Thursday, December 01, 2022

Become a Patreon!

Article Index

Violenceto the Person or Property Exclusions were:

  • False alarm/Bomb threats
  • Fighting/Violence
  • Serious Bodily Injury
  • Theft
  • Use/Possession of explosive/incendiary/poison gas
  • Use/Possession of a Gun
  • Use/Possession of weapon other than gun/explosive
  • Vandalism
  • Firearm Look-a-like

 Violence to the person or property was not included in the Subjective Discipline Grade.

Of the 880 districts that reported, the median percentage of discipline based on violence to the person or property was 33.3%. The average was 34.5%; the lowest was 0 and the highest was 100%.

The mean for Community (charter) schools (38.3%) was higher than the mean for Public Districts (32.8%). This difference was statistically significant (p=.00). Which means that there zero chance of this difference occurring by chance alone.

There was a difference based on public school typology. Small town districts had a higher percentage of their exclusions due to violence (34.3%) than suburban districts (30.5%). This difference was statistically significant (p=.00). Which means that there zero chance of this difference occurring by chance alone. 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Violence to Person or Property

By Organizational Type

Organizational Type

Number of
District

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Community (Charter) School

274

38.3

36.7

0.0

100.0

Public District

606

32.8

32.5

0.0

100.0

Total

880

34.5

33.3

0.0

100.0

ANOVA Table

 

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

5627.715

1

5627.715

18.546

0.000

 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Violence to Person or Property
By Typology of Public Districts

 

Number of Districts

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population

123

33.945

32.258

0.0

100.0

Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population

105

30.700

32.143

0.0

96.3

Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population

110

34.854

33.333

0.0

82.9

Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

89

33.652

34.965

8.6

63.9

Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

77

31.645

31.494

9.5

73.1

Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population

46

29.470

28.874

5.9

53.0

Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population

47

33.787

33.770

0.0

51.6

Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population

8

33.885

34.921

2.7

54.1

Total

605

32.9

32.6

0.0

100.0

 ANOVA Table

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

1818.886

7

259.841

1.290

0.253

 

 

[Back to Top]


Tobacco, Alcohol, and Drugs Exclusions:

  • Use/Possession of alcohol
  • Use/Possession of other drugs
  • Use/Possession of tobacco 

Tobacco, Alcohol, and Drug behavior were not included in the Subjective Discipline Grade.

Of the 880 districts that reported, the median percentage of exclusions based on Tobacco, Alcohol or Drug behavior was 5.1%. The average was 9.2%; the lowest was 0, and the highest was 100%.

The mean for Community (charter) schools (3.5%) was lower than the mean for Public Districts (11.8%). Public Districts were almost four times more likely to have an exclusion based on tobacco, alcohol, or drugs. This difference was statistically significant (p=.00). Which means that there zero chance of this difference occurring by chance alone.

There was a difference based on the Typology of Public School. Suburban districts had a higher percentage of their exclusions due to tobacco, alcohol, and drugs (17.5%) than Urban districts (3%). This difference was statistically significant (p=.00). Which means that there zero chance of this difference occurring by chance alone. 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Use/Possession of Tobacco, Alcohol or Drugs

By Organizational Type

 

N

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Community (Charter) School

274

3.5

0.0

0.0

100.0

Public District

606

11.8

8.9

0.0

100.0

Total

880

9.2

5.1

0.0

100.0

 ANOVA Table

 

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

13118.209

1

13118.209

95.556

0.000

 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Use/Possession of Tobacco, Alcohol or Drugs
By Typology of Public Districts

 

Number of Districts

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population

123

10.7

8.0

0.0

55.6

Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population

105

14.9

11.2

0.0

100.0

Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population

110

11.9

10.5

0.0

53.3

Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

89

8.2

6.7

0.0

25.4

Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

77

12.1

11.0

0.0

44.3

Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population

 

46

23.7

20.4

0.0

69.2

Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population

47

4.1

3.0

0.0

12.3

Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population

8

1.6

1.5

0.6

3.4

Total

605

11.8

8.9

0.0

100.0

 ANOVA Table

 

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

12476.493

7

1782.356

13.337

0.000

 

 

[Back to Top]


Truancy Exclusions

 

Of the 880 districts that reported, the median percentage for truancy was 0.0%. The average was 1%; the lowest was 0 and the highest was 100%.

The mean for Community (charter) schools (1.3%) was higher than the mean for Public Districts (.9%). This difference was statistically significant (p=.0269). Which means that there less than 5% probability that this difference occurred by chance alone.

There was a difference based on public school typology, Urban districts had the highest percentage of their exclusions due to truancy (1.5%), and rural districts (.4%) had the lowest. This difference was not statistically significant. 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Truancy
By Organizational Type

 

Number of Districts

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Community (Charter) School

274

1.3

0.0

0.0

100.0

Public District

606

0.9

0.0

0.0

23.8

Total

880

1.0

0.0

0.0

100.0

Anova Table

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

22.271

1

22.271

1.221

0.269

 

 

Percentage of Exclusions
Based on Truancy
By Typology of Public Districts

 

Number of Districts

Mean

Median

Minimum

Maximum

Type 1: Rural - High Student Poverty & Small Student Population

123

0.469

0.000

0.0

15.1

Type 2: Rural - Average Student Poverty & Very Small Student Population

105

0.383

0.000

0.0

23.8

Type 3: Small Town - Low Student Poverty & Small Student Population

110

1.148

0.000

0.0

15.0

Type 4: Small Town - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

89

0.896

0.000

0.0

14.7

Type 5: Suburban - Low Student Poverty & Average Student Population Size

77

1.638

0.873

0.0

11.1

Type 6: Suburban - Very Low Student Poverty & Large Student Population

46

0.848

0.000

0.0

5.8

Type 7: Urban - High Student Poverty & Average Student Population

47

1.954

1.361

0.0

7.8

Type 8: Urban - Very High Student Poverty & Very Large Student Population

8

1.233

0.307

0.0

5.3

Total

605

0.943

0.000

0.0

23.8

ANOVA

         

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

F

Sig.

 

151.777

7

21.682

4.431

0.000

 

 

  patreonblack01