In Washington, the word “exclusion” carries far more weight than most families and students realize. It sounds like something buried in board policy but exclusion is exactly what it sounds like: a student being removed from their learning environment. Suspension, expulsion and emergency removals are all tools schools can legally use. And for thousands of Washington students every year, those tools shape their entire educational experience.
Under state law (RCW 28A.600 and related WACs), schools are allowed to exclude students only when there’s a legitimate safety concern or after other strategies fail. The law is supposed to limit removals, not encourage them. But across districts in Spokane County, the reality is harder to navigate. What’s meant to be a last resort often becomes the first response.
Parents in various school districts in the region share similar stories of their child being removed from class with little to no explanation, vague language like “disruption,” or a claim that they were a “threat,” even when no actual threat occurred. For some families, especially Black, Indigenous, Pacific Islander, Latino and Mixed-Race households, discipline feels more like a maze than a safety measure.
What complicates things further is how discipline is documented. Exclusions must come with written notice, access to appeal, and a plan to re-engage the student but schools must attempt alternatives first including mediation, parent meetings and behavioral support. However, parents say removals often happen fast, without meaningful steps to keep students included. Personal experiences from my education in the Central Valley School District highlight the increase in instances of exclusion. Most times, my school administrators would try to justify their methods of punishment without doing any digging into the issues they claim students were part of. This is where the architecture of exclusion becomes clear. Not just in one big moment, but in the hundreds of small decisions that lead to students being pushed out.
In one school district, for example, “emergency expulsion” is supposed to be used only when there’s an immediate, serious safety risk. Yet families report situations where the “emergency” lasted days before anyone even contacted them. In another school district, parents describe one-to three-day classroom removals that aren’t labeled as suspensions, but still remove kids from learning. Many instances of students (even those as young as elementary age) sitting in isolated “quiet” rooms with limited instruction have occurred over the years.
These shadow practices, legal gray zones between discipline and exclusion, often prevent families from appealing or requesting support because if it’s “not technically a suspension,” districts may argue that the law doesn’t apply.
For students, especially Gen Z teens who are already navigating academic pressure, social media drama, and mental health challenges, being removed from class can disrupt learning, let alone being humiliating and disorienting. Imagine being labeled a “problem” before anyone asks what’s going on beneath the surface. Many times, students have these labels placed on them early in their Primary School years which follow them throughout their education.
For parents, information often feels like it’s being withheld. They’re left with questions like “Is this lawful”, “why wasn’t I notified sooner,” “what other options were available” and “why wasn’t this documented?”
But most importantly: Why is exclusion happening so easily?
Advocates including the Spokane NAACP Education Committee and local student-rights organizers argue that exclusionary discipline is built into a system that reinforces inequities rather than challenging them. They say districts have the policies to do so but too often bypass the spirit of the law.
The architecture of exclusion isn’t just about a suspension slip. It’s about who gets the benefit of patience and support, and who gets removed.
If Washington is serious about changing outcomes, it starts by examining these structures honestly. Who are they protecting? Who are they harming? And how can families, educators and students push for environments where safety and inclusion are not competing priorities, but shared commitments?
Exclusion may be legal, but that doesn’t make it inevitable.
This piece is part of a three-part series on accountability in discipline policies and exclusion laws in Washington State entitled “Hidden Removals: Inside Washington’s Racial Discipline Crisis.”