Disproportionality Data Report

Why is it important to collect identity-based data?

Identity-based data are necessary to understand barriers created by systemic racism and other forms of discrimination in and across organizations and sectors. The Anti-Racism Data Standards (ARDS) explain that systemic discrimination occurs when organizations create or maintain inequity because of hidden biases in policies, practices, and procedures that privilege some groups and disadvantage others. For example, this can look like people in authority treating members of Indigenous, Black and racialized groups harshly or differently than others, it can look like informally or unconsciously excluding gender diverse and disabled individuals from opportunities, and it can look like not paying enough attention to issues and problems that disproportionately affect people learning English as an additional language and ethnically diverse communities.

In HWDSB, when student identity data are linked with other datasets that we have such as suspensions, attendance, achievement and well-being, we learn more about our students and their experiences in the school board. Patterns reveal how the school environment affects different students in different ways and how some groups of students are advantaged while others are disadvantaged. Understanding where students are disproportionately represented, for example, in suspensions, enables the Board to act in ways that address this problem and work toward a more equitable system.

The ARDS provide historical context for why organizations are beset with inequities and contend that:

“Throughout Canada’s history including prior to Confederation, colonial practices, including the oppression of Indigenous peoples and the enslavement of people of African descent, have entrenched public attitudes, beliefs, and practices that continue to negatively impact Indigenous, Black, and racialized individuals and communities in social, economic, and political life. The exclusion and devaluing of different groups is also evident in Canada’s history of discriminatory immigration and citizenship policies, including restricted admission for Jewish people at the height of the Holocaust; the Head Tax on Chinese immigrants; and the internment of Japanese Canadians during World War II, among many other examples.”

The Ontario Human Rights Commission, in its Policy and Guidelines of Racism and Racial Discrimination affirms that racism is tied to social, political, economic, and institutional power that is held by the dominant group in society. HWDSB recognizes that the education sector is very much shaped historically by systems of oppression and that has resulted in a system that does not support the learning and achievement of all students. Collecting identity-based data is the first step in unpacking our shared past and beginning the long work of addressing inequities, in our commitment to better serve every student.

We acknowledge that disproportionalities are not new; the data in this report confirm what many people have seen, known and experienced all their lives. We also acknowledge that unequal treatment of different identity groups across sectors (e.g., child welfare, justice, education) and in the job market along with lack of adequate supports (e.g., housing, social assistance, mental health and well-being) indicate whole systems that are lacking and, thus, perpetuate what we see in the HWDSB data.

Suspension Disproportionalities 2021-2022

Why is it Important?

There is a great deal of evidence in the academic research literature about school suspensions having unintended negative consequences such as lower academic achievement, school drop-out, feelings of alienation, substance use, antisocial and violent behaviour. Research also shows that suspensions feed the school to prison pipeline.

When schools suspend students disproportionately, it shows how systems (like education systems) disadvantage some groups of students and advantage others. The Ontario Human Rights Commission report on The Ontario Safe Schools Act: School Discipline and Discrimination describes this issue in Ontario. HWDSB data shows the disadvantaging of First Nations, Black, and Arabic speaking students along with boys, bisexual students and those with certain disabilities.

Background

Suspensions are reported once per year to trustees in public reports. The June 2023 report is here. It shows suspensions (and expulsions) over the last five years by infraction type. It also includes the number of students who are identified as exceptional (per Special Education guidelines) who were suspended or expelled.

Community members, parents/guardians, educators, and others who support students have expressed concerns over the disproportionate impact suspensions have had on Black students, Indigenous students, racialized students, students with disabilities and other groups of students who experience marginalization.  In March 2023, community members brought concerns forward to the Board of Trustees and their presentations can be found here.

With the identity data collected through the We All Count: Student Census project, we have been able to look at suspensions in more detail to gain a better understanding of which groups of students are suspended in HWDSB.

How to read the chart

The bars on the chart represent the proportion of students who were suspended one or more times within an identity group. This means that if a student was suspended one time or five times, they are only counted here once. We compared the proportion of students who were suspended for each identity group with the proportion of all students in the Board who were suspended (represented by the orange line, also called the “board average”). When the identity group proportion is more than the Board proportion (i.e., the bar is above the orange line), it signals that students within that group are disproportionately represented in our suspension data.

The bar chart below shows trends we expect to see in the whole student population. The proportions are statistically significant and the number of students in each identity group is high enough that we can be reasonably sure these results are not due to chance. To see all identity groups and data, go to the data table included with this report.

Graph Legend

The suspension data included in this chart is from the 2021-2022 school year. *White is the only proportion shown here that is not significantly different from the Board average according to statistical tests but we included it for comparison.

It’s important to remember that individual students within a group have different suspension rates.  Some students within a group may be suspended many times, while other students in that same group may be suspended few times or none at all.

