Exclusion Grade (2019)

Details: By Vernellia Randall; Parent Category: School-to-Prison Pipeline; Category: RJN! 2019 Ohio School Discipline Report; 20 April 2019; Hits: 22799

Article Index

A school district's contribution to the School-to-Prison pipeline is directly related to the number of exclusions. In this report, exclusions are expulsions, out-of-school suspensions, emergency removal by district personnel, and removal by hearing officer.

Every instance of an exclusion disrupts a student's education. Exclusions are particularly problematic for preschool through 3rd grade.[1] It is during these initial years that students lay the foundation for their academic success. Research has shown that suspensions in the 9th grade are also problematic in that even one instance of exclusion significantly increases the likelihood of school dropout.[2] Of course, dropping out is correlated with incarceration. Thus, an exclusion grade is calculated to quantify the extent of the School-to-Prison pipeline problem.

To determine the exclusion grade, first an exclusion score was calculated, using the following formula:

Overall Exclusion Grade minus
(Preschool-3rd Grade Exclusion Penalty + 9th Grade Exclusion Penalty)

Exclusion - Final Grade

The average Final Exclusion grade was 37.0; Half the schools/districts had a grade below 38. The lowest Final Exclusion Grade was -44.7, and the highest was 100.

Public Districts had a higher mean grade (46.7) than Community (Charter) Schools (15.4). This difference was statistically significant (p=.000). That is, there is zero probability that this difference occurred by chance.

Type 8 Urban schools had the lowest mean Exclusion - Final Grade (-11.1); and Type 6 Suburban schools had the highest mean Exclusion - Final Grade (68.7). This difference was statistically significant (p=.000). [3]

Exclusion - Final Grade
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
879	37.0	38.0	-44.7	100.0

Exclusion Overall Grade by Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	273	31.1%	15.4	6.5	-44.7	95.0
Public District	606	68.9%	46.7	48.5	-24.2	100.0
ANOVA
Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
183830.738	1	183830.738	216.682	0.000

Exclusion Overall Grade by Typology of Public Districts
Typology of Public Districts	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	48.2	48.2	-14.6	95.0
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	58.7	60.0	2.9	100.0
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	57.0	58.1	9.2	95.0
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	37.9	37.5	-11.5	95.0
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	41.7	47.0	-9.6	89.1
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	68.7	69.5	15.2	95.0
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	3.7	1.9	-24.2	84.4
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	-11.1	-12.4	-16.3	3.5

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
171608.921	7	24515.560	45.431	0.000

Penalty Points (Combined)

Penalty points were calculated for Pre-school to 3rd-grade exclusions and Excessive 9th-grade exclusions. The two areas were combined to produce a total that will be subtracted from the Preliminary Exclusion Grade. The average combined Penalty Points was 10.9. Half the schools/districts had combined penalty points below 11.4. The lowest Combined Penalty Points was 0, and the highest was 44.7.

Public Districts (10.9) and Community (Charter) Schools (10.8) had mostly the same mean combined penalty points.

For Public Districts, Type 8 Urban schools (22.4) had the highest mean Penalty Points (combined); and Type 6 Suburban schools (7.7) had the lowest mean Penalty Points (Combined).

Penalty Points (Combined)
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
879	10.9	11.431	0.0	44.7

Penalty Points (Combined) By Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	273	31.1%	10.8	11.3	0.0	44.7
Public District	606	68.9%	10.9	11.5	0.0	34.2

Penalty Points (Combined) By Typology of Public Districts
Typology of Public Districts	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123.0	20.3%	10.4	11.6	0.0	24.6
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105.0	17.4%	8.2	10.6	0.0	17.1
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110.0	18.2%	9.7	11.1	0.0	20.8
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89.0	14.7%	12.0	12.3	0.0	21.5
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77.0	12.7%	12.1	12.0	0.7	19.8
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46.0	7.6%	7.7	10.5	0.0	15.0
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47.0	7.8%	18.3	17.7	1.0	34.2
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8.0	1.3%	22.4	22.4	16.5	26.3

Exclusion - Preliminary Grade

The average preliminary grade was 47.8; Half the schools/districts had a grade below 50. The lowest Preliminary Grade was 0, and the highest was 100.

Public Districts had a higher mean grade (57.5) than Community (Charter) Schools (26.2 ).

For Public Districts, Type 8 Urban schools had the lowest mean Preliminary Exclusion Grade (11.3); and Type 6 Suburban schools had the highest mean Preliminary Exclusion Grade (76.4).

