With @Sflecce austerity and @ONeducation agenda on "reforming" school suspensions,I hope they will take a serious look at the progressive discipline policy. The loopholes must be examined and the ways it violates the rights of Black students receiving an inclusive education. /1

Progressive discipline and the use of "mitigating factors" has been applied inconsistently among Ontario school boards as well as between schools since the policy was implemented. There are *many* ways school admins weaponize it and keep Black students in suspension limbo. /2

Under the Act a principal can “refuse to admit” someone whose presence in the school would be “detrimental" to other students.This is often deployed as another means of excluding Black youth from returning &/ transferring to a new school- admins use this clause to block them. /3

The open ended and arbitrary power that school admins hold under the Act sec. 265 (refuse to admit), varies widely in Boards in Ont. There is no requirement for schools to keep records of this form of exclusionary practice-especially how it affects students with disabilities. /4

Instead of issuing expulsions, there is now an increase in “alternatively” placing students in suspension programs to complete school. Having made the decision NOT to expel  based on "mitigating factors"  admins are using this as means to exclude them from returning. /5

The practice  of "alternatively" placing students as a method of discipline makes schools appear to have low susp./exp. numbers- when in reality they aren’t showing up on the Board’s statistics or being tracked. These exclusions are happening in spite of what is in the policy. /6