Here is an example of how to read the results in this chart: In the “Gender Identity” category, we can see that 6.1% of students who identify as boys were given at least one suspension in the 2021-2022 school year. This proportion is higher than the Board average which means that boys are overrepresented in terms of suspensions.

Findings

• On average, schools suspend at higher rates students who identify as:
  • Living with a disability (see details in Appendix B)
  • Boys
  • Arabic-speaking
  • First Nations
  • Black
  • Bisexual
• On average, schools suspend at lower rates students who identify as:
  • Girls
  • South Asian
  • East Asian

What does this mean?

The data clearly show patterns of disparity across identity groups which means that some students are being disadvantaged due to discriminatory and unfair disciplinary practices. There are initiatives in place to begin the work of developing bias-free, progressive disciplinary strategies. However, we acknowledge we are in the early stages of transforming structures and practices, and much more needs to be done.

Attendance Disproportionalities 2021-2022

Why is it important?

There is a great deal of research on attendance and its impact on students. Studies have found that when students are absent from school, they miss instructional time which makes them more likely to fall behind their peers and be disengaged from school. Students with high absenteeism are also more likely to leave school early (i.e., drop out of school) and are less likely to graduate high school. Leaving school early is associated with negative outcomes later in life, such as unemployment, precarious or low-paying jobs, and limited access to postsecondary education.

Background

There is a strong relationship between student attendance and achievement. If students attend school regularly, they have opportunities to learn and are shown to have higher levels of achievement compared to students who frequently miss school. Absenteeism is considered “chronic” or “persistent” if students miss 10% or more than 19 days of school (based on 194 instructional days) in one year. Students who are persistently absent are less likely to pass courses, attain credits, and be prepared for learning in future courses or grades.

Students may miss school for a variety of reasons including illness, COVID-19 isolation, injury, religious/creed observances, vacation, and truancy (truancy means missing school on purpose without a valid reason). Students may also miss school for reasons that are less visible, such as to avoid a bully at school, to care for younger siblings while a parent picks up an extra shift at work, to avoid using a bathroom that is not appropriate for their gender identity, or because they don’t feel connected to what they’re learning in class. When we see patterns of high absences in a particular group of students, educators must examine what is happening in those students’ lives and their experiences at school that is affecting their attendance.  How can the school environment be improved for students to feel safe and welcome? How can students be encouraged to feel engaged in their learning? How can students and families be supported to address barriers to attending school?

How to read the charts

We have used “jitter plots” to represent the data because they show how varied attendance is from student to student.  Each dot in the chart represents an individual student and the number of days that student was absent. The dots are clustered in bars to represent students within an identity group.  The large orange dot within each cluster or bar represents the average number of school days missed for students within that identity group. To learn more about what a jitter plot does, see Appendix A provided with this report.

We compared the average number of absences for each identity group with the average number of absences for all students in the Board (represented by the orange line, also called the “board average”).  Where the average number of absences is more than the Board average (i.e., above the orange line), it signals that students within that group are underserved by our education system.

The data show trends we expect to see in the whole student population. The averages are statistically significant and the number of students in each identity group is high enough that we can be reasonably sure these results are not due to chance. To see all identity groups and data, go to the data table in Appendix B.

Days Absent per Student by Identity Group

Average number of days absent:

Graph Legend

1	East Asian	5	White	9	Indigenous Spirituality	13	Gay or Lesbian
2	Lation/a/x	6	Buddhist	10	Other	14	Heterosexual
3	South Asian	7	Christian	11	Sikh	15	Pansexual
4	Southeast Asian	8	Hindu	12	Bisexual	16	Transgender

 

It’s important to remember that individual students within a group do not all have the same experience.  Although the averages show us an overall pattern of attendance, you can see by the dots that some students within a group may have missed a lot of school days, while others in that same group may have only missed a few days.

Here is an example of how to read the chart: We see that the Board average for days absent in 2021-2022 is 17.2 days. When we look at Indigenous Spirituality under the Religion category, we see an average absence rate of 29.5 days which is much higher than the Board average and very concerning. However, when we look at the dots, we see that most of them are clustered below the Board average. What we understand by this is that there are probably a few students with extremely high absence rates which pulls up the average for the whole group. This signals us to focus on understanding more about what is affecting their attendance.

Findings

• On average, schools report more absences for students who identify as:
  • Living with a disability or unsure of their disability status
  • First Nations
  • Latina/Latino/Latinx
  • Indigenous Spirituality or “Other” religions
  • Transgender
  • Bisexual, Gay or Lesbian, or Pansexual

What does this mean?

