Through the lens of early educators: Understanding the use of expulsion and suspension in childcare programs

Highlights

• Preschoolers are expelled and suspended for a variety of behaviors.

• Expulsion is primarily used to address “non-compliant” families.

• Early educators use expulsion and suspension when they run out of strategies.

• Expulsion and suspension have failed to address behaviors exhibited by children.

• Expulsion and suspension are seen as necessary to protect the interest of others.

Abstract

As a means to comprehend barriers and challenges to the agenda of early care and education, this study was designed to understand the practice of expulsion and suspension in early childhood settings, particularly center-based childcare programs. Qualitative data were obtained through interviews with 9 teachers and 4 administrators from 3 childcare programs. State- and program-level policies were analyzed. Results reveal that preschoolers are expelled and suspended for a variety of behaviors. Expulsion and suspension are used to achieve 3 purposes: protecting the interests of others, addressing families, and addressing challenging behaviors. Although participants agreed that expulsion and suspension have failed to address family or challenging behaviors exhibited by children, there is a consensus that such practices are necessary to protect the interests of other children, adults, and the program.

Introduction

Decades of early childhood research supports the critical role of early care and education in building the foundation of children's development, learning, and wellness (Belsky et al., 2007; Broekhuizen et al., 2016; Mashburn et al., 2008; Peisner-Feinberg et al., 2001). Despite its promising effects, early care and education has not become a reality for many children. Among 12 million preschoolers in the United States, only 64.2% were enrolled in some form of early care/education programs (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). More alarmingly, many children have been deprived of their access to and participation in early care and education programs due to the use of expulsion and suspension (Gilliam, 2005; Malik, 2017; U.S. Department of Education, 2014). As a means to comprehend barriers and challenges to the agenda of early care and education, this study was designed to understand the practice of expulsion and suspension in early childhood settings, particularly center-based childcare programs.

Recent data revealed the high rates of expulsion and suspension in preschool settings. Of more than 1 million preschoolers enrolled, over 8000 were suspended at least once. Among these preschoolers, some were reported as suspended (removed from their regular classroom(s) for at least half a day but remains under the direct supervision of school personnel) multiple times (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). For every 1000 preschoolers enrolled in 52 state-funded prekindergarten systems during the 2003 and 2004 academic years, 6.67 were expelled, suggesting that preschoolers were 3.2 times more likely to be expelled than their K-12 peers (Gilliam, 2005). Variabilities in the rate of expulsion and suspension were found at multiple facets and levels. Public preschools and Head Start programs had lower expulsion rates than faith-affiliated centers and for-profit childcare programs (Gilliam, 2005; Gilliam and Shahar, 2006). Boys were over four times more likely to be expelled than were girls. Similar to the K-12 context, racial disparity in expulsion and suspension also exists in early care and education settings with African American preschoolers being expelled at a much higher rate as compared with their peers from other ethnic backgrounds (U.S. Department of Education, 2014). Young children with disabilities were over four times more likely to be suspended or expelled than their typically developing peers (Zeng et al., 2021).

We review the effectiveness of expulsion and suspension by evaluating the extent to which they contribute to four school discipline goals (1) to ensure the safety of students and teachers; (2) to create a climate conducive to learning; (3) to teach students skills needed for successful interactions in school and society; and (4) to reduce the rates of future misbehaviors (Skiba et al., 2006). If expulsion and suspension were to be considered effective, their use should have at a minimum achieved some of the goals, yet evidence has suggested otherwise. First, even though expulsion and suspension were designed to address the most violent and dangerous behaviors in K-12 schools following the clause of the Zero Tolerance policy (Council on School Health, 2013; Skiba et al., 2006), state legislatures and local schools have broadened the mandates beyond the federal mandates addressing weapons, to include drugs and alcohol use, fights, and even nonviolent disruptive behaviors (Curran, 2019; Skiba et al., 2006). Early childhood programs have also adopted these practices even though they may be used in different ways. For example, in-school-suspension in K-12 means temporarily removing a student from their regular classroom to another on-campus site (U.S. Departments of Health & Human Services & Education, 2014). In-school-suspension in early care and education settings typically involves sending a child to the director/administrator's office. Second, expulsion and suspension have failed to create a conductive learning climate or to prepare students to be successful in schools and society. In fact, many studies (e.g., Council on School Health, 2013; Rosenbaum, 2018; U.S. Departments of Health & Human Services & Education, 2014) have revealed the profound, adverse impacts of K-12 expulsion and suspension. In the context of early care and education, decades of research has shown that early learning and intervention are essential to children's short-term and long-term development (Belsky et al., 2007; Broekhuizen et al., 2016; Mashburn et al., 2008; Peisner-Feinberg et al., 2001). When a child is suspended or expelled from early care and education settings, the access to early education, the participation in early learning, and the supports for early intervention are taken away, which can further disadvantage children with the greatest needs and place a child on a life course trajectory of failure (U.S. Departments of Health & Human Services & Education, 2014). The last purpose of expulsion and suspension is to reduce the future occurrence of misbehaviors. Nonetheless, a number of studies have found that expulsion and suspension in early grades are positively associated with exclusionary discipline in later school grades as well as placement in the juvenile justice system (Fabelo et al., 2011; Mendez, 2003; Rosenbaum, 2020). In summary, existing research has communicated a clear and consistent message that expulsion and suspension have failed their function in meeting any of the school discipline purposes, yielding an urgent need for understanding why they are widely used in early care and education settings.