Preliminary Exclusion Grade
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
879	47.8	50.0	0.0	100.0

Preliminary Exclusion Grade by Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	273	31.1%	26.2	10.0	0.0	95.0
Public District	606	68.9%	57.5	60.0	10.0	100.0

Preliminary Exclusion Grade by Typology of Public Districts
	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	58.5	60.000	10.0	95.0
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	66.9	70.000	20.0	100.0
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	66.6	65.000	30.0	95.0
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	49.9	50.000	10.0	95.0
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	53.8	60.000	10.0	95.0
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	76.4	80.000	30.0	95.0
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	22.0	20.000	10.0	95.0
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	11.3	10.000	10.0	20.0

The Overall Exclusion Rate

The first step in determining an exclusion grade is to calculate the number of exclusions. Exclusions are the number of expulsions plus out-of-school suspensions plus Emergency Removal by District Personnel plus Removal by Hearing officer. For many districts, this is more of an approximation than an actual number. Many districts, instead of reporting the exact number of discipline occurrences and enrollment numbers, reported: "< 10". We took that to mean "less than 10" disciplinary occurrences in the particular category. To calculate a rate, we arbitrarily assigned a value of "3" for all districts that reported "less than 10".

Of the 879 reporting districts, the half had more than 94 exclusions, with the average being 348 total exclusions. Some districts had 0 exclusions; while one district had 23,988 exclusions. The total number of exclusions for the state of Ohio was 242,388. That is in Ohio, during 2017-2018, over 240,000 expulsions, out-of-school suspensions and removals occurred.

To compare districts, a rate was calculated by diving the total number of exclusions by total adjusted enrollment, multiplied by 100 and rounding to 1 decimal point.

There were a total of 879 districts reporting discipline occurrences data. Of the 1173 districts, only Community (Chart) Schools and Public school districts reported discipline occurrences. Half the reporting schools had rates equal to or below 7.3 exclusions per 100 students. [4]

While the average was 17.7 exclusions per 100 students; the lowest reported was 0 exclusions per 100 students, and the highest was 188.6 exclusions per 100 students. That is 188.6 combined expulsion, out-of-school suspension, and removals per 100 students.

Total Exclusions Rate
	Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
	879	17.7	7.3	0.0	188.6

Community (Charter) Districts had an average (38.4 exclusions per 100 students) that was 4.5 times that of Public districts (8.5 exclusions per 100 students. This difference in organizational type was statistically significant (p=.000).

Total Exclusions Rate by Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of District	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	273	31.1%	38.4	29.7	0.2	188.6
Public District	606	68.9%	8.5	5.5	0.0	95.7
ANOVA
Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
168440.949	1	168440.949	396.258	0.000

Urban districts had an average (38.2 exclusions per 100 students) that was 11.6 times that of Suburban Public Districts w (3.3 exclusions per 100 students). This difference was statistically significant (p=.000).

Total Exclusions Rate by Typology of Public Districts
Typology of Public Districts	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	6.7	5.6	0.3	36.1
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	5.3	3.8	0.0	22.1
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	4.9	4.5	0.5	16.0
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	9.7	7.1	0.2	33.3
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	8.2	6.4	0.5	31.7
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	3.3	2.7	0.2	13.3
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	26.8	23.2	0.7	95.7
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	38.2	39.6	22.3	48.0

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
27119.367	7	3874.195	80.422	0.000

Best Districts Based on Exclusion Rates

Three districts had a rate of zero exclusions per 100 students (Ottoville Local, Pettisville Local, Russia Local). While the following 41 schools and districts had a rate of less than one exclusion per 100 students:

District Name	Organization Type	Typology of Public Districts
A+ Arts Academy	Community (Charter) School
Anna Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Antwerp Local	Public District	Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Canfield Local	Public District	Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size
Canton Harbor High School	Community (Charter) School
Chesapeake Union Exempted Village	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Columbus Bilingual Academy-North	Community (Charter) School
Constellation Schools: Westpark Community Elementary	Community (Charter) School
Dawson-Bryant Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
East Holmes Local	Public District	Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Edon Northwest Local	Public District	Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Fairbanks Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Fairland Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Federal Hocking Local	Public District	Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Fort Loramie Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Genoa Area Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Granville Exempted Village	Public District	Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population
Ironton City	Public District	Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size
Jackson-Milton Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Jennings Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Joseph Badger Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Marion Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Minster Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
New Bremen Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Newark Digital Academy	Community (Charter) School
Northeastern Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
Oakwood City	Public District	Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population
Old Brook High School	Community (Charter) School
Ottawa Hills Local	Public District	Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population
Pandora-Gilboa Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Parkway Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Perrysburg Exempted Village	Public District	Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population
Revere Local	Public District	Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population
Shadyside Local	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
St Clairsville-Richland City	Public District	Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population
St Henry Consolidated Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Steubenville City	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
Versailles Exempted Village	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Wauseon Exempted Village	Public District	Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size
Waynesfield-Goshen Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
Wellsville Local	Public District	Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size
Wilmington City	Public District	Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

Preschool-3rd Grade Exclusion Rate

The Preschool-3rd Grade exclusion is the combined exclusion count for preschool, kindergarten, First Grade, Second Grade and third grade divided by the combined enrollment for the same grades multiplied by 100. [5]

Seven hundred seventy-eight schools reported discipline occurrences for preschool through 3rd grade.

The exclusion rate is the number of exclusions divided by the total enrollment in preschool through third grade multiplied by 100. The mean (average) was 10.3 exclusions per 100 students; the median (midpoint) exclusion rate was 2.3; the lowest was 0, and the highest was 190 exclusions per 100 students.

*Total Preschool - 3d Grade Exclusions Rate Organization Type**
Number of District	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
778	10.3	2.3	0	190

Preschool through 3rd-grade exclusion rate varied by the organizational type. Community(Charter) schools had an average of 33.4 exclusions compared to a 3.7 average for Public District. That is, Community (Charter) Schools were 9.0 times more likely than public districts to exclude, suspend, or have a preschool through 3rd-grade student removed. This difference was significant (p<.000).

*Total Pre-school to 3d Grade Exclusion Rate Organization Type**
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	172	22.1%	33.4	24.6	0.0	190.2
Public District	606	77.9%	3.7	1.6	0.0	86.1
ANOVA
Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
117691.288	1	117691.288	424.995	0.000

Preschool through 3rd-grade exclusion rate varied by the Typology of Public Districts. Type 8: Urban (-Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population) had an average of 22 exclusions compared to 1.0 average for Type 6: Suburban. That is Type 8: Urban was 22 times more likely to exclude, suspend, or have a Preschool to 3rd Grade student removed than Type 6 Suburban. This difference was significant (p<.000).

*Total Preschool to 3d grade Exclusions Rate Typology of Public Districts**
	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	2.4	1.6	0.0	27.0
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	2.1	0.8	0.0	21.3
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	1.8	1.1	0.0	9.7
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	4.5	2.6	0.0	25.3
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	3.2	2.0	0.0	17.3
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	1.0	0.5	0.0	9.2
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	14.4	9.3	0.0	86.1
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	22.0	20.5	11.1	37.2
ANOVA
Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
9333.214	7	1333.316	45.360	0.000

Preschool -3rd Grade Exclusion Penalty

The preschool-3rd Grade Exclusion penalty was based on the assumption that there should be no exclusions in that age group. Consequently, we wanted to both have a floor penalty that everyone excluding students in this age group received, and recognize that there is a significant difference between a preschool-3rd-grade exclusion rate of 1.0 exclusion per 100 students and a preschool-3rd-grade exclusion rate of 190 exclusions per 100 students. Consequently, we set the penalty at 10 points for any exclusions plus 15% of the exclusion rate.

Seven hundred seventy-eight districts had preschoolers. The lowest penalty was "0," and the highest penalty was 39. The Average penalty was 9.9; Half the schools had penalty's over 10.3.

*Pre3dgrade Exclusions Penalty Organization Type**
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
778	9.90	10.34	0	39

Community (Charter) Schools had a higher mean penalty (14) than public districts (8.8). That difference was statistically significant (p=.000). [6]

Preschool-3dGrade Exclusions Penalty * Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of district	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	172	22.1%	14	13.7	0	39
Public District	606	77.9%	8.8	10.2	0	23

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
3639.578	1	3639.578	152.792	0.000

Type 8 Urban Public Districts had a higher mean penalty (13.3) than other public districts. That difference was statistically significant (p=.000).[7]

Pre3dgrade Exclusions Penalty by Typology of Public Districts
Typology of Public Districts	N	% of Total N	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	8.7	10.2	0	14
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	7.0	10.1	0	13
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	8.3	10.2	0	11
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	9.6	10.4	0	14
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	10.0	10.3	0	13
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	6.7	10.1	0	11
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	11.9	11.4	0	23
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	13.3	13.1	12	16

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1370.413	7	195.773	12.441	0.000

9th Grade Exclusion Rate

The 9th Grade exclusion rate was calculated by dividing 9th-grade exclusion counts by 9th-grade enrollment and multiplying by 100. The 9th-grade penalty is the 9th-grade exclusion rate. The 9th-grade exclusion rate is the number of expulsions plus out-of-school suspensions plus Emergency Removal by District Personnel plus Removal by Hearing officer. [8]

