerate existing educational
alternatives for expelled pupils, identify gaps in educational services to expelled pupils, and
strategies for filling those service gaps. The plan shall also identify alternative placements for
pupils who are expelled and placed in district community day school programs, but who fail to
meet the terms and conditions of their rehabilitation plan or who pose a danger to other district
pupils, as determined by the governing board.‖ The requirement has been in place since 1997.
The most recent most recent countywide plans are available on the California Department of
Education website.

Colorado

Colorado administers the Expelled and At-Risk Student Services Grant, which funds districts in
providing educational services to expelled students. According to a recent evaluation report to
the Colorado legislature, funded sites reported that 73 percent of expelled students experienced
―positive outcomes‖ in their completion of school, return to school, and continuation of
education (Martinez & Wakefield, 2009).




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                                  Services for Expelled Students—6
Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania requires that expelled students under age 17 continue to be provided services under
the state’s compulsory attendance law, though the initial responsibility for arranging services is
with the student’s parent or guardian (Title 22, Pennsylvania Code, §12.6). The parent must
submit evidence of the student’s participation in a program, which may include home schooling.
If the parent is unable to arrange for the student’s education, the district must do so.

Tennessee

Tennessee requires local boards to establish alternative schools for suspended and expelled
students in Grades 7–12 (Tennessee Code §49-6-3402). Two or more local boards are permitted
to operate alternative schools together, and one local board can contract services from another
local board. Attendance at the alternative schools is not mandatory unless the local board adopts
a policy that requires attendance.

Washington

Washington law states that once a student is expelled it must be ―brought to the attention of the
appropriate local and state authorities including, but not limited to, juvenile authorities acting
pursuant to chapter 13.04 RCW in order that such authorities may address the student’s
educational needs‖ (WAC 392-400-275). A recent report by the state’s educational ombudsman
indicated that ―in most counties, however, juvenile authorities do not provide education services
unless the youth is detained in a juvenile institution‖ (Office of the Educational Ombudsman,
2009).

                                  Future Policy Directions
As states continue to work on improving graduation outcomes, additional policies and initiatives
related to serving expelled students may be implemented. In addition, this survey of recent policy
activity related to expulsion revealed that states have begun to retreat from strict zero-tolerance
policies by limiting the offenses that require an automatic suspension or expulsion and
promoting intervention programs and alternative disciplinary action.




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                              Services for Expelled Students—7
                                           References
Advancement Project. (2010). How “zero tolerance” and high-stakes testing funnel youth into
      the school-to-prison pipeline. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010,
      from http://www.advancementproject.org/sites/default/files/publications/01-
      EducationReport-2009v8-HiRes.pdf

Ali, T., & Dufresne, A. (2008). Missing out: Suspending students from Connecticut schools. New
        Haven, CT: Connecticut Voices for Children. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
        http://www.ctjja.org/resources/pdf/education-ctvoices.pdf

American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance
      policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American
      Psychologist, 63(9), 852–862. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.pdf

Arcia, E. (2006). Achievement and enrollment status of suspended students: Outcomes in a large,
       multicultural school district. Education and Urban Society, 38(3), 359-269.

Aron, L. Y. (2006). An overview of alternative education. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
       Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/411283_alternative_education.pdf

Colorado Foundation for Families and Children. (2002). Youth out of school: Linking absence to
       delinquency. Denver, CO: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.schoolengagement.org/TruancypreventionRegistry/Admin/Resources/Resour
       ces/YouthOutofSchoolLinkingAbsencetoDelinquency.pdf

Cox, S. M. (1999). An assessment of an alternative education program for at-risk delinquent
       youth. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36(3), 323-336.

Czaja, M. D. (1997). Continued education services to expelled students in Texas: A comparison
       of voluntary and mandated juvenile justice alternative education programs. Retrieved
       February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED
       413566

Education Law Center. (2001). Fairness in school discipline: The rights of public school
       students. Newark, NJ: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
       9/42/d9.pdf

Fernan, S., Parman, M. J., White, D., & Wiltrout, D. (2001). Offering educational opportunities
       to expelled students in Wisconsin. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public
       Instruction, Division for Learning Support. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://dpi.wi.gov/sspw/pdf/expel.pdf


REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                            Services for Expelled Students—8
Hetzner, A. (2009, October 19). Expelled student needs education, judge rules. Milwaukee
       Journal Sentinel online. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/64733322.html

Indiana Department of Education. (2005). Community service for suspended and expelled
       students project. Indianapolis, IN: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.doe.in.gov/sservices/docs/juvenile_CSSES_final-report.pdf

Kratochvil, J. A. (2008). In Wisconsin expulsions, we don’t have to leave children behind.
       Marquette Law Review, 91, 1213–1231. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://law.marquette.edu/lawreview/summer2008/Kratochvil.pdf

Lehr, C. A., Moreau, R. A., Lange, C. M., & Lanners, E. J. (2004). Alternative schools: Findings
       from a national survey of the states. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute on
       Community Integration. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://ici.umn.edu/alternativeschools/publications/alt_schools_report2.pdf

Levin, M. (2006). Schooling a new class of criminals? Better disciplinary alternatives for Texas
       students. Austin, TX: Texas Public Policy Foundation. Retrieved February 25, 2010,
       from http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2006-03-PP-DAEP-ml.pdf

Louisiana School-to-Prison Reform Coalition. (2009). Effective discipline for student success:
       Reducing student and teacher dropout rates in Louisiana. New Orleans, LA: Author.
       Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/downloads/LA_Reducing_Student_Dropout.p
       df

Martin, M. W., Levin, S., & Saunders, R. (2000). The association between severity of sanction
       imposed for violation of tobacco policy and high school dropout rates. Journal of School
       Health, 70(8), 327–330.

