EEAC reviews bias-incident and hate-speech data, raises questions about definitions and small-group percentages

Members of the Tigard-Tualatin SD 23J Equity & Engagement Advisory Committee spent a portion of the March 31 meeting reviewing the district’s quarterly bias-incident, hate-speech and school-climate data and raised questions about how the data are collected and presented.

Chair Jacob DeGrama directed members to the EEAC shared folder that contains school-by-school PDFs and a district worksheet for comments. Committee members were asked to focus on the school climate section of each PDF, which includes major office discipline referrals (ODRs), bullying/harassment counts, bias incidents and hate speech, and a new page with student violence ODRs.

Zinnia Un, the district’s Director of Equity and Inclusion and Multilingual Services and District Civil Rights Coordinator, said the data are pulled from Synergy, the district’s student information system, and noted that what gets entered can vary by school. She explained a major reporting distinction: “This is where there's a difference between, elementary and secondary. At the elementary level, they track what we they call minor ... microinsults and microinvalidations are more around those microaggressions ... so that's why those are more connected to minor referrals.” In contrast, Zinnia said, microassaults and overt hate speech fall under major ODR categories.

Committee members reported other data issues. Barb Doyle said some PDFs had links she could not open. A parent member, Diane Watson, urged that the district publish raw counts alongside percentages: “I think it would be helpful to have raw numbers instead along with percentages because there are only, like, 8 Black kids at Fowler. Right? And so if you say 43% or 50% of them are doing whatever, you're talking about 4 kids.” Several members raised similar concerns about small-group percentage interpretation and pointed out that Pacific Islander students appear overrepresented in some referral categories relative to their enrollment.

Members also noted earlier-quarter increases in bias-incident and hate-speech reporting and contrasted that with declines in overall major ODRs and student-acts-of-aggression reports. One committee member suggested increases in bias-incident counts may reflect improved reporting and implementation of tighter protocols rather than a rise in underlying incidents. Members asked for additional breakdowns — for example, repeat originators and grade-level splits — to better assess whether interventions are reducing repeated behavior and to improve interpretation of small-sample percentages.

The committee was instructed to place observations, confirmations, clarifications and conflicts into the shared district worksheet; Chair DeGrama set a second in-meeting review window and asked members to continue work outside the meeting if needed. No formal votes were taken. The EEAC will reconvene in person April 28 for the SRO year review and to continue district oversight work.