Although there has been more public attention to the issue of early childhood expulsion and suspension (U.S. Departments of Health & Human Services & Education, 2014), the research on this topic is still scarce and preliminary. The handful of empirical studies on early childhood expulsion and suspension primarily used survey methods and generated findings through descriptive analyses. Although these methodologies contribute to the initial understanding of early childhood expulsion and suspension, they fall short of cultivating in-depth information about “what is happening” and “why it is happening” (Shavelson and Towne, 2002). In other words, although it is evident that expulsion and suspension occur at a high rate in early care and education settings, it is unclear why preschoolers who presumably would engage in less severe forms of challenging behaviors are expelled and suspended more often than their K-12 peers, what the pathways look like, and why such decisions are made. The lack of research, combined with the homogeneity of research methodologies in regard to early expulsion and suspension, calls for more studies with diverse methodologies.

This study was a part of a larger project designed to gain an understanding of expulsion and suspension practices in childcare programs and use professional development to reduce the future likelihood of using expulsion and suspension. The project used a mixed methods design and this study was the first stage of the project, the data from which enabled the development of a professional development package. Below we provide the definitions of the key terms in the context of this study and as explained to the participants. Expulsion refers to school disciplinary actions of permanently removing a child who misbehaves from the program (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2013). Out-Of-School Suspension (OSS) occurs when a child who misbehaves is sent home temporally ranging from hours to several days. In-School Suspension (ISS) involves removing a child who misbehaves from an on-going activity/routine to another room separate from where the activity/routine occurs. Challenging behaviors refer to any external behaviors that early educators raise concerns about, find challenging, or need support to address (Bradley et al., 2004; Westling, 2009).

Two theories informed the design of this study: the bioecological theory (Bronfenbrenner et al., 2006) and social constructivism (Guba and Lincoln, 1990). The bioecological theory (Bronfenbrenner et al., 2006) suggests that the process leading to the development of knowledge, attitude, and belief is influenced by the context - a series of systems that directly or indirectly involve the developing person. Three common types of contexts include the microsystem, the mesosystem, and the exosystem. In this study, the phenomenon that we are interested in is early childhood expulsion and suspension, a practice used by early educators (i.e., teachers and administrators). The microsystem is the social structure in which the early educators operate on a day-to-day basis - the classroom and the school/program. The mesosystem is the interconnectedness between the different microsystems (e.g., the interactions between classroom practices and program policies). The ecosystem represents the broader social, cultural, and political contexts, such as state-level regulations. Based on the bioecological theory, we perceive early expulsion and suspension as a phenomenon that is contextualized in multiple systems and affected by these systems as well as the interactions across them.

Social constructivism holds the premise that realities are socially constructed by individuals and their implications of those constructions differ for their interactions with the physical and social world (Patton, 2015). Social constructivism has at least two implications for this study. First, individuals construct realities based on their own historical and social perspectives. Therefore, each early educator's decision making of expulsion and suspension may involve different contextual factors and contain different meanings. Second, because realities are socially constructed, a central role that researchers play in understanding a phenomenon is to seek to capture diverse understandings, definitions, and experiences of the phenomenon of interest (early expulsion and suspension in the case of this study; Stake, 2013).

Guided by these 2 theories, we define the pathway to early expulsion and suspension as a complex and multi-dimensional process. This process is influenced by multi-level systems and the interactions between them. Because expulsion and suspension are decisions made by early educators, we aim to approach this issue by amplifying the voices of these individuals. We emphasize the need to understand both perceptions and practices because expulsion and suspension are realities constructed by early educators and their decisions are affected by their experiences and beliefs. Specifically, we ask two research questions:

• In what conditions are expulsion and suspension used or considered for use?

• What is the perceived purpose and effectiveness of expulsion and suspension?