THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU
1/9/2014 Understanding New Mexico’s School To Prison Pipeline: What The Data Are Beginning To Show Presented At: The 21st Annual Children’s Law Institute Albuquerque, New Mexico January 15-17, 2014 Facilitated By: Judge Louis P McDonald, Chief Judge Of The 13th Judicial District Peter Winograd, The UNM Center For Education Policy Research Acknowledgements • • • • • • • • • • Matt Montano, NM PED Jeanne Masterson, NM CYYFD Tonna Burgos, Rio Rancho Public Schools Tara Ford, Pegasus Legal Services For Children Traci Neff, San Juan County Deborah Dungan, Esq, Supreme Court Lisa Hamilton, NM PED Linda Carlisle, NM CYFD Fran Bunker, NM CYFD Annamarie Luna, NM CYFD • • • • • • • Tom Dauphinee, UNM CEPR Dominica Montano, Sandoval County District Court Amy Ballard, UNM CEPR Christina Marie Reynoso , UNM CEPR Chris Erwin, UNM CEPR Alfie McCloud, UNM CEPR Hailey Heinz, UNM CEPR The Joint Education Task Force • • • • The Joint Education Task Force established by Order No. 12‐8300 and chaired by Governor Susana Martinez and Chief Justice Petra Jimenez Maes The purpose is to provide collaborative advice, recommendations, and proposed strategies to this Court to address the educational needs of children and youth in the state’s custody and other high risk youth Members include representative from the Court, the Governor, the Legislature, the Secretary of the Department of Public Education, and the Secretary of the Children, Youth, and Families Department The Joint Education Task Force has focused on a number of goals including: – Identifying the challenges and barriers to educational success including, but not limited to, attendance and truancy; – Developing and implementing a sustainable collaborative model for ongoing systemic improvement of educational outcomes; and – Developing and implementing a system to share data between child welfare, judiciary, and educational entities in order to make informed policy decisions and ensure individual student success 1/9/2014 What Do We Know About The Students Who Are Caught Between The Schools And The Justice System? • • • It is difficult to get a clear picture of the students who are involved in both the education and juvenile justice system. Important questions include: • How many students commit infractions in schools each year? How do those infractions vary over time by type of infraction and by student, school and community demographics? • What happens to those students and how do those consequences vary over time, by type of infraction and by student, school, and community demographics? • What are schools and communities doing now in both practice and policy that seem to prevent infractions from occurring? Could those practices and polices be taken to scale across the state? • What are schools and communities doing now in both practice and policy to respond to infractions in ways that are most constructive for the student who committed the infraction and the well‐being of the other students in that school? The Public Education Department; The Children, Youth, and Families Department, and the Courts are making significant progress in sharing data that can help us answer those questions. One of the ways we can learn more about these students is by tracking how many students are arrested, suspended, expelled, or receive some other form of response to their infractions Student Infractions Grouped Into Four Major Areas • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Assault/battery with firearm Assault/battery with knife or cutting object Assault/battery with other dangerous weapon Assault/battery aggravated with hands, feet, fist Assault/battery simple Other Violence ‐ Sexual battery Other Violence – Homicide Other Violence – Kidnapping Other Violence ‐ Robbery using force Other Violence ‐ Self Injury Other Violence – General (includes Threat or Intimidation) Sexual Harassment Disorderly Conduct Bullying Weapons, Substance Abuse, Gang Activity • • • • • • • • • Weapons Possession – Knife/Cutting Weapons Possession – Other Gang‐Related Activity Drug Violation Alcohol Violation – Possession Alcohol Violation – Use Alcohol Violation – Dealing Tobacco Use Other Weapons, Substance Abuse, Gang Activity – Describe Firearms Possession (NOT to include toy guns, cap guns, BB guns, pellet guns, etc.) Vandalism • • • • • • • Graffiti Criminal Damage Breaking/Entering/Larceny Missing Property/Theft Arson Vandalism Other Vandalism, Describe • Handgun Possession • Rifle/Shotgun Possession • Other Firearms Possession ‐ Describe in Comment Field • Student Teach The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file Source: NM PED STARS Manual for School Year 2013-2014 Responses to Infractions Are Organized Into Eight Categories Arrest/referral to justice system In school suspension Out of school suspension Expulsion ‐ no educational services – REGULAR ED ONLY; NOT to be used for Special Ed students) Modified Expulsion (still receiving some educational services) Sent to alternate setting by school personnel Sent to alternate setting based on hearing officer determination of likely injury Other/Unknown The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file Source: NM PED STARS Manual for School Year 2013-2014 1/9/2014 Total Percent of Students Suspended From Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, by State (2006) District of Columbia North Dakota South Dakota Wyoming Iowa Utah Idaho Nebraska Minnesota New York Vermont Montana Maine Oklahoma Oregon Wisconsin Kansas New Mexico Hawaii Massachusetts Texas New Hampshire New Jersey Arizona Alaska Washington Colorado Ohio Illinois Kentucky Pennsylvania Connecticut United States Maryland Virginia Tennessee Missouri Arkansas Indiana Nevada California Michigan Rhode Island Georgia Alabama West Virginia Mississippi Louisiana Florida North Carolina Delaware South Carolina In 2006, New Mexico suspended 17,140 or 5.27% students. In 2006, the national average was 