The Latino-White Education Gap in Connecticut:
Indicators of Inequality in Access and Outcomes
Camara Stokes Hudson & Lauren Ruth, Ph.D.

July 2018

Introduction
In Connecticut, access to educational opportunities differs widely by race and ethnicity. These
disparities impact both student success and the success of the state as a whole. For Connecticut’s just
under 133,000 1 Latino students, 2 access to a robust and challenging education will allow them to
pursue their chosen dreams and goals while also moving Connecticut toward having a more prepared
workforce and competitive economy. 3
In Connecticut, Latino students make up 25 percent of the school population. 4 They are both the
largest percentage of students of color and the fastest growing population of students in the public
school system. This growth demands that policymakers, advocates, educators, parents, students, and
community members all understand how Latino students are faring in Connecticut’s schools as
compared with other racial/ethnic groups.
This brief, which is the second in a two-part series on racial-ethnic disparities in the education
system, 5 explores some of the disparities in educational opportunities and outcomes between Latino
and White students. First, we analyze disparities in access: access to same-race/ethnicity teachers,
chronic absenteeism, access to challenging coursework, and school discipline. Second, we analyze
disparities among three outcomes indicators: Smarter Balanced test scores, 6 high school graduation
rates, and “school day” SAT scores. 7 While Connecticut has made some gains improving access to
educational opportunities and outcomes for Latino students since 2011, 8 significant gaps still exist
between Latino and White students.

Describing Latino Students in Connecticut’s Public Schools
The Connecticut State Department of Education (SDE) defines Latino as: “a student who traces
their origin or descent to Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Central and South America and other Spanish
cultures regardless of race.” 9 For the purposes of this paper, when we refer to Latino students we will
be using the above definition of students whose families trace their origin to a culture originating in
Mexico, the Caribbean (Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Dominican Republic), Central or South

 America. When “Black” or “White” students are referred to in this paper we mean Black students
with no Latino/Hispanic heritage and White students with no Latino/Hispanic heritage.
In the 2017-2018 school year (SY), Latino students constituted the second largest racial/ethnic
group of students in the Connecticut public school system. Connecticut’s Latino students comprise
25 percent of the school system. White students, as a comparison, are 54 percent of the state’s
students and are the largest racial/ethnic group of students in Connecticut’s public schools. 10 These
proportions have not been static over the past six years, during which there has been a fivepercentage point increase in Latino enrollment, as indicated in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Percentage of Latino Students and White Students enrolled in Connecticut schools between
2011-2017

Percent of Students Enrolled

70%
60%

60%

59%

58%

57%

56%

55%

54%

50%
40%
30%
20%

22%

22%

23%

24%

25%

20%

21%

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14
Latino

2014-15
White

2015-16

2016-17

2017-18

10%
0%

Source: Connecticut Department of Education – EdSight - Student Demographic Trends

Although Latino students make up a large share of the student population in Connecticut, they are
overwhelmingly clustered in Connecticut’s cities. As of SY 2017-2018, the school districts with the
highest percentages of Latino students were: New Britain (64%), Hartford (53%), Waterbury
(53%), Bridgeport (48%), New Haven (45%), and Stamford (44%). 11 These statistics reflect what
we know to be broadly true about Connecticut’s schools—they are heavily segregated on the basis of
race. According to the UCLA Civil Rights Project, Connecticut is ranked 14th highest in the nation
for the segregation of Latino students. 12

English Learners
The SDE defines “English Learners” as students who “[have] a dominant language other than English
and the Local Education Agency has determined that the [students are] not proficient in English on
the basis of language proficiency testing, interviews and a review of the child’s school records.” 13 While
not all Latino students are Spanish speaking or are English Learners (ELs), Spanish-speaking students
2

 are the largest population of English Learners (previously called English Language Learners) in
Connecticut’s Schools. This reality creates additional factors to consider when discussing success for
this population of students.
Of the 528,040 students enrolled in Connecticut schools, 51,738 (10 percent) speak Spanish as their
dominant language (the primary language spoken in the home).14, 15 Seventy-two percent of English
Learners in the state speak Spanish as their home language. While there are English Learners in all
grade levels, they are most heavily concentrated in the early grades. In the 2014-2015 school year, 44
percent of English Learners were in grades K-3.
It should be noted that meeting the above definition of EL does not mean a student cannot benefit
from continued language supports in the classroom. This is true for two reasons—first, all EL
students are limited to 30 months of bilingual education, unless the local board of education or SDE
approves an extension. 16 Second, English language proficiency has many different components. It is
possible for a student to be proficient at, for example, conversational speech but not at academic
writing, which could impact their placement in EL services. 17 Furthermore, to ensure the continued
academic success of EL students once they leave formal EL services, practices that support the
learning of these students in general education classes is essential. 18

