Discipline Data and a Parent Petition
The building leadership team at a fifth and sixth grade school is reviewing first-quarter discipline data. Black students make up 18 percent of the sixth grade but received 41 percent of office referrals written for 'defiance' or 'insubordination.' Three of the twelve sixth grade teachers wrote 62 percent of those referrals. In the same window, a parent group of about 20 families circulated a petition asking the principal to replace the 25-minute, twice-weekly advisory circle with additional math intervention, arguing that the circle is 'not academic' and that their children are bored. The principal has asked the leadership team for a written recommendation in three weeks. The school improvement plan already names 'sense of belonging' as a goal, and the district equity office has offered to facilitate a book study that last year drew four attendees.
1. What are the most defensible conclusions from the discipline data, and what would you need to check before acting?
Read the worked answer
Defensible conclusions, stated with appropriate caution:
- The referral rate is large enough that it is unlikely to be explained by chance or by one unusual event. Black sixth graders are 18 percent of the grade but receive 41 percent of 'defiance' referrals. That warrants a referral-level review.
- The concentration matters more than the aggregate. Three teachers writing 62 percent of those referrals points toward adult practice, not toward a cohort of children - unless those three teachers happen to share a roster or a schedule.
Before acting, check the actual counts behind the percentages, because 41 percent of a small number can be five referrals. Check whether those three teachers also write a disproportionate share of all referrals, not just defiance ones. Check whether the same students account for repeats, how 'defiance' is defined across classrooms, and what administrators' own referral base rate looks like.
The caution is not a reason to delay. It is a reason to read the narratives and talk to the students behind them before publishing any conclusion about individual teachers.
2. Draft a recommendation that responds to both the equity data and the petition, and name the tradeoffs you are accepting.
Read the worked answer
Recommendation: keep advisory, restructure it, and audit the referrals.
On the circle: the petition asserts the time is not academic. The team should reject the framing that belonging and math compete for a fixed slice of time. Advisory is 50 minutes out of roughly 1,650 weekly instructional minutes - about 3 percent. Cutting it will not produce the math gains families want, and the improvement plan's belonging goal is directly connected to the discipline data. But 'bored' is real feedback. Recommend a structured advisory with a stated purpose and genuine student voice, not free-form circle time.
On the referrals: recommend a review of every quarter-one 'defiance' referral, with the principal reading the three highest-referring teachers' narratives, and a shift toward documenting observable behavior rather than labels. Offer restorative practice training, paid if possible.
Tradeoffs accepted: families who wanted a quick win will be frustrated, and some staff will feel accused. Mitigate the second by making the referral review building-wide rather than targeted at three names, so the practice is reviewed for everyone, not just the outliers.
3. How would you involve families and staff so the decision is not reversed within a semester?
Read the worked answer
Two moves, run in parallel.
With families: do not announce a decision and defend it. Convene a short working session with petition organizers and advisory supporters, present the minute math and the discipline data, and ask what a worthwhile advisory would look like to their children. Offer a six-month review with defined measures - attendance, referral counts, and a student belonging survey - so the decision can be revisited on evidence rather than by petition. Families reverse decisions they had no part in shaping; they defend ones they helped define the test for.
With staff: the book study drawing four attendees is the tell. Voluntary equity professional development rarely reaches the people whose referrals are in question. Instead, make referral review a routine, non-accusatory part of building practice - every teacher reviews two of their own referrals per month with a peer, looking at what preceded the behavior and what alternative response was available. That reaches all twelve teachers without singling out three.
Finally, name one owner and one date for each action. Recommendations that end in a committee rarely survive a semester.