6.86% NOTE: Suspension is excluding a student from school for disciplinary reasons for 1 school day or longer. A student is counted only once, even if suspended more than once during the same school year 10 12 14 SOURCE: 2012 Digest of Educational Statistics. U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection: 2006. (Data was prepared July 2008.) Total Percent of Students Expelled From Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, by State (2006) Hawaii New Jersey North Dakota Missouri Minnesota New York Florida Iowa Utah Vermont Massachusetts New Hampshire West Virginia Arizona Montana New Mexico Kentucky Maine Idaho Virginia Arkansas South Dakota Wyoming Michigan Alaska Illinois North Carolina Pennsylvania Wisconsin Alabama Kansas Maryland Delaware United States District of Columbia Georgia Nebraska Connecticut Texas Colorado Mississippi California Tennessee Oregon Washington Oklahoma Nevada Ohio Indiana South Carolina Louisiana 0.00 In 2006, New Mexico expelled 240 or .07% students. In 2006, the national average was .21% NOTE: Expulsion is the exclusion of a student from school for disciplinary reasons that results in the student’s removal from school attendance rolls or that meets the criteria for expulsion as defined by the appropriate state or local school authority A student is counted only once, even if expelled more than once during the same school year 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 SOURCE: 2012 Digest of Educational Statistics. U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Civil Rights Data Collection: 2006. (Data was prepared July 2008.) Total Count of Infraction Responses (Arrest/Referral to Justice System; In School Suspension; Out Of School Suspension; Expulsion – No Educational Services; Modified Expulsion – Still Receiving Some Educational Experiences) 17,500 17,148 17,000 16,566 16,500 16,000 15,818 15,500 15,000 2010‐2011 2011‐2012 2012‐2013 Source: New Mexico Public Education Department. Note: Does not include data on students sent to alternative settings or coded as other/unknown 1/9/2014 This map shows infractions of all types as a percentage of total district enrollment for the 2012‐2013 school year 0.3% - 5% 5.1% - 10% 10.1% - 15% 15.1% - 36.3% The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file Source: New Mexico Public Education Department 10 Total Number Of Infraction Reponses By Gender, Ethnicity, and Special Education Status For 2012‐2013 (N=15,818) 12,000 11,333 9,937 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,485 4,234 4,000 2,606 2,446 2,000 523 221 77 Female Male American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian Black or African American Caucasian Hispanic Multiracial Students W/ Disabilities Source: New Mexico Public Education Department. Note: Does not include data on students sent to alternative settings or coded as other/unknown 11 Male, Minority, and Students With Disabilities Have A Disproportionate Chance Of Being Arrested, Referred to Justice System, Suspended or Expelled (2012‐2013) 80% 71.6% 70% 62.8% 59.2% 60% 50% 51.4% 48.6% 40% 30% 28.4% 16.5% 15.5% 13.8% 10.2% 10% 1.3% 0.5% 0% Female Male American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian Percent of Total Student Population 12 26.8% 25.7% 20% 3.3% 2.2% Black or African American Caucasian Hispanic Students W/Disabilities Percent Of Infraction Responses Source: New Mexico Public Education Department. 1/9/2014 Total Number Of Infraction Reponses By Age For 2012‐2013 (N=15,818) 3,000 2,634 2,500 2,360 2,284 2,022 2,000 1,746 1,500 1,406 1,000 805 732 468 500 185 281 337 313 190 43 20 21 22 The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file 13 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Source: New Mexico Public Education Department. Note: Does not include data on students sent to alternative settings or coded as other/unknown What Are Some Of The Questions We Have Yet To Explore? How many students commit which kinds of infractions in schools each year? How have the number and types of infractions changed over time? How many students commit multiple infractions and how do we handle those cases? How do those infractions vary by type and by student, school and community demographics? What happens to those students and how do those consequences vary by type of infraction and by student, school, and community demographics? What are schools and communities doing now in both practice and policy that seem to prevent infractions from occurring? Could those practices and polices be taken to scale across the state? 14 What Are Some Of The Questions We Have Yet To Explore? What are schools and communities doing now in both practice and policy to respond to infractions in ways that are most constructive for the student who committed the infraction and the well‐being of the other students in that school? Much of the current data deal with 15,000 students with infractions. In 2011‐ 2012, New Mexico had over 51,000 students who were habitually truant. We need to know much more about the educational and juvenile justice outcomes for these students We need to know much more about the disciplinary policies in place in New Mexico’s schools. In 2010, the New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty reviewed the discipline policies of 12 of the state’s 89 public school districts and found that several of the districts incorporated zero tolerance elements into their policies. This study should be replicated and include all of the districts and charter schools 15 1/9/2014 And Now To The Panel Tara Ford, JD, Pegasus Legal Services For Children Tonna Burgos, Rio Rancho Public Schools, Michele DeLese, School Resource Officer, Jeanne Masterson, Associate Deputy Director for Juvenile Justice Services, Matthew Montano, Director of Educator Quality, Tracy Neff, Juvenile Facility Administrator 16 CEPR.UNM.EDU The image part with relationship ID rId2 was not found in the file 17
Ngày đăng: 23/10/2022, 06:16
Xem thêm: