Did you know in where the LTISD did excel?

Posted on December 19, 2007 by David Lovelace.
Categories: Administration, Board.

The LTISD finally did excel at something: Overrepresentation of Minority and Special Education Students in Discretionary Discipline Referrals.

You can read all about it in “Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline Dropout to Incarceration The Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance ” written by Texas Appleseed, a non-profit, public interest law organization.

Hey Rocky, you should read this report.

It lists some other districts in Texas who have excelled in their “overrepresentation” and could be considered as candidates for your exclusive club of “cohort” or “lighthouse” districts.

Considering the large number of school districts in Texas, the LTISD is right up there as “over represented.” Will this cause the Board to give Rocky another pay raise?

I wonder if Rocky and the Board are aware that:

“Federal law limits the school’s discretion regarding children receiving special education services by requiring that the children with disabilities be educated in the least restrictive environment possible.”

(Hogg Foundation for Mental Health)

“When disciplining a special education student, school districts must follow procedures outlined by the federal government under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act 2004.”

(Lucy Wood, The Special Education Due Process Hearing – Discipline and Behavioral Issues Under the New IDEA, in State Bar of Texas, CLE Materials for Special Education Issues and the Juvenile Justice System (June 2006)

Just how does the LTISD define “discretionary discipline?”

Who knows?

We do already know that they apply discretionary adherence to written policies and procedures.

Here are a few highlights from Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline Dropout to Incarceration The Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance as is pertains to the LTISD:

Overrepresentation of Hispanic Students in

In School Suspension (ISS), 2005-06

(Referred at Rates 10% or More Than Their Representation in Student Population)

School District
Hispanic Percentage in Student Body
Hispanic Percentage in ISS Discretionary Referrals
Alamo Heights ISD 30% 44%
Boerne ISD 21% 35%
Frenship ISD 30% 42%
Gregory-Portland ISD 44% 56%
Lake Travis ISD 14% 25%
Levelland ISD 58% 73%
Lewisville ISD 18% 29%
McKinney ISD 21% 31%
Plano ISD 15% 25%
Source: Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline Dropout to Incarceration The Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance, page 47

Overrepresentation of Special Education Students in

Out of School Suspension (OSS),2005-06

(Referred at More than Triple Their Representation in Student Population)

School District
Percentage of Special Education Students in Student Body
Percentage of Special Education Students in OSS Discretionary Referrals (Nonviolent Offenses)
Alamo Heights ISD
8%
33%
Aledo ISD
10%
54%
Allen ISD
11%
50%
Bellville ISD
15%
45%
Belton ISD
14%
43%
Brownwood ISD
13%
40%
Canyon ISD
12%
37%
Carroll ISD
11%
45%
Center ISD
11%
36%
College Station ISD
9%
34%
Columbus ISD
11%
47%
Coppell ISD
9%
39%
Cotulla ISD
11%
36%
Early ISD
16%
77%
Franklin ISD
8%
50%
Frisco ISD
8%
25%
Goliad ISD
14%
53%
Gonzales ISD
11%
38%
Grapevine-Colleyville ISD
7%
23%
Ingram ISD
9%
34%
Joshua ISD
11%
37%
Katy ISD
9%
31%
Keller ISD
8%
25%
Kerrville ISD
12%
46%
Klein ISD
9%
31%
La Joya ISD
9%
27%
La Vernia ISD
12%
57%
Lake Dallas ISD
12%
36%
Lake Travis ISD
9%
38%
Lampasas ISD
15%
51%
Laredo ISD
12%
37%
Lexington ISD
9%
53%
Little Cypress-Mauriceville CISD
15%
46%
Lockhart ISD
14%
42%
Los Fresnos CISD
10%
31%
Lytle ISD
9%
27%
Marble Falls ISD
12%
43%
McKinney ISD
10%
37%
Midway ISD
10%
36%
Pearland ISD
10%
34%
Plano ISD
11%
35%
Pleasant Grove ISD
9%
37%
Poteet ISD
11%
35%
Robinson ISD
14%
45%
Rockwall ISD
10%
34%
Round Rock ISD
9%
27%
Royse City ISD
11%
45%
San Benito CISD
10%
33%
Sealy ISD
14%
59%
Sharyland ISD
6%
19%
Sherman ISD
14%
52%
Shiner ISD
15%
52%
Terrell ISD
14%
46%
Tomball ISD
8%
28%
Tuloso-Midway ISD
11%
35%
United ISD
12%
36%
Source: Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline Dropout to Incarceration The Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance, pages 52-53.

