Information Services - Statistical Reports

Student Exclusions: School Year 2002–03

  Download Full Report

VII. Alternative Education

Trend data show that the majority of the excluded students that were provided alternative education services for the duration of their exclusion were served via in-district alternative programs and home tutoring. Of those student exclusion cases where alternative education was not made available, the primary reason, consistent with prior years, was that schools exercised their right to not provide it (Table 7a).

Table 7a. Alternative Education by Settings & by Reasons Not Provided

	2000–01		2001–02		2002–03
Types of Alternative Education Settings	#	%	#	%	#	%
Home tutoring	206	13	310	17	345	18
In-district alternative program	807	50	767	43	1,037	53
Alternative program in another district	53	3	76	4	39	2
Private alternative setting	88	5	109	6	32	2
Work/community service setting	2	0	0	0	4	0
Not reported	0	0	0	0	0	0
Subtotal	1,156		1,262		1,457
Reason Alt Education Was Not Provided	#	%	#	%	#	%
Student moved/transferred	22	1	35	2	27	1
Student refused/did not respond	100	6	58	3	55	3
Student was incarcerated	13	8	8	1	14	1
School chose not to provide it	330	20	410	23	396	20
Not reported	0	0	2	0	0	0
Subtotal	465		513		492
Totals	1,621		1,775		1,949

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

As shown in Table 7b, in 75 percent of all exclusions in the 2002–03 school year, students were provided with alternative education for the duration of their exclusion. Sixty-eight percent of general education students excluded from school received alternative education, an increase of five percentage points from the prior year.

Federal law requires special education students with an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) who are excluded from school to be offered alternative education. Ninety-five percent of the special education students excluded in 2002–03 received alternative education. Of those general education students that were referred for special education evaluation but had not yet been evaluated, 80 percent received alternative education as shown in Table 7b.

Table 7b. Alternative Education by Program Status

	2000–01		2001–02		2002–03
	#	%	#	%	#	%
All Students
Alternative education provided	1,156	71	1,262*	71	1,457	75
Alternative education not provided	465	29	512	29	492	25
Not reported	0		1	0		0
General Education Students
Alternative education provided	787	64	811	63	960	68
Alternative education not provided	439	37	487	37	460	32
Not reported	0		0		0
Special Education Students
Alternative education provided	370	94	450	95	481	95
Alternative education not provided	24	6	24	5	28	6
Not reported	0		0		0
Special Education Referrals
Alternative education provided	0		0		16	80
Alternative education not provided	0		0		4	20
Not reported	0		0		0

Reported percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.
*Program status data for one student was not reported.

In regards to the 28 special education students who did not receive alternative education, 11 were reported as having refused or not responding to the offer of alternative education, and eight students had moved or transferred. In the case of six students, the school chose not to provide alternative education, and three students were reported as having been incarcerated.

For special education students that are excluded, placement of those students to an alternative setting is determined by either: (1) an impartial hearing officer, or (2) school personnel. In school year 2002–03, 16 percent (83 students) were removed to an alternative education setting by an impartial hearing officer and 84 percent (424 students) were removed to an alternative education setting by school personnel. For two special education students it was not reported whether the removal was by either an impartial hearing officer or school personnel.

VIII. Exclusions by School Districts

The number of districts reporting one or more student exclusions in the 2002–03 school year remained the same from the 2001–02 school year as shown in Table 8. Of those school districts that excluded students, the overwhelming majority continue to have fewer than 10 exclusions.

Table 8. Distribution of School Districts* by Number of Exclusions

	2000–01		2001–02		2002–03
Number of Exclusions	#	%	#	%	#	%
0	244	66	202	54	206	55
1–3	63	17	92	25	90	24
4–9	40	11	50	13	46	13
10–19	13	4	12	3	21	7
20–49	6	2	12	3	7	2
50–99	2	1	1	0	3	1
100 or more	3	1	3	1	3	1

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.
*Charter schools and regional vocational technical schools are also considered to be districts.

The number of districts having 10 or more student exclusions has increased. In 2000–01, there were 24 districts, 28 districts in 2001–02 and 34 districts in 2002–03.

Although some districts may have excluded more than 10 students from school, they had fewer than four exclusions per 1000 students enrolled in the district due to their large student enrollment. Other districts had fewer than 10 student exclusions, but had four or more exclusions per 1000 students. As illustrated in Table 10, the number of districts reporting four or more student exclusions per 1000 students in school year 2002–03 remained the same as the previous school year.

