Developing Policy on Early Childhood Suspension and Expulsion

[Pestle]

Nobody's mentioned yet the unconscious biases that exist when it comes to suspension/expulsion. There's a growing awareness that race, gender, perceived culture/class, and other factors impact how much empathy school officials have when interpreting negative behavior. For instance, people have trouble gauging the age of folks of a different race, and white people tend to overestimate the age of black children. So even when a white administrator knows objectively that the black boy sitting in her office is the same age as the white boys in his class, she may unconsciously hold him to a developmentally inappropriate standard of behavior. (And how many of you've had a little girl who preens when she's caught acting out, clearly waiting for us to melt in the face of her cuteness? That's behavior that's gotten positive reinforcement.)

All that to say, this could be in part a ham-handed attempt to reduce the disparity in how children are excluded from preschool programs.

http://fortune.com/2016/09/28/how-racial-bias-is-showing-up-in-schools/

[Cat Herder]

white people tend to overestimate the age of black children.

Can you link that study? I have never heard of that research before.

[Pestle]

Oh, you totally did mention it! I was dealing with kids and didn't hit "post" until after you posted yours.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/black-boys-older.aspx

[Cat Herder]

Oh, you totally did mention it! I was dealing with kids and didn't hit "post" until after you posted yours.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releas...oys-older.aspx

Happens all the time. :: No worries. :hug:

I read the article you linked. This stood out. "

White teachers, with lower expectations of black children, rated the severity of the behavior lower. Black teachers, who held black students to a higher standard, consistently rated their behavior as more severe."

How are those statements not also micro-aggression's? I don't know, none of this sits well. :confused: No matter where anyone sets the bar they are ridiculed and projected upon as to their reasoning.

[Cat Herder]

Can you link that study? I have never heard of that research before.

Nevermind, Pestle, I found it. Off to read. Thanks for that.

http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2014/03/black-boys-older.aspx

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/psp-a0035663.pdf

Tough topics, but I want to understand. :hug:

[Mom2Two]

Sounds like parents aren't considered responsible anymore. Like as if it's just assumed that daycare/schools are raising children and parents aren't even considered to be accountable for children's behavior.

[Cat Herder]

Sounds like parents aren't considered responsible anymore. Like as if it's just assumed that daycare/schools are raising children and parents aren't even considered to be accountable for children's behavior.

My understanding was that was the outcome from one of the original Head Start program studies that assumed lower income kids would have their early experiences (and therefore adult outcomes) leveled with their higher income peers that way. Now they link it to the ACES study, I think. https://www.cdc.gov/violencepreventi...udy/index.html

None seem to focus on parents responsibility, evaluation, progress or accountability, though. :confused: Anyone know of a study on that?

[Cat Herder]

Cool find

"Triple P (Positive Parenting Program)

https://www.triplep-america.com

Triple P is a system of parenting and family support to address parents’ varied needs. There are five levels of intervention, ranging from media strategies to increase awareness and acceptance, to brief consultation on common developmental issues, to intensive approaches to address problems with parenting and child behavior. In addition to impacting CM outcomes, this program has
shown improvements in parenting behavior and child behavior problems."

[Ariana]

Anyone caring for a child, whether it is in a professional setting or in a parental setting, should have required courses for caring for those children. I know it sounds outlandish but the way a child is raised has a HUGE impact on society, prison systems and victimization.

I currently have a 3 yr old with major impulse control issues. I am working with mom on it but so far after 3 weeks I have only seen small improvements. I actually said to my husband that this type of personality, if not nipped in the bud, will result in this kid going to prison. No one thinks behavior in a 3 yr old can impact how that child grows up and the choices they make. At least there are some parrallels being drawn here.

[LysesKids]

This is what I do not like (#2). I think that a majority of providers, both new and old, DO try to cover every base before terminating care. We see what we can do on our end, what changes can be made in the daily life of the child (naps, eating, consistency), ask the parents for cooperation and offer advice on what they can do at home, ect. But, when all else fails or if there is no cooperation from the parents, termination is in the best interest of all involved. It protects us, our other dc kids, our home. But it also puts the issue back on the parent and somewhat forces them to deal with it. They don't always and may hop over to the next dc, but history generally repeats itself if changes are not made, so it usually bites them in the bum.

I could never support the bolded part though (#2). There HAS to be consequences when no improvements are made and ultimately, we are private business owners. The amount of work and effort we want to put into a child should be our decision. It is great to give people tools, but eliminating the expulsion option is not the way to go. I know it is not the same, but I was reading the archives last night on the peanut allergy threads and it was a parent who knew about the allergy, but did not inform the dc provider, bc they knew they would have some form of protection under the ADA to be expelled at that point. It seemed like a move to force a provider to deal with something they were not capable of dealing with. I can see the similarities in the above. Forcing providers to work harder and potentially deal with aggressive/violent/abnormal behaviors for the sake of the child, when that is ultimately the responsibility of the parent. That is not okay, but even more, it is potentially dangerous for the provider and the other children in their care.

The Peanut allergy issue is exactly why I put into my policies the following in my Meals policy...