The data clearly show patterns of disparity across some identity groups in terms of attendance.  Ensuring that the learning environment is serving all students and that they feel welcome, safe, included, valued and engaged is ongoing work. We know we have much to do to create the kind of learning environments we want to provide.  Throughout the 2023-2024 school year HWDSB will be collaborating with students, parents/guardians, educators and community partners in updating the Equity Action Plan and on the development of the three-year Mental Health Strategy. Using the information from this data, these plans will have specific strategies to understand and address the disparities in attendance and engagement.

Achievement Disproportionalities 2021-2022

Why is it important?

The Ontario Ministry of Education commissioned research studies in the early 2000s that brought attention to graduation rates among Ontario’s secondary school students and what factors influence whether or not a student graduates. One study found that students who do not obtain all of their grade 9 credits (students are expected to obtain 8 credits by the end of grade 9) are far less likely to graduate. Another study found that the reasons for students leaving school early and not graduating had more to do with their disconnection with and disengagement from school rather than their personal and family circumstances. Early student learning is a predictor of later student learning. Elementary achievement is just as important as secondary credit accumulation in shaping educational outcomes for students.

We know our education systems work for certain groups of students but less so for others. When we see that a student’s ability to succeed in school differs because of their identity, we must examine what aspects of our school system are not serving certain groups of students and how this is impacting their futures.

Background

The Ontario Ministry of Education provides guidance for educators on how student learning and work is to be evaluated, and marks assigned. They have also determined what level of achievement is necessary for students to be considered to have demonstrated the knowledge and skills necessary to be prepared for their next year or course. This is called the “provincial standard” and is a Level 3. It is the same as a mark in the B range or 72-78%.

Student achievement is affected by several factors beyond someone’s ability to learn or do well on a test. While students’ personal factors, including motivation to learn and relationships with peers and educators impact their success, there are larger systemic factors that determine their success, including class size, quality, effective and culturally responsive instructions, and inclusive and welcoming school environments. When we see patterns of low achievement in a particular group of students, we must examine why the disparities are occurring and how we can better support student learning.

How to read the charts

We have used a “jitter plot” to represent the data because it shows how varied achievement is from student to student.  Each dot in the chart represents individual students and each student’s average final grade. The dots are clustered within identity groups.  The large orange dot represents the average final grade for students within each identity group. To learn more about what a jitter plot does, see Appendix A of this report.

The data show trends we expect to see in the whole student population. The averages are statistically significant and the number of students in each identity group is high enough that we can be reasonably sure these results are not due to chance. To see all identity groups and data, go to the data table in Appendix B.

Average Grades per Student by Identity Group

Average grades:

1	No	6	Arabic	11	Punjabi	16	Black
2	Not Sure	7	Cantonese	12	Serbian	17	East Asian
3	Yes	8	Gujarati	13	Urdu	18	Middle-eastern
4	Boy/Man	9	Korean	14	Not Indigenous	19	South Asian
5	Girl/Woman	10	Mandarin	15	First Nations

1	Agnostic	5	Indigenous Spirituality	9	Gay or Lesbian	13	No
2	Atheist	6	Jewish	10	Heterosexual	14	Not Sure
3	Christian	7	Sikh	11	Pansexual	15	Yes
4	Hindu	8	Bisexcual	12	Queer

Well-Being Disproportionalities 2021-2022

Why is this important?

When students experience a positive school climate, they are more likely to have higher levels of well-being, which in turn promotes their success in the classroom. Academic research literature on well-being tells us that student well-being is related to their participation at school and is affected by factors like their perceptions of being listened to, of having a say at school, of being valued and respected. Although student well-being is an outcome of their experiences at school, in the community and at home, we focus on it at school because of the impact it has on student engagement which is linked to attendance which is linked to achievement. When we see a pattern of low well-being in particular groups of students, we take this as an indication that school environments are not environments in which all students can thrive, and we need to address that.

Background

Students succeed when there is a positive environment for their learning. The Ontario Ministry of Education states that a positive learning environment or “school climate” exists when everyone in the school feels safe, included, accepted, and respected; when positive behaviours and interactions are promoted; and when equity is embedded in students’ learning.

The Ontario Ministry of Education requires that school boards gather feedback on school climate every two years to understand how students, parents and staff feel about the school community. One of the tools HWDSB has used to assess student perceptions of school climate is called the “Middle Years Development Instrument (MDI).” The MDI is a self-report questionnaire developed by University of British Columbia’s Human Early Learning Partnership, and it was used to ask students in Grades 4-12 about their well-being at school and in the community. We used one of the sections in the MDI, called the “Well-Being Index,” to report on well-being in this report.

The Well-Being Index provides a summary of students’ social, emotional and physical health.  It combines five measures related to optimism, happiness, self-esteem, absence of sadness and general health. It can result in three categories of well-being: “thriving” (or high) well-being, “medium to high” well-being, or “low” well-being. To be in the thriving category, students must report positive responses on four of the five measures that make up the Well-Being Index.

