View in EDS

Suspensions in QLD state schools, 2016–2020: overrepresentation, intersectionality and disproportionate risk.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Suspensions in QLD state schools, 2016–2020: overrepresentation, intersectionality and disproportionate risk.
Authors: Graham, Linda J.1 (AUTHOR) linda.graham@qut.edu.au, Killingly, Callula2 (AUTHOR), Alexander, Matilda3 (AUTHOR), Wiggans, Sophie3 (AUTHOR)
Source: Australian Educational Researcher (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.). Sep2024, Vol. 51 Issue 4, p1527-1558. 32p.
Subject Terms: *Student suspension, *School discipline, *Student records, *Students with disabilities, Indigenous Australians, Intersectionality
Abstract: Overrepresentation in exclusionary school discipline is extensively documented for certain groups of students, particularly students of colour and those with disability, yet while these groups may overlap, policies that aim to address disproportionality tend to consider equity factors in isolation. The majority of research on overrepresentation, intersectionality and disproportionate risk has been conducted in the United States, yet there has been limited research within an Australian context despite reports of the overrepresentation of students in priority equity groups: students with a disability, Indigenous students and those living in out-of-home care. To disentangle the intersectionalities between these three priority equity groups, we created seven independent groups in which one or more of these factors was present. We then compare each of these seven groups to one referent group (not Indigenous, no disability, not in care) to examine trends in Queensland state school suspensions from 2016 to 2020. Findings show that students in the seven groups were issued suspensions at rates disproportionate to enrolments, in contrast to the referent group, with the risk of suspension increasing with greater intersectionality. Further analyses highlight disability as a common underlying factor, both in terms of increasing risk of suspension and in its repeated use, particularly for students recorded as receiving adjustments in the Social-Emotional category. These findings underscore the need for more nuanced reform and support strategies that can better account for the intersectionalities between groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Australian Educational Researcher (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
Description
Abstract:Overrepresentation in exclusionary school discipline is extensively documented for certain groups of students, particularly students of colour and those with disability, yet while these groups may overlap, policies that aim to address disproportionality tend to consider equity factors in isolation. The majority of research on overrepresentation, intersectionality and disproportionate risk has been conducted in the United States, yet there has been limited research within an Australian context despite reports of the overrepresentation of students in priority equity groups: students with a disability, Indigenous students and those living in out-of-home care. To disentangle the intersectionalities between these three priority equity groups, we created seven independent groups in which one or more of these factors was present. We then compare each of these seven groups to one referent group (not Indigenous, no disability, not in care) to examine trends in Queensland state school suspensions from 2016 to 2020. Findings show that students in the seven groups were issued suspensions at rates disproportionate to enrolments, in contrast to the referent group, with the risk of suspension increasing with greater intersectionality. Further analyses highlight disability as a common underlying factor, both in terms of increasing risk of suspension and in its repeated use, particularly for students recorded as receiving adjustments in the Social-Emotional category. These findings underscore the need for more nuanced reform and support strategies that can better account for the intersectionalities between groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:03116999
DOI:10.1007/s13384-023-00652-6