Students Immigrating from Latin America
Connecticut is home to a diverse immigrant community. In 2015, 15 percent of the state’s population
was born outside of the United States, and of native-born Connecticut residents, 13 percent had at
least one immigrant parent. 19 These families make significant contributions to the state: seventeen
percent of Connecticut’s workforce are immigrants, and in 2014, they paid $1.8 billion dollars in state
and local taxes. 20
Among families where at least one parent is an immigrant, nearly half are Latino. 21 Children of Latino
parents comprise the largest population of children with at least one parent who had immigrated to
Connecticut, and this number is increasing. In 2012, the proportion of children living in a household
with at least one parent who had emigrated from Latin America was 42 percent (of all children living
in immigrant households), by 2016 that number had risen to 49 percent. 22
While not all Latino children in the state are immigrants themselves or have parents who are
immigrants, the impact of immigration on educational attainment is clear. 23 On top of the general
concerns that a young person has while in school, students in families who immigrated to the United
States often also juggle adapting to a new culture, translating for their families (or learning a new
language themselves), and experiencing ongoing concerns and threats regarding both their own and
family members immigration status.
All of these factors have a real and measurable impact on how Latino students who are in families that
immigrated to Connecticut perform in school. 24 For example, fear experienced regarding immigration
raids by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency has had extremely negative impacts
on the mental health and educational attainment of these students. A multi-state survey completed by
the UCLA Civil Rights project asked more than 5,000 teachers about the impact of recent changes in
3

 immigration policy on their students. The survey found that, in Northeastern school districts, 61
percent of teachers reported that they had observed an impact of immigration enforcement on their
Latino students regardless of students’ immigration status (undocumented, documented, or nativeborn). 25 The impact on these students was often severe—57 percent of teachers noted an increase in
absences, and 60 percent noted some impact on students’ academic performance. 26 For all Latino
students to have equitable access to education in Connecticut, schools should address their unique
concerns such as immigration status and dominant language when designing education reforms.

Disparities in the Classroom
We begin by exploring four key educational experiences—access to same-race/ethnicity teachers,
consistent attendance, access to rigorous courses, and fair treatment in school discipline matters.
While these are not the only experiences that have a bearing on the success of Latino students, the
indicators that we discuss below have been shown to be important factors that influence student
success across racial and ethnic groups. 27, 28

Disparities in Access to Same Race Teachers
Figure 2: Racial Composition of Teachers and Students in Connecticut Schools

Percent of Students and Full-Time Teachers

100%

91%

90%
80%
70%
56%

60%
50%
40%
30%

23%

20%
10%

13%
5%

4%

0%
Latino

White
Students

1%

Asian

4%

Black

5%

1%

Two or More
Races

Teachers

*Please note that these numbers have been rounded to the nearest whole number, meaning that when added together, they may not
necessarily add up to 100%, exact numbers are available at edsight.ct.gov. ** Both Native American and Pacific Islander/Hawaiian
Native students have been excluded from this graph as the numbers of both teachers and students is less than 1 percent.

Source: CT Department of Education – EdSight – Student Enrollment Counts and Educator Demographics SY 2015-16

4

 As can be seen in Figure 2, despite 23 percent of students identifying as Latino, the most recent
count of teachers (done in SY 2015-2016) found that just under 4 percent of teachers were Latino.
White teachers made up 92 percent of the full-time teaching staff, but White students only
comprised 55 percent of Connecticut’s student body. The disparity between Connecticut’s
proportion of Latino teachers and Latino students is concerning because having access to samerace/ethnicity teachers has a positive impact on educational achievement for students of color. 29, 30, 31
Increased proportions of Latino teachers have been linked to lower dropout rates and higher
graduation rates for Latino students. 32 By bolstering student confidence and reducing feelings of
marginalization among Latino students, Latino teachers can act as a protective factor against
experiences such as racist comments and punitive discipline policies, which helps increase the
likelihood of Latino students graduating. 33

