Senate Bill S5055

                                 BILL NUMBER:  S5055

 TITLE OF BILL :  An act to amend the education law, in relation to
suspension procedures for disruptive pupils

 PURPOSE : Requires schools to develop a plan of intervention that
would address strategies to identify and modify repeatedly disruptive
student behavior.

 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS : This bill amends paragraph 1 of subdivision 2
of Section 2801 of the education law, to require a minimum suspension
period for students who have been removed from the classroom by a
teacher(s) three times during the school year. A new paragraph n is
added that would add provisions to a district's code of conduct that
require the principal (or his or her designee) to devise and implement
a plan of intervention to address the student's disruptive behavior.
The intent of the bill is to streamline the disciplinary process for
repeatedly disruptive students. In addition, the bill provides for a
plan of intervention to address the underlying causes of the student's
behavior and to stipulate consequences as well as corrective measures.

 EXISTING LAW : Law allows for students to be removed from a classroom
by a teacher four times a semester before triggering a minimum
suspension.

 JUSTIFICATION : A year and a half has already passed since the
              

adoption of the historic school Safety Legislation in 2001.  Since
that time, several deficiencies in the law have been identified that
this bill seeks to address. This proposal seeks to address the
revolving door of repeatedly disruptive students who are removed from
the classroom by a teacher(s) only to return without any clear
consequences to the student or plan to address the underlying causes
of the student's disruptive behavior. This bill requires that a
minimum suspension period be set for disruptive students who have been
removed from the classroom by a teacher(s), pursuant to the SAVE
legislation (subdivision 3-a of section 3214 of the Education Law), at
least three previous times during the school year. Under existing law,
the Commissioner is given wide discretion in setting the criteria for
triggering a suspension. Current regulations allow a student to be
removed from the classroom by a teacher four times a semester before
triggering a minimum suspension. This amount of disruption should not
be tolerated and the penalty for such behavior should be unequivocal.

This legislation also requires that each school district's Code of
Conduct contain provisions that requires the principal, or their
desig- nee, to develop and implement a plan of intervention that would
address in a comprehensive manner the underlying causes of a student's
disruptive behavior. This plan of intervention would involve
administrators, teachers, parents and other professionals with needed
expertise. The plan would describe the causes of the behavior,
strategies to address the behavior and identify those responsible for
carrying it out. The plan would be delivered to the student's parents
or legal guardians and teachers and put into effect within fifteen
school days of the completion of the suspension period.

In this way, both the consequences of the student's repeated
disruptive behavior is definitive as well as the strategy to address
the causes of the behavior to prevent further disruption and
disciplinary actions.

 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY : None

 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS : None

 LOCAL FISCAL IMPLICATIONS : None

 EFFECTIVE DATE : This act shall take effect on the first of September
after is has become law.