Table 9. Districts* with Ten or More Student Exclusions

2001–02					2002–03
District	#	Per 1000 students	% Alt. Ed.		District	#	Per 1000 students	% Alt. Ed.
Springfield	458	18.3	91		Springfield	583	21.9	92
Boston	172	2.8	88		Boston	221	3.6	98
Worcester	128	4.9	97		Worcester	102	4.0	100
Lawrence	59	4.6	88		Lawrence	75	6.0	92
Holyoke	39	5.4	33		Holyoke	56	7.7	82
Quincy	38	4.4	63		Lowell	50	3.2	80
Lowell	31	2.0	100		Plymouth	34	3.8	68
Barnstable	31	5.1	55		Chicopee	32	4.2	13
Plymouth	27	3.0	41		Cambridge	28	4.1	100
Chelsea	25	4.3	68		Quincy	25	2.8	80
Chicopee	25	3.3	36		Assabet Valley	24	27.0	33
Dennis-Yarmouth	25	5.6	56		North Attleborough	24	5.1	67
Malden	23	4.2	4		Stoughton	22	5.3	77
Cambridge	22	3.1	100		Greater Lawrence RVT	19	13.5	32
Revere	22	3.8	82		Dennis-Yarmouth	19	4.4	5
Middleborough	21	5.7	76		Chelsea	18	3.1	56
Assabet Valley	19	21.7	37		Fitchburg	18	3.0	72
S.E. Reg. Voc Tech	18	15.4	50		Greenfield	18	8.0	50
Brookline	17	2.9	88		Nauset	17	9.2	100
Fitchburg	17	2.7	47		Revere	13	2.2	69
Nauset	16	8.9	100		Winchendon	13	6.9	46
Somerville	16	2.8	19		Central Berkshire	12	5.2	25
Stoughton	16	3.9	44		Randolph	12	3.0	67
Central Berkshire	14	6.1	14		Haverhill	12	1.4	67
Oxford	13	5.9	92		Fall River	11	0.9	73
Ayer	10	7.1	10		New Bedford	11	0.8	100
Braintree	10	2.0	70		Walpole	11	3.0	36
Whittier Voc	10	7.5	0		Athol-Royalston	10	4.5	50
					Barnstable	10	1.6	60
					Brockton	10	0.6	40
					Leominster	10	1.6	30
					New Leadership HMCS	10	31.3	40
					Salem	10	2.0	40
					Wareham	10	2.9	80

*Charter schools and regional vocational technical schools are also considered to be districts.

Table 10. Districts* with Four or More Student Exclusions per 1000 Students

2001–02					2002–03
District	#	Per 1000 students	% Alt. Ed.		District	#	Per 1000 students	% Alt. Ed.
S. Boston Harbor Acad Ch	6	25.2	0		Champion HMCS	5	50.5	0
Assabet Valley	19	21.7	37		New Leadership HMCS	10	31.3	40
Springfield	458	18.3	91		Assabet Valley	24	27.0	33
S.E. Reg. Voc Tech	18	15.4	50		Springfield	583	21.9	92
North Brookfield	9	11.0	67		Gr. Lawrence RVT	19	13.5	32
Murdoch Middle Charter	2	8.8	0		Ralph C. Mahar	7	9.6	43
Nauset	16	8.9	100		Nauset	17	9.2	100
Boston Evening Acad HMCS	1	7.6			Greenfield	18	8.0	50
Whittier Voc	10	7.5	0		City On A Hill Charter	2	7.8	50
Ayer	10	7.1	0		Holyoke	56	7.7	82
Ralph C. Mahar	5	6.9	60		Northern Berkshire Voc	3	7.0	0
Southern Worcester Cty VT	7	6.9	100		Winchendon	13	6.9	46
Northampton-Smith	3	6.7	33		Ware	9	6.8	11
Ware	9	6.7	44		Boston Evening Acad HMCS	1	6.6	0
Old Rochester	7	6.2	14		Mount Greylock	5	6.2	20
Central Berkshire	14	6.1	14		Lawrence	75	6.0	92
Gr. Lawrence RVT	8	6.1	38		Southern Berkshire	6	5.8	100
Oxford	13	5.9	92		Roxbury Prep Charter	1	5.7	100
Sabis International	7	5.8	100		Avon	4	5.5	25
Middleborough	21	5.7	76		Stoughton	22	5.3	77
Dennis-Yarmouth	25	5.6	56		Central Berkshire	12	5.2	25
Holyoke	39	5.4	33		Frederick Douglass CS	1	5.2	0
Mount Greylock	4	5.1	100		Northboro-Southboro	6	5.2	83
Barnstable	31	5.1	55		North Attleborough	24	5.1	67
Essex Agr Tech	2	5.1	50		Bristol County Agr	2	4.8	0
Martha's Vineyard Charter	4	5.0	75		Abby Kelley Foster Reg CS	4	4.7	75
Worcester	128	4.9	97		Athol-Royalston	10	4.5	50
Southern Berkshire	5	4.9	100		Dennis-Yarmouth	19	4.4	5
Lawrence	59	4.6	88		North Central Charter Ess	1	4.3	0
City On A Hill Charter	1	4.5	0		Chicopee	32	4.2	13
Georgetown	7	4.4	0		Cambridge	28	4.1	100
Quincy	38	4.4	63		Monson	6	4.0	50
Chelsea	25	4.3	68		New Bedford Global Learning	1	4.0	100
Malden	23	4.2	4		Worcester	102	4.0	100

*Charter schools and regional vocational technical schools are also considered to be districts.

  Previous   |   Next