"I stick to a chemical free, organic diet due to my own health issues and because it's better for the children... I do not allow outside foods to be brought in unless a child has a special dietary need that can be verified in writing by a physician; That being said, I am gluten intolerant due to an autoimmune disease & I also care for Celiac children - I use a number of nut flours among other things for baking... I cannot guarantee to be a nut free home for this reason alone; the danger of cross contamination is something that cannot be avoided here."

Families are expected to read my entire website before contacting me thru the website (yes it is stated on the site)... essentially if they try & throw the allergy crap @ me, I remind them that there are at least 3 different policies about allergies on the site & they were told to read & agree to them before sending me their contact info; if you sign the contract agreeing to the policies in person, then you can't come back & bitch @ me because your child has a nut allergy and you didn't know I wouldn't do no peanut butter etc etc.

[Annalee]

The money is found in QRIS.

My state alone is funneling money like crazy into educating and training providers. ANY and ALL efforts to create a QUALITY program that focuses on preparing the child for school is rewarded.

Of course, what is really happening is a completely different story but as long as it looks good on paper or in theory, they'll just keep doling out the money.

Close Gaps by 5

http://closegapsby5.org/

The state is not only drinking the Kool-aide but they are paying for it too

My state has been there and done that....a small amount of funding there still for academic classwork but for the most part funding is diminishing. Fifteen years later they are down 3000 Family/Group providers. The goal this last fiscal year was to raise FCC providers by 5%:: Today we have 638 for the whole state that are licensed....I dare say there are triple this number of unlicensed providers legally/unlegally. We dropped providers, no gain at all! Until Assessment is GONE, providers will not go back to being licensed and will remain under the radar. Assessment is in the law here so it is not going anywhere! :confused:

[Annalee]

"Limiting access to high-quality early education widens the achievement gap at school entry. Expelling children from preschool creates a missed opportunity to address young children’s socio-emotional and cognitive needs prior to school entry. “Preschool behavior problems are the single best predictor of adolescent delinquency and adult imprisonment. Expulsion from preschool leaves young children without access to education and early intervention, and families without support to address children’s behavior challenges. In the absence of these supports, “children are most likely to develop chronic behavior problems, contributing to school failure, peer rejection, substance abuse, truancy, incarceration, unemployment, divorce, psychiatric illness, and early death in adolescence and adulthood” resulting in more costly and long-term interventions.v Therefore, crafting and implementing policies and practices to support administrators, teachers and parents in addressing behavioral and cognitive challenges can help to prevent expulsion and reduce instances of suspension to only when in the best interests of the child."

"This brief includes resources to inform early childhood stakeholders at the state and local level interested in developing policy and guidance for programs to prevent and reduce suspension and expulsion." - https://www.zerotothree.org/resource...-and-expulsion

1. Establishing preventive, disciplinary, suspension, and expulsion policies and administering those policies free of bias and discrimination;
2. Setting goals and using data to monitor progress in preventing, severely limiting, and ultimately eliminating expulsion and suspension practices in early childhood settings; and
3. Implementing early childhood workforce competencies and evidence-based interventions and approaches that prevent expulsion, suspension, and other exclusionary discipline practices, including early childhood mental health consultation and positive behavior intervention and support strategies.

Should we no longer be able to term based on what is best for the group, safety, our own financial security or legal liability? Thoughts?

Our new regs state we have to have an "expulsion policy" for licensing to approve which I did, but now I know why. I am sure your info is the reasoning behind it. My state likes being the first to jump on the bandwagons:confused:

[Cat Herder]

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/school-discipline/policy-statement-ece-expulsions-suspensions.pdf

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION POLICY STATEMENT ON EXPULSION AND SUSPENSION POLICIES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD SETTINGS

The above is the actual 17 page statement.

"These disturbing trends warrant immediate
attention from the early childhood and education fields to prevent, severely limit, and work toward eventually eliminating the expulsion and suspension – and ensure the safety and well -being – of young children in early learning settings."

"Should a situation arise where there is documented evidence that all possible interventions and supports
recommended by a qualified professional, such as an early childhood mental health consultant, have been
exhausted – and it is unanimously determined by the family, teacher, program, and other service providers
that another setting is more appropriate for the well-being of the child in question – all parties, including
the receiving program, should work together to develop a seamless transition plan and use that plan to
implement a smooth transition."

[Annalee]

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/...uspensions.pdf

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION POLICY STATEMENT ON EXPULSION AND SUSPENSION POLICIES IN EARLY CHILDHOOD SETTINGS

The above is the actual 17 page statement.

"These disturbing trends warrant immediate
attention from the early childhood and education fields to prevent, severely limit, and work toward eventually eliminating the expulsion and suspension – and ensure the safety and well -being – of young children in early learning settings."

Odd thing is when licensing actually reads/views the expulsion policy they really couldn't say if it was correct or not because they do not understand fully what is expected from the provider. This happens alot here due to constant new rules/regs being implemented.

[Cat Herder]

https://www.ecmhc.org/tutorials/defining/mod1_1.html

Yes, I had to google Early Childhood mental health consultation (ECMHC).

"Early childhood mental health consultation (ECMHC) is emerging an as evidence-based intervention for supporting young children's social/emotional development and addressing challenging behaviors. Over the last decade, the following research and practice guided definition has taken shape:

A problem-solving and capacity-building intervention implemented within a collaborative relationship between a professional consultant with mental health expertise and one or more caregivers, typically an early care and education provider and/or family member. "