 Thank you for being with us. You have been on our calendar on again off again for a while now. And we only have a little over 10 minutes, but I'm so, but I thought you might would give us just an overview of the work that you have done and committee. For those of you who haven't had an opportunity to take a look. We're talking about the, where is it here? The legislative report, the final report on the task force for equitable and inclusive school environments. It's on our website. Just wondering if you could give us an overview of some of the work who was involved. We could always have you back. But for now the floor is yours. Great. Thank you so much for allowing me the opportunity to come and provide testimony for the record. I'm Amy Wheeler Sutton co director of the best project housed at the center on disability and community inclusion at the University of Vermont. And I was a member of the task force. Our goal according to the legislature was to make recommendations to end suspensions and expulsions for all, but the most serious behaviors. And to compile data regarding school discipline in Vermont public and approved independent schools to inform strategic planning, guide statewide and local decision making and resource allocation. And to measure the effectiveness of statewide and local policies and practices. So it was a very lofty goal of act 35. And so if you get a chance to review the report, you'll see that it's a very complex issue with a lot of moving parts. You will find that. We just referenced the finding section of act 35 in terms of rationale. There was really no disagreement among the task force that this is a goal that should be a goal of Vermont to reduce exclusionary discipline. And we were tasked to meet six times, which we did. However, based on the quantity of the work to be completed and the complexity, we formed subcommittees and ultimately had 20 subcommittee meetings. Cat Gallagher superintendent served as the chair of the task force and all other task force members are listed on page four of the report. I believe there was 16 of us, at least to begin with. So today I'll just briefly go over the recommendations. And then please see the full report. And I created a slideshow of the report for this. The rest of the information. Okay. Okay. So. And just there's a section of definitions, which I normally would just skip over. But it is important to note that every time we use the term school in this report, we're referring to public schools, approved independent schools and pre qualified pre kindergarten programs. So our recommendations really apply to all children enrolled in any kind of environment that is receiving public education dollars. And there is some confusion over what is defined as early childhood education, pre kindergarten education. It has this defined in the Vermont learning standards is a little bit different about ages. So there's more detailed information about that within the report. But overall our recommendations from the task force are to really couch any of these recommendations in the current context of Vermont schools right now. As Jackie was just referring to schools have very limited capacity right now, serious workforce issues that make any of these recommendations. To feel somewhat challenging. So while reducing exclusionary discipline is critical. We really feel that any legislative action should really take the form of additional support and strengthening existing initiatives. Rather than proposing or mandating anything new for schools right now. And we really want it to take a supportive approach to be thinking about a sustainable long term implementation of alternatives to exclusionary discipline. And a gradual phased in approach rather than saying, you know, two months from now this, this practice needs to be markedly different. And of course we would hope that any recommendations that are taken forward would be funded with adequate appropriations. So the first recommendation we have is for the legislature to consider whether additional state level staffing is necessary in order to support schools in moving toward a more equitable and inclusive environment that minimizes exclusionary discipline. So we have some examples of what a role at the, or more than one role at the agency of education could include in order to make gains in this area. Some related to data and some related more to content and overseeing alignment of initiatives that are related to this topic. We also recommend the formation of an interagency committee that would examine the intersections between several departments across the state like the agency of education, department of mental health, department of health, human services, office of racial equity. As they all connect to this topic and have people with a lot of expertise that can contribute to this. But really what we found is that additional resources are really needed beyond what was allowed in act 35 in order to accomplish the goals of the act. The way the data was asked for within act 35 did not necessarily illuminate any disproportionality between student groups. And what we discovered was the Holcomb reports from 2015 and 2017, the way the data was asked for those years really helped shine a light on where there were some discrepancies between how different student groups were treated in terms of exclusionary discipline. So we have some recommendations around how the data could be asked for in the future, some additional data sources that could be used. And then the legislature needs to consider whether or we would recommend the legislature consider whether it's a priority to collect behavioral data from all students in schools that are accepting public dollars because now there's very limited or no data