How to read the chart?

The bars on the chart represent the proportion of students who scored “high” or “thriving” on the Well-Being Index within an identity group. We compared the proportion of students with high well-being for each identity group with the proportion of students with high well-being for all students (represented by the orange line, also called the “board average”). When the proportion of “thriving” or “high” well-being students in an identity group is below the Board average (i.e., the bar is below the orange line), it signals that students within that group are underserved by our education system.

The data show trends we expect to see in the whole student population. The proportions are statistically significant and the number of students in each identity group is high enough that we can be reasonably sure these results are not due to chance. To see all identity groups and data, go to the data table in Appendix B.

Proportion of Students in each Identity Group that Measure “High”on the MDI Well-Being Scale

Here is an example of how to read this chart: Across all the students in our Board who both submitted Student Census data and filled out the MDI, 22.9% of them scored “high” or “thriving” on the well-being index. In the “Gender” category, we can see that 27.5% of students who identify as boys report having a high well-being, which is greater than the Board average. We also see that a low proportion of students who identify as non-binary (3.3%) and students who are genderfluid (3.1%) report having a high well-being.  These low proportions are concerning as they are far below the Board average.

Findings

• On average, schools see a lower well-being for students who identify as:
  • Living with disabilities (See Appendix B for full details)
  • Genderfluid, Girls, Non-Binary, or not sure of gender identity
  • Agnostic, or Atheist
  • Bisexual, Gay or Lesbian, Pansexual, or Queer
  • Transgender, or not sure of Transgender status

What does this mean?

The disproportionalities we see in the wellbeing data are in keeping with disproportionalities we see across other measures. Examining our school environments to identify and address systemic factors that contribute to creating disparities in student wellbeing is part of our continuing effort to affect transformative change so that schools are safe and welcoming spaces for all students.

These well-being disproportionality data paired with student voices are foundational in the creation of the three-year Mental Health Strategy.

We have a lot of work to do. Our new strategic directions (January 2024), based on feedback we heard from our families, students, staff and communities, will set the intention and purpose for HWDSB to actively work toward ensuring every student feels a deep sense of belonging and has joyful learning experiences while recognizing that students have different needs and identities.

Staff will monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of initiatives across the Board to eliminate barriers, in alignment with the ARDS. Staff will also dig deeper into intersectionalities to understand the experiences of students across multiple identity groups (e.g., students who identify as both disabled and racialized) as we work alongside students, families and the broader community. To that end, there will be a yearly student identity data collection in three grades and at registration. Again, all identity-based data collection is voluntary. Students and parents/guardians can choose to have their data excluded from our student identity dataset. However, we hope that the HWDSB community will see the value and purpose in building this data set over time.

Some of the initiatives we have put in place currently to identify and address inequities as guided by the Board Equity Action Plan are described below. As we advance down our pathway of confronting bias, colonial structures, systemic racism and oppression in our Board and the broader education sector, we will further develop responses in the form of programming, professional development, and strategies that create more equitable learning experiences for students. All this is to say that we are at the beginning of this work and have a long way to go. We are committed to a focused long-term effort to redress inequities through widespread awareness and effective practices.

The purpose for this report is to communicate what we found in our data—the disproportionalities—and to provide context for understanding them. Going forward we need to develop shared solutions that recognize the complexity and interdependency of systems of oppression in schools, in communities, and in organizations. Our work is also to focus our interventions and be more specific about how interventions, like the ones described below, are targeting specific findings in our data. Most of the programs below are new over the past couple of years and need some time to see the impacts.

Student well-being and achievement are impacted by factors beyond the walls of the classroom.  Students’ experiences in school are linked to their family environment, the neighborhood they live in, and the communities they belong to. To better understand the priorities, concerns, needs and interests of students, particularly those who have been underserved in our schools as this disproportionality report depicts, continued collaboration with communities is our priority. Community engagement is also advised by the Anti-Racism Data Standards (ARDS), as it promotes the collection, management, use and analysis of data in ways that align with cultural contexts and lived experiences of students.

Some Examples of Current Initiatives

Appendices

• Appendix A: Bar Charts & Jitter Plots
• Appendix B: Disproportionality Tables
• Appendix C: Glossary

Additional Links

• Disproportionality Data (CSV)
• Full Disproportionality Report
• We All Count: HWDSB Student Census 2021
• We All Count: HWDSB Student Census – Glossary

Translated PDF Reports

• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-ARABIC
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-CHINESE – SIMPLIFIED
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-FARSI
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-FRENCH – CANADIAN
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-KAREN
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-KOREAN
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-KURDISH – SORANI
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-SOMALI
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-SPANISH – LATIN AMERICA
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-URDU
• About Disproportionalities and Translation Instructions-VIETNAMESE