Overrepresentation of Special Education Students in

In School Suspension (ISS), 2005-06

(Referred at More Than Double Their Representation in Student Population)

School District
Special Education Students in Student Body
Special Education Students in Discretionary ISS Referrals
Aledo ISD
9%
30%
Allen ISD
11%
29%
Athens ISD
11%
23%
Austin ISD
12%
25%
Boerne ISD
13%
31%
Borger ISD
14%
33%
Brownsville ISD
12%
25%
Buffalo ISD
13%
27%
Callisburg ISD
11%
25%
Cameron ISD
13%
32%
Canton ISD
10%
23%
Canutillo ISD
9%
20%
Carroll ISD
10%
30%
Clyde ISD
15%
33%
College Station ISD
9%
20%
Dawson ISD
13%
28%
East Chambers ISD
13%
27%
Ed Couch-Elsa ISD
8%
19%
Frisco ISD
10%
26%
George West ISD
11%
23%
Glen Rose ISD
13%
30%
Grapevine-Colleyville ISD
7%
18%
Gunter ISD
17%
41%
Henderson ISD
13%
27%
Highland Park ISD
8%
21%
Hudson ISD
11%
25%
Humble ISD
9%
20%
Huntington ISD
14%
29%
Jacksboro ISD
13%
29%
Kerrville ISD
12%
27%
Klein ISD
9%
19%
La Grange ISD
12%
28%
Lake Travis ISD
9%
24%
Laredo ISD
12%
27%
La Vernia ISD
12%
26%
Leander ISD
11%
24%
Lone Oak ISD
16%
47%
Lubbock ISD
18%
37%
Lufkin ISD
14%
31%
Lumberton ISD
11%
27%
Manor ISD
12%
25%
McKinney ISD
10%
23%
Millsap ISD
16%
33%
Monahans-Wick ISD
15%
32%
Natalia ISD
13%
27%
New Braunfels ISD
10%
21%
Northwest ISD
12%
27%
Pampa ISD
12%
27%
Pearland ISD
9%
23%
Perryton ISD
9%
20%
Plano ISD
11%
25%
Pleasant Grove ISD
9%
29%
Port Neches ISD
11%
24%
Poth ISD
12%
36%
Rockwall ISD
9%
22%
Rogers ISD
13%
30%
Round Rock ISD
9%
20%
Stanton ISD
13%
30%
Stephenville ISD
10%
21%
Sulphur Springs ISD
13%
27%
Tomball ISD
8%
20%
Tyler ISD
12%
25%
United ISD
12%
28%
Van Alstyne ISD
12%
29%
West ISD
17%
37%
Wylie ISD (Collin County)
10%
22%
Wylie ISD (Taylor County)
10%
27%
Source: Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline Dropout to Incarceration The Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance, pages 54-55

This report asks some interesting questions. Questions that Rocky and the Board should answer:

  • Why are LTISD Hispanic Students referred to discretionary discipline at higher rates?
  • Why are LTISD Special Education Students referred to discretionary discipline at higher rates?
  • Who is responsible for the overrepresentation of minority and special education students in discretionary discipline at the LTISD?
  • What training have LTISD teachers and administrators undergone regarding disabilities and how they specifically affect each child in special education?
  • If LTSID teachers and administrators were trained, would the LTISD no longer excel in their overrepresentation of special education students to discretionary discipline referrals?
  • Was this the result of “Loosey Goosey’s” management of the Special Education department?