coming from approved independent schools or pre-qualified pre-kindergarten programs. So our report does not include data from those sources. So if they were, the legislature were to decide that those would be a priority. Adequate resources and accountability measures would need to be allocated and developed for that data to be collected. And you might remember that moving forward the agency of education is going to be expected to provide a report to the legislature each year starting in 2025 on exclusionary discipline. However, due to the complexity of the data analysis that is required and the reporting requirements, the task force would like the legislature to consider recommending and supporting with appropriate adequate appropriations that the A we contract with an outside organization that has the requisite data to be oriented quantitative skills and is really facile with large scale statewide educational data sets rather than expecting the agency of education to take this on as an additional reporting requirement. And if that were possible, we would recommend that qualitative data is also collected from students and families who have experienced exclusionary discipline or alternatives to exclusionary discipline to show the power. And I'm not sure how that would work. And I'm not sure whether they would have the funding to put out a bid for that. Okay. Thank you. And then we have some other recommendations that are more for the agency of education or for schools. So I won't go through those. But they're outlined in the report. And then we were asked to do that. And then we were asked to look at what other states do in regard to exclusionary discipline. So we have some recommendations around that in relation to creating a mechanism in which schools that have high out of school suspension rates or have significant gaps between student groups would be required to review and address their discipline policies within their continuous improvement plan. process. Many states also have a statewide school climate survey, which Vermont originally considered and then moved away from being able to offer a statewide school climate survey. So we would recommend that the agency of education reconsider this. And potentially establishing some kind of state level restorative approaches coordinating council that would oversee restorative approaches in Vermont schools. We were also asked to recommend what are the most serious behaviors that would still constitute or be eligible for exclusionary discipline, which required a lot of conversation. And what we really want to stress is that none of us on the task force were there to be legislative or sorry to be, you know, lawyers. And so we want to ensure that legislative council would review any recommendations to make sure that there is no conflict between existing law or statute of federal or state to anything that we are recommending. We definitely think there needs to be further study about drug and alcohol abuse, use possession and distribution. We weren't sure where those should fall in terms of whether or not the school would be able to identify a drug or a substance. So we are looking at the issues that are related to informal removals where students are sent home midway through the day. The school doesn't record it as a suspension. They say your child is not safe to be here. They are not calling it a suspension. So more attention needs to be drawn to that and to how students are, you know, received in terms of exclusionary discipline. And then there was a member of the public who came to several meetings that we just wanted to make sure his concern was heard about disciplinary record expungement. So that wasn't a part of our work, but we wanted to make sure his concern was heard that there is not a great process for expunging disciplinary records. And so we wanted to make sure that we were able to identify those issues. So we wanted to make sure that there were various behaviors that after considering all of their alternatives and supports should remain eligible for suspension or expulsion depending on the context and the intensity of the behavior. So, you know, a kindergarten or threatening someone with scissors is very different than, you know, a high school student walking in with a knife. And so that's a very different thing. So we wanted to make sure that there was a certain level of harm or injury and the AOE is currently working on guidance around that language. However, none of those would, unless otherwise specified in law, would require a suspension or expulsion. Those would just still be eligible. We also talked about whether there should be a list of behaviors that should not be considered eligible. And so we wanted to make sure that there was a certain law or statute that those schools cannot suspend. But by the time of the end of the task force, we did not come to a consensus about whether that was possible. So we just recommend that that should be revisited in the future years. We compiled a really great list of professional development program supports services, best practices that are available to schools in Vermont. And so we really recommend that there should be, you know, an additional funding for school mental health, which I know is being addressed in the legislature right now. But funding that would allow mental health, clinicians and other support staff to be able to provide support downstream. So not just for the students who are already experiencing behaviors that are challenging, but pushing that support down to school mental health, which I know is being addressed in the legislature right now. We were asked to look at services, particularly for kids under eight. And we know that that is also being taken up in the legislature right