Martinez, J., & Wakefield, C. (2009). Expelled and at-risk student services grant: Evaluation
       report to Colorado legislature. Denver, CO: Colorado Department of Education.
       Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.cde.state.co.us/cdeprevention/download/pdf/EARSSFinalReport2008_09a.pd
       f

Massachusetts Department of Education. (2004). Student exclusions in Massachusetts public
      schools: 2002–03. Malden, MA: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://www.doe.mass.edu/infoservices/reports/exclusions/0203/full.pdf

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-
      based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning
      studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved February 25, 2010,
      from http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf



REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                            Services for Expelled Students—9
Office of the Education Ombudsman. (2009). 2009 Recommendations for improving K–12 public
       education: Reducing missed instructional time for suspended and expelled students.
       Seattle, WA: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.governor.wa.gov/oeo/work/2009_suspension_expulsion.pdf

Picciano, A. G., & Seaman, J. (2009). K–12 online learning: A 2008 follow-up of the survey of
       U.S. school district administrators. Boston: Sloan Consortium. Retrieved February 25,
       2010, from http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/k-
       12_online_learning_2008.pdf

Planty, M., Hussar, W., Snyder, T., Kena, G., KewalRama, A., Kemp, J., et al. (2009). The
        condition of education 2009. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, National
        Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
        http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009081.pdf

Quinn, M. M., & Poirier, J. M. (2007). Study of effective alternative education programs: Final
       grant report. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Retrieved February 25,
       2010, from http://cecp.air.org/AIR_alternative_education_final_report_6-12-07.pdf

Rausch, M. K., & Skiba, R. (2004). Disproportionality in school discipline among minority
      students in Indiana: Description and analysis. Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation
      and Education Policy. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
      b/b5/c0.pdf

Shaul, M. S. (2003). Special education: Clearer guidance would enhance implementation of
       federal disciplinary provisions. Washington, DC: General Accounting Office. Retrieved
       February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
       b/74/d8.pdf

Skiba, R., Eaton, J., & Sotoo, N. (2004). Factors associated with state rates of out-of-school
       suspension and expulsion. Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.
       Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/1
       b/b5/d2.pdf

Virginia Department of Education. (2005). Creating community service opportunities for
       suspended and expelled youth: Virginia’s experience. Richmond, VA: Author. Retrieved
       February 25, 2010, from http://www.gosap.virginia.gov/pdf/CSResourceGuideFeb28.pdf

Watson, J., Gemin, B., Ryan, J., & Wicks, M. (2009). Keeping pace with K–12 online learning:
      An annual review of state-level policy and practice. Evergreen, CO: Evergreen Education
      Group. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://www.kpk12.com/downloads/KeepingPace09-fullreport.pdf



REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                          Services for Expelled Students—10
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2009a). Alternatives to expulsion: Case studies of
      Wisconsin school districts. Madison, WI: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://dpi.wi.gov/sspw/pdf/expulsionalts.pdf

Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2009b). Answers to frequently asked school
      discipline questions. Madison, WI: Author. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
      http://dpi.wi.gov/sspw/pdf/schldscplnqa.pdf

Yearwood, D. L., & Abdum-Muhaymin, J. (2007). Juvenile structured day programs for
      suspended and expelled youth: An evaluation of process and impact. Preventing School
      Failure, 51(4), 47–59.

Zweig, J. M. (2003). Vulnerable youth: Identifying their need for alternative educational
       settings. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/410828_vulnerable_youth.pdf

Additional Resources
Bosworth, K., Ford, L., Anderson, K. E., & Paiz, D. (2006). Community service as an alternative
      to suspension: A practical program toolkit. Tucson, AZ: Smith Prevention Initiatives.
      Retrieved February 25, 2010, from http://www.serviceoptions.org/Documents/manual.pdf

Kleiner, B., Porch, R., & Farris, E. (2002). Public alternative schools and programs for students
       at risk of education failure: 2000–01 (NCES 2002-04). U.S. Department of Education.
       Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved February 25, 2010,
       from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002004.pdf

National Alternative Education Association. (2009). Exemplary practices in alternative
       education: Indicators of quality programming. Greenwood, AR: Author. Retrieved
       February 25, 2010, from
       http://www.state.tn.us/education/learningsupport/alted/doc/ExemplaryPracticesinAE.pdf




REL Midwest at Learning Point Associates                            Services for Expelled Students—11

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:41
posted:12/9/2011
language:
pages:13