Of the 1176 schools in the database, 806 (68.5% ) had enrollment in the 9th grade. Of the 806 districts with 9th grades, 706 ( 87.6%) had both reported discipline occurrences and published enrollment account. The average adjusted enrollment was 187, and average exclusion was 42.1

	Enrollment Adjusted Ninth Grade	Exclusion Ninth Grade Total Count
Mean	187.0	42.7
Median	110.6	12.0
Minimum	5	0
Maximum	4602	3691

The 9th Grade exclusion rate. The mean (average) was 17.4 exclusions per 100 students; the median (midpoint) exclusion rate was 9.5 per 100 students; the lowest was 0 per 100 students, and the highest was 298.1 exclusions per 100 students.

9th Grade Exclusion Rate
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
706	17.4	9.5	0.0	298.0

Community (Charter) Schools had a higher mean exclusion rate (36.7) than Public Districts (14.2). That is, community (charter schools) had 2.6 times more exclusions per 100 students. This difference was significant (p<.000).

Exclusion 9th Grade Rate by Organization Type
Organization Type	N	% of Total N	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	100	14.2%	36.7	26.4	0.0	298.0
Public District	606	85.8%	14.2	8.7	0.0	91.0
Total	706	100.0%	17.4	9.5	0.0	298.0

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
43569.035	1	43569.035	79.784	0.000

The 9th Grade exclusion rate varied by the Typology of Public Districts. Urban Schools with very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population (Type 8) had an average of 60.3 exclusions per 100 students compared to 7.1 average for Suburban schools (Type 6). That is Type 8 schools were 8.5 times more likely to exclude, suspend, or have a student removed than Type 6. This difference was significant (p<.000).

*Exclusion 9th Grade Rate Typology of Public Districts**
Typology of Public Districts	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	11.3	9.2	0.0	77.8
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	8.2	5.2	0.0	40.5
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	9.3	6.8	0.0	64.6
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	16.0	11.9	0.0	65.4
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	14.3	10.6	0.0	57.5
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	7.1	6.3	0.0	29.4
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	42.5	40.1	3.7	91.0
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	60.3	62.1	24.7	81.0
ANOVA
Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
64861.997	7	9266.000	56.817	0.000

9th Grade Exclusion Penalty

The 9th Grade Exclusion penalty was based on the belief that: (1) there is a need for some exclusions in the 9th grade; and, (2) exclusions in the 9th grade should be kept to a minimum. Consequently, we set the penalty at 15% of the exclusion rate.

Seven hundred six districts had 9th graders. The lowest penalty was 0, and the highest penalty was 39. The Average penalty was 9.9; Half the schools had a penalty over 10.3.

Exclusion 9th Grade Penalty
Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
706	2.6	1.4	0.0	44.7

Community (Charter) Schools had a higher mean (5.5) penalty than public districts (2.1 ). That difference based on Organizational Type was statistically significant (p=.000). That is, there is zero probability that difference occurred by chance alone.

Exclusion 9th Grade Penalty by Organization Type
Organization Type	Number of Districts	% of Total Number of Districts	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Community (Charter) School	100	14.2%	5.5	4.0	0.0	44.7
Public District	606	85.8%	2.1	1.3	0.0	13.6

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
980.303	1	980.303	79.784	0.000
8650.028	704	12.287
9630.331	705

Type 8 Urban Public Districts had a higher mean penalty (9.3) than other public districts. That difference was statistically significant (p=.000).

*Exclusion 9th Grade Penalty Typology of Public Districts**
Typology of Public Districts	N	% of Total N	Mean	Median	Minimum	Maximum
Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population	123	20.3%	1.7	1.4	0.0	11.7
Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population	105	17.4%	1.2	0.8	0.0	6.1
Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population	110	18.2%	1.4	1.0	0.0	9.7
Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	89	14.7%	2.4	1.8	0.0	9.8
Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size	77	12.7%	2.1	1.6	0.0	8.6
Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population	46	7.6%	1.1	0.9	0.0	4.4
Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population	47	7.8%	6.4	6.0	0.6	13.6
Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population	8	1.3%	9.0	9.3	3.7	12.1
Total	605	100.0%	2.1	1.3	0.0	13.6

Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1459.395	7	208.485	56.817	0.000

Best School Districts Based on Overall Exclusion Grade

Three school districts scored 100. All three were public school districts, and all were Type 2 Rural districts.