now. So we didn't spend as much time on that because of the charge from the legislature for another stakeholder group to handle kind of the early childhood suspension expulsion. So we were asked to look at services, particularly for kids under eight, and we know that that is also being taken up in the legislature right now. So we didn't spend as much time on that because of the early childhood suspension expulsion practices. And lastly, I just want to name a caution that we found the Oregon legislature in 2015 limited the use of exclusionary discipline for certain grade levels. And in 2021, a study found that office discipline referrals that resulted in exclusionary discipline actually increased following the policy reform, and particularly for black students. So we just want this to be a reminder that policy change in and of itself is likely not sufficient. It really needs to come with professional development and support for schools to be able to implement these changes. So like I said, going forward each year, the agency of education is going to be submitting a written report. We hope you'll consider all of the recommendations that are listed in the report. The report really constitutes a great deal of work from many, many people. And that if you were to choose to pursue any of those recommendations to really dive into that section of the report for further information and, you know, what we talked about related to that. And we hope this report will lead Vermont in the direction of limiting exclusionary discipline, creating more inclusive and equitable learning environments for our students. And other members of the task force would be more than willing to come in and testify to lend their expertise if requested. Thank you. Thank you for the questions. So this is very helpful. I'm going to leave it with committee members to digest it. It's really well written. I would highly recommend committee members go through it. And I think maybe you and I, Ms. Mueller Sutton could have a conversation sometime soon, perhaps tomorrow or early next week around anything in particular that the legislature needs to put in place this year. You know, we already have things going. As you know, we did the exclusionary discipline bill last year regarding children under eight years of age. We have these reports coming, but is there anything else? It sounds like one of the things is, you know, has to happen to the agency needs to review this. And we have to get it to schools and teachers. And so that perhaps there might be some ways that it might be that we might be able to be helpful. It's a great report committee. Any questions? Anything else? Just a procedural question, please. Yeah. So we've heard the report now. What was our responsibility with it? Both to accept it or do we have to. It's a great question. No. So these are the kinds of legislative reports that we ask for over the years and they come in. It's an opportunity for us to take some of their research and either act on it basically or not. I hate to see reports get done and then just sort of pile up. So it's just good to sort of go over and see what's in them and see if there's anything we can have takeaways now. So what if we, what if we disagree with a portion of it? You know, after hearing it, what do you, what do you do with it at that point with a report like this? Nothing or? Yeah. No, I mean, you can certainly engage as we were Sutton, ask questions, how they got there, that kind of thing. And we can always have Ms. Weaver Sutton back in. I don't know if it's necessary. We can have a, maybe a little more committee discussion. I want to, I'm really going to dig in tonight. Yeah. Okay. There's a few couple red flags I heard that I thought were a little different, but appreciate all your work, Amy. Yeah. Terrific. And I think maybe what we can do is plan on having you in for another 15 minutes next week after we've had an opportunity to digest the report a little bit. And you and I can talk about how possible if there's any need for legislation this year. Senator Lyons. Just briefly, thank you so much. It's very comprehensive. And obviously there are maybe some shorter term things that we can do, but certainly as a longer term look at what has to happen. So for, and as an example, I'm looking at your, at the title nine issues that are there. And they, they stretch from early education to higher education. And I don't know what thought you were giving to some of the higher ed. Things that have been happening as you are looking at the report itself or the information. Yeah, we were only tasked to look at pre pre K through 12. So we, we didn't consider title nine and higher ed. Yeah. Right. But it's a, it's a continuum of. Need and so, but, but acting at lower grades would help prevent. Problems later on. For sure. And that's another one of the recommendations is to really provide adequate funding and support for early MTSS. And something called the pyramid model. So a request for proposals actually just came out from the agency of education related to that yesterday, I think, to help expand that to more schools in Vermont to really get at that preventative approach. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm going to ask that me to find maybe 10 minutes for the two of us to talk on Monday. And then we'll also have you in for a few minutes, 15 minutes next week. Appreciate it. Thank you so much. Thank you. Committee tomorrow we're going to hopefully wrap up a lot of our work on three bills having to do with military families. We're also going to do some work on PCVs, career technical schools and adult education, literacy funding. Okay. I think you can take us offline. Everybody. Okay. Definitely. I think you can take us offline. Everybody.