Maryland education officials present discipline data showing racial and gender disparities, outline restorative-practices plan

Maryland Department of Education officials told the State Board's strategy and operations committee on April that statewide suspension and expulsion data show persistent disparities by race and gender and that the agency is developing a comprehensive framework to expand restorative-practices schools.

Mary Gable, assistant state superintendent for the Division of Student Support and Federal Programs, and Jeff Sanderson, MSDE accountability staff, presented four years of student-removal data (beginning with 2021–22 as in-person attendance resumed), showing higher removal rates in middle school grades and consistent gaps by gender and race. "The African American student group [is] being removed at 8% compared to Hispanic student group at 3.3% and our white student group at 2.7%," Sanderson said, citing MSDE's aggregated counts and rates. He added the data are unique counts of students removed for out-of-school suspensions or expulsions and offered to provide denominators and additional cross-tabulations upon request.

The presentation included a gender breakdown showing males are removed at higher rates than females (MSDE cited recent-year rates of roughly 5.6% for males versus 3.4% for females). Staff noted some categories, such as a nonbinary gender identifier, are collected in enrollment but often suppressed at the grade level because counts are small and masking rules apply.

Board members pressed for context and deeper analysis. Dr. James Bell, an ad hoc committee member who requested the item, asked for enrollment denominators and for infraction-level comparisons (for example, how specific infractions map to removals across student groups). Sanderson and Gable said the underlying student-level data exist and that MSDE can provide links and targeted analyses, including LEA-level reports, infraction breakdowns, and three-year trend ratios used to identify disproportionality.

Gable described the agency's measurement approach: MSDE calculates two primary ratios for disproportionality — a risk ratio (a group's removal rate versus other students) and a state-comparison ratio (the group's removal rate versus the statewide rate). She said both require multiple years of data and that the statutory identification threshold is a 3x factor; staff reviewed the committee work that recommended that threshold and confirmed it was adopted by the board.

On policy and supports, Gable walked the committee through definitions used in regulation (short-term and long-term suspension, extended suspension, expulsion, in-school suspension) and cited statutory requirements that the State Board establish a state code of discipline and that LEAs adopt aligned regulations. She described recent legislation that requires MSDE to develop a comprehensive plan for establishing restorative-practices schools, including a model of training, designation standards, and outcome metrics. "We have established a diverse stakeholder work group that has been meeting since September, and the comprehensive plan is due by June," she said.

Gable laid out related MSDE efforts: a statewide model bullying-prevention policy that every LEA must align with, an online introductory bullying-prevention course with more than 5,200 completions, a webinar series, a mental-health response team (in partnership by MOU with the University of Maryland School of Medicine), and a six-session Integrated Behavioral Intervention series that has reached building-level staff; Walt (Walter) Salee, MSDE director of student services, confirmed more than 500 personnel have completed that series.

Board members urged practical supports for districts and schools. Multiple members suggested MSDE organize resources by MTSS tier (tier 1/tier 2/tier 3) and clearly indicate which school or district staff should use each tool (teachers, assistant principals, school counselors, district staff). "If we can't address the student behavior side, then I think it's going to compromise the academic side as well," Dr. Bell said, recommending material be presented in a way that is discoverable and usable by on-the-ground practitioners. MSDE staff said they released an agencywide MTSS model last August and are working with LEAs and a community of practice to refine tiered guidance and make some training asynchronous for wider uptake.

Members also asked that MSDE publish more analyzable data (for example, machine-readable formats rather than PDF) and provide longer trend series; staff agreed to follow up with supplemental analyses, LEA data links, and infraction-level breakdowns. "We can really break it down because we do track the suspensions across the board," Gable said, and MSDE promised to supply links to standard reports and to produce the additional cross-tabulations the board requested.

The committee ended without taking formal policy action. Marie Lewis moved to adjourn; Miss Chang seconded, and the chair called the voice vote. The meeting was adjourned and the board noted the full board meeting is scheduled for April 28 and the committee's next meeting in May.

What happens next: MSDE will provide the requested denominators and targeted analyses (including LEA- and infraction-level reports), continue stakeholder work on the restorative-practices framework with a comprehensive plan due in June, and pursue expanded training delivery options and more accessible data publishing formats.