Chapter 4: State Variation in Racial/Ethnic Disparities in the Use of ExD

One of the most important ongoing issues related to the use of ExD is that it is not used equally across different groups of students. For instance, many research studies have documented the existence of racial/ethnic disparities in its use, with Black and Native American children disproportionally the targets of its use (Owens & McLanahan, 2020; Sacramento Native American Higher Education, 2019; U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 2019). 

The extent of these disparities is captured in Figures 4.1 and 4.2 below. Figure 4.1 visually presents the CRDC ExD for each of the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia separately for the 3 data collections. Users can select which data collection period to look at. Here are some takeaways from this figure.

• Although there is considerable variability from state to state, with some states having high rates in some years and some states having considerably lower rates.
• There is also high consistency across years and across states. Importantly, note that regardless of the data collection period selection or the state, the rates of ExD are consistently highest for Black and Native American students (red and dark blue markers, respectively).
• In fact, it is almost impossible to find a state where either Black or Native American students do not have the highest rates of ExD in that state. This is true across all of the data collections.
• Additionally, note that rates for Hispanic students are most often at and even sometimes below the rates for their white peers.
• Figure 4.2 allows users to select a specific state to see the rates of ExD for each of the racial/ethnic groups over the three data collection periods. These data give a different picture of the findings above and can be used by decision-makers to better understand how schools in their state compare to other states.
• Figure 4.2 also highlights that ExD rates were relatively stable from 2013-2014 to 2015-2016 and then dropped significantly in the 2017-2018 data collection, although once again there is considerable variability from one state to another and for the racial/ethnic groups.

Another way to highlight the degree to which racial/ethnic groups experience disproportional rates of ExD is to use an index of Risk Ratios. Such measures provide insight into the relative risk that racial/ethnic minority students face in terms of ExD relative to their white peers. The Risk Ratio is calculated by taking the ExD rate for a racial/ethnic group and dividing it by the ExD rate for white students. A Risk Ratio of 1.0 means that the ExD rates were exactly the same. Risk Ratios greater than 1.0 indicate relatively greater rates for the racial/ethnic students whereas Risk Ratios less than 1.0 indicate relatively greater rates for white students relative to the racial/ethnic students. If, for example, the Risk Ratio is 2.0, it indicates that the racial/ethnic students are twice as likely to experience ExD than their white peers. A Risk Ratio of 3.0 indicates that racial/ethnic students are three times more likely to experience ExD than their white peers.

Figure 4.3 presents the ExD Risk Ratio data for Black, Native American, and Hispanic students. Users can select any of the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, and the U.S. average Risk Ratios, to see the Risk Ratios across the three data collection periods. Here are some takeaways from these data:

• On average, across the ExD rates for U.S. Black students were more than 2x higher than white students. 
• ExD rates for Native American students were about 1.5x higher than white students.
• Hispanic students are near the levels of white students and are at the same level in the 2017-2018 data collection.
• State variability also is evident. In some states (AR, DC, DE, GA, MD) Risk Ratios for Black students increased in 2017-2018 whereas in other states, Risk Ratios declined (ME, MI, MT, NH, OR).

These data presented in reveal that despite the significant decrease in ExD rates for Black and Native American students, the disparities as reflected in Risk Ratios for these students remain relatively high. Let's look at some examples.

• In California in 2017-2018, rates of ExD for Black students dropped by 28% from their high in 2015-2016. However, as indicated in the figure below, the Risk Ratio for Black students did not drop but actually increased in 2017-2018. This is because the drop in ExD rates for white students was greater (32%) than it was for Black students, thereby increasing the gap between Black and white students (see Figure 4.4).

• In the District of Columbia, although there has been a steady decline in ExD rates for Black students, the Risk Ratios increased significantly in 2017-2018, jumping by more than 22% from 2015-2016 to 2017-2018. Once again, this is because the relative drop in ExD rates for white students was greater than it was for Black students, thereby increasing the gap between Black and white students (see Figure 4.5).

• Across the U.S., there were more than 4,700 schools that showed this contrasting trend; wherein ExD rates decreased from 2015-2016 to 2017-2018 for Black students, but the Risk Ratios increased during this time (see Figure 4.6).