IRN	DistrictName	Organization Type	Typology of Public Districts
049387	Ottoville Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
047076	Pettisville Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population
049817	Russia Local	Public District	Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population

Worst School/Districts Based on Overall Exclusion Grade

One hundred and forty- seven districts had a negative overall exclusion grade. Of the 22 worst districts, 16 (72.7%) were community (charter schools). All of the Public Districts were urban districts (Type 7 or Type 8).

IRN	District Name	Exclusion Overall Grade	Organization Type	Typology of Public Districts
148932	Franklin Local Community School	-44.7	Community (Charter) School
014064	Winton Preparatory Academy	-38.5	Community (Charter) School
011507	Achieve Career Preparatory Academy	-35.8	Community (Charter) School
012011	Columbus Performance Academy	-29.7	Community (Charter) School
014063	University Academy	-27.1	Community (Charter) School
011923	Northeast Ohio College Preparatory School	-25.6	Community (Charter) School
008286	Harvard Avenue Performance Academy	-24.8	Community (Charter) School
133389	Lighthouse Community Sch Inc	-24.4	Community (Charter) School
044511	North College Hill City	-24.2	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
015712	Euclid Preparatory School	-22.4	Community (Charter) School
000609	Summit Academy School - Lorain	-22.3	Community (Charter) School
000296	Summit Academy Community School-Columbus	-19.5	Community (Charter) School
132944	Miami Valley Academies	-19.3	Community (Charter) School
014825	Buckeye Preparatory Academy	-19.3	Community (Charter) School
012541	University Of Cleveland Preparatory School	-18.9	Community (Charter) School
043950	Euclid City	-18.6	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
044297	Mansfield City	-17.2	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
133454	Dayton Leadership Academies-Dayton View Campus	-17.0	Community (Charter) School
133678	Riverside Academy	-16.6	Community (Charter) School
044263	Lorain City	-16.3	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
048694	Trotwood-Madison City	-16.3	Public District	Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population
043802	Columbus City School District	-16.3	Public District	Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population

Searchable Database - Exclusions

This database has two visible pages - list of all records (initially) or records that meet the condition (on search), and a detailed view of the selected record. When the detailed report will be returned for the selected record.

This database covers only information related to Exclusions. For more detail see individual schools/district page.

Footnotes

[1] Dolores Stegelin, Preschool Suspension and Expulsion: Defining the Issues (December 2018) https://www.instituteforchildsuccess.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/ICS-2018-PreschoolSuspensionBrief-WEB.pdf (Last Visited: June 19, 2019)

[2] Robert Balfanz, Vaughan Byrnes, and Joanna Fox, Joanna, "Sent Home and Put Off-Track: The Antecedents, Disproportionalities, and Consequences of Being Suspended in the Ninth Grade," Journal of Applied Research on Children: Informing Policy for Children at Risk: Vol. 5: Iss. 2, Article 13, http://digitalcommons.library.tmc.edu/childrenatrisk/vol5/iss2/13 (Last Visited: June 17, 2019)

[3] That is, there is zero probability that this difference occurred by chance.

[4] Publicly available data makes it impossible to tell if 7 out of 100 students were suspended once, or is one out of 100 students was suspended 7 times. That is, it is impossible to know how many students were actually being excluded. This is true for all of the calculated rates.”

[5] Exclusion is the number of expulsions plus out-of-school suspensions plus Emergency Removal by District Personnel plus Removal by Hearing officer. For many districts, this is more of an approximation than the actual number. Many districts instead of reporting the actual number of discipline occurrences and enrollment numbers, reported: "< 10". We took that to mean "less than 10" disciplinary occurrences in the particular category. In order to calculate a rate we arbitrarily translated that to be "3" for all districts that reported "less than 10".

[6] That is, there is zero probability that difference occurred by chance alone.

[7] That is, there is zero probability that difference occurred by chance alone.

[8] For many districts in this report, this is more of an approximation than the actual number. Many districts instead of reporting the actual number of discipline occurrences and enrollment numbers, reported: "< 10". In order to calculate a rate we arbitrarily translated that to be "5" for all districts that reported "less than 10" in either enrollment or discipline occurrences.

For More Information on Racial Justice Now and School Discipline: RJNOhio.org

Copyright Notice

Race, Racism and the Law
Vernellia R. Randall
licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Fair Use Notice

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, some material on this website is provided for comment, background information, research and/or educational purposes only, without permission from the copyright owner(s), under the "fair use" provisions of the federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed for other purposes without permission of the copyright owner(s). In general, the copyright owner is the author of the article.