Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Discipline Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supporters tell committee HB 4 88 would broaden school discipline reporting to flag disparities earlier
Summary
Supporters of House Bill 4 88 told the Ways and Means Committee the bill would make discipline data more accessible and add measures that identify schools with disproportionate suspension rates earlier, require state support when disparities are found, and make plans and data public.
Delegate Erin Coughlin (D–Montgomery County) asked the committee for a favorable report on House Bill 4 88, which would require the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) to publish discipline‑related data in accessible formats, disaggregate that data by grade, race/ethnicity, special‑education status and gender, and change the state’s method for flagging disproportionate discipline.
Supporters said the bill would lower the risk‑ratio threshold the state uses to identify schools with disproportionate suspensions from 3 to 2 and add a separate “high‑suspending” flag for any student group when 25% or more of the group is suspended in a year. Levi Bradford of the Public Justice Center said the change would identify schools now missed by the 3‑to‑1 ratio; he cited Lansdowne Middle School as an example where Black students were suspended at nearly three times the rate of other students but that school was not being flagged under the current method.
Leaders of civil‑rights and discipline‑reform groups — including Gail Sunderman of the League of Women Voters of Maryland, Kenzie Funk of Strong Schools Maryland, Logan Ewing of Disability Rights Maryland, and Frank Patanella of the ACLU of Maryland — told the committee that improved transparency and earlier flagging would help districts design supports rather than relying solely on punitive responses. Sunderman summarized decades of research: exclusionary discipline is linked to lower achievement, higher dropout risk and longer‑term social harm.
Under current regulation, MSDE requires districts to produce plans to reduce disparities within three years. Several witnesses said the bill would direct MSDE to create complementary action plans and to publish data and district responses for public accountability. Committee members questioned technical details — such as how small subgroup counts affect flagging and whether MSDE has current data — and witnesses said MSDE has not produced consistent statewide calculations since about 2019 and that county‑level practices vary. Advocates urged the committee to require more accessible publication formats (spreadsheets and rates rather than raw counts) and to lower the risk ratio to better match federal reporting definitions.
The hearing concluded with the sponsor requesting a favorable report; no committee vote was recorded.
