Kidsdata.org offers the following measures of school absence and exclusionary discipline:

• The number and rate of K-12 public school students suspended and expelled from school, by county and school district, as recorded by the California Dept. of Education; also available are rates by disability status, foster youth status, homelessness status, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status
• Estimates of reasons for absence in the previous month and truancy in the previous year among students in grades 7, 9, 11, and non-traditional programs, derived from student reports; these data come from the California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) and are available by grade level, gender, level of school connectedness,* parent education level, and sexual orientation
• Staff reports on the extent to which truancy or cutting class is a problem at their school; this indicator comes from the California School Staff Survey and is available for elementary, middle, high, and non-traditional school staff

Regular school attendance is a predictor of academic success (1). Frequent absences for any reason are linked to negative school outcomes, including lower test scores and higher dropout rates, which can have lifelong effects on employment and earning potential (1, 2). A child might miss school for many reasons, including excused absences (such as for health or personal reasons), truancy, and exclusionary punishment (suspensions and expulsions). Rates of chronic school absence tend to be higher among students who live in poverty, those with special health care needs or disabilities, youth of color, English learners, homeless students, and children in foster care (1).

Students who are suspended or expelled are more likely than their peers to have academic problems, drop out of school, and enter the juvenile justice system (3, 4). In the 2015-16 school year, U.S. public school students lost more than 11 million days of instruction due to suspensions (4). Suspensions and expulsions disproportionately affect children of color (particularly African American/black and American Indian/Alaska Native students), those with disabilities, and LGBTQ youth (3, 4).

Exclusionary punishment also leads to significant social costs. For example, dropouts resulting from suspensions have been estimated to cost California approximately $2.7 billion over the lifetime of a single 10th grade cohort (5). Costs are due in part to lost wages and tax revenue, increased crime, and higher health care expenses.

Nearly 155,000 California K-12 public school students were suspended from school in 2020—25 for every 1,000. Suspension rates vary dramatically across regions with data, from 13 per 1,000 to 62 per 1,000 for counties and from fewer than 3 per 1,000 to more than 150 per 1,000 for school districts in 2020. Statewide, suspension rates by demographic group show disparate disciplinary treatment of students of color (particularly African American/black and American Indian/Alaska Native youth), students with disabilities, homeless students, foster youth, and socioeconomically disadvantaged students. In 2018-2020, socioeconomically disadvantaged students and students with disabilities were suspended at more than double the rate of their peers, and foster youth were suspended at more than four times the rate of non-foster youth.

In 2020, California students were expelled from school at a rate of 0.5 per 1,000, a drop of two-thirds compared with 2012. Among students with disabilities, foster youth, socioeconomically disadvantaged students, and students of every race/ethnicity for which data are available, expulsion rates decreased between 2015-2017 and 2018-2020. Still, disparities persist. In 2018-2020, rates of expulsion among African American/black (1.6 per 1,000) and American Indian/Alaska Native (1.7 per 1,000) students were more than double the rate for Hispanic/Latino students (0.7 per 1,000), more than triple the rate for white students (0.5 per 1,000), and ten times the rates for Asian American and Filipino students (0.2 per 1,000). The rate at which homeless students were expelled from school was 1.6 per 1,000, up from 1.4 in 2015-2017, and more than double the rate for non-homeless students (0.6 per 1,000).

Frequent disciplinary removal from school is associated with higher student dropout and delinquency rates (1, 2). In fact, students who regularly miss school for any reason—unexcused or excused—are at increased risk for academic failure and dropping out (3). While disciplinary removal may be necessary at times, suspensions and expulsions generally do not result in safer schools or better student behavior (1, 4). In addition, research has documented disparate disciplinary treatment of youth of color, students with disabilities, and LGBTQ youth (1, 2).

California has enacted numerous policy changes over the last decade to improve school discipline and attendance, including a recent ban on out-of-school suspensions in grades K-8 for minor disruptive or defiant behavior (5, 6, 7). While substantial progress has been made, much more work is needed to ensure that all schools, beginning with pre-K, implement effective, equitable discipline policies and provide positive learning environments (4, 8). In accordance with state guidelines, many districts are employing evidence-based strategies that focus on improving school climate and providing students with the support they need to succeed (8). In addition, increased efforts have focused on identifying absenteeism and truancy early, and intervening in non-punitive ways, to help improve student attendance and success (3, 7).

Policy and practice options to continue progress on school discipline and attendance include:

• Increasing awareness about the need to address chronic absenteeism and school discipline, and strengthening the capacity of districts and schools to carry out comprehensive, prevention-oriented solutions (3, 4, 9)
• Providing schools with adequate support to improve school climate and to adopt a whole-child approach to education, which is linked to better student engagement and behavior; such efforts should involve families and community partners, provide staff training and instruction on social-emotional skills, and implement systems to address behavioral health and other needs (9)
• Ensuring that schools have non-punitive, restorative discipline policies that are clear, fair, and consistent, and that teachers and administrators are adequately trained; this should include trauma-informed, culturally-sensitive practices and a tiered system of appropriate responses to misconduct that keeps students in school when possible (4, 9)
• Ensuring that high-suspending schools have technical assistance and resources to make necessary improvements; also, continuing efforts at the state and local levels to eliminate the use of out-of-school suspensions for minor misbehavior (4)
• Collecting, reporting, and using data at the school and district levels on exclusionary punishment and resulting days of missed instruction, with detail by student race/ethnicity, gender, disability status, LGBTQ identification, and reason for removal (4)
• In accordance with state policy, improving efforts to uncover and flag chronic absenteeism—both unexcused and excused—early in elementary and middle school by tracking attendance in real-time and analyzing absence data at the district, school, grade, and student subgroup levels (3)
• Ensuring that schools and community partners use attendance data to reach out to parents and students early—before absences become chronic—to offer support; as part of this, increasing formal collaboration (e.g., through school attendance review boards) with local agencies and service providers to engage hard-to-reach families and address underlying causes of absences (3)
• Ensuring consistent administration of school climate surveys, and strengthening the capacity of schools and districts to use the results as a tool for change (4, 8)