Disparities in Attendance and Absenteeism
Chronic absenteeism is defined by the State Department of Education as missing ten percent or
more of the days in a school year (18 or more). 34 Significant evidence suggests that missed
educational time has an impact on student success. Students who are chronically absent in
kindergarten are more likely to be held back or retained in third grade, and those who are chronically
absent in middle or high school have an increased risk of dropping out.35
Importantly, chronic absenteeism is often caused by problems unrelated to willful truancy and
skipping school. 36 Health issues (both mental and physical), school climate (e.g., high levels of
bullying and violence in schools), and community/family factors (e.g., a parent’s mental health
status) all act as major contributors to chronic absence. 37 Furthermore, when discussing students
who are immigrants or come from families of immigrants, school absenteeism can be the result of
two other realities—the destabilizing effects of immigration and fear of discrimination. For example,
to ensure that familial relationships are maintained, students may be taken out of school for an
extended period to visit their home country or parents may keep a child out of school for fear of
being separated during an immigration raid. 38, 39 Such considerations should be taken into account
when creating interventions for chronically absent students.
In 2014 Latino students in Connecticut who missed less than 9 days of school per year had a
graduation rate of 86.6 percent. Latino students who are chronically absent (missing more than 18
days) had a graduation rate of 38 percent.40 Figure 3 shows that sixteen percent of Latino students
were chronically absent during the 2015-2016 school year. The rate of chronic absenteeism among
Latino students is higher than any other racial/ethnic group of students in Connecticut. 41 Although
the number of Latino students who are chronically absent has decreased by 2 percentage points over
the last six years, Latino students remain over two times more likely to be chronically absent than
their White peers. 42

5

 Figure 3: Percentage of Chronically Absent Students Who Identified as White or Latino

Percent of Students Chronially Absent

25%

20%

19%

18%

18%

18%
16%

15%

10%

8%

8%

7%

7%

6%

5%

0%
Latino

White

Source: Connecticut Department of Education – EdSight – Chronic Absenteeism Trends 2011-2017

Disparities in Access to Challenging Coursework
As college entrance processes and entering the job market have become more competitive, students
need to develop more complex thinking and analytical skills to succeed in today’s universities and
workforce. 43 Honors programs and gifted and talented programs offer students chances to engage in
the kinds of critical thought necessary for college success and 21st-century workforce participation. 44
When looking at three different indicators—enrollment in gifted and talented programs, advanced
mathematics courses, and Advanced Placement courses—there are significant disparities in the
enrollment of Latino students compared to that of White students.
Gifted and talented programs in Connecticut support K-12 students who have been identified by a
teacher, parent or other school official as having “extraordinary learning ability or outstanding talent
in the creative arts, the development of which requires programs or services beyond those ordinarily
provided in the regular school programs but which may be provided through special education as
part of the public school program.” 45 In the 2013-14 school year, the last year for which this data is
available, White students were six times more likely than Latino students to participate in gifted and
talented programs despite the fact that the statewide population of White students is almost three
times larger than the Latino population. 46 The low enrollment of Latino students in these types of
programs is not likely due to individual student aptitude but rather the result of institutional factors,
such as the lack of teachers of color.47 This assertion is supported by research conducted by
Vanderbilt University which demonstrates that in schools with higher numbers of Latino teachers,
Latino students are more likely to be recommended for gifted and talented programs. 48
6

 Enrollment in high school advanced courses also shows disparities between Latino and White
students. In SY 2013-14, White students were nearly six times more likely to be enrolled in
Advanced Mathematics and over seven times more likely to be enrolled in at least one Advanced
Placement course. 49

Figure 4: Percentage of Students Enrolled in Gifted and Talented, Advanced Mathematics, and at Least
One Advanced Placement Course by Race in 2013-14 School Year

Percent Of Students Enrolled

100%
80%
60%
40%

69%

71%

73%

11%

12%

10%

Gifted and Talented

Advanced
Mathamatics

Advanced Placement

58%

20%
0%

Latino

21%

Total Population

White

Source: United States Department of Education – Civil Rights Data Reporting 2013-14 School Year

Disparities in Exclusionary Discipline Rates
“Exclusionary Discipline” refers to any type of school disciplinary action that removes or excludes
students from their usual educational settings. 50 These forms of discipline can include in-school
suspensions, out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, referrals to law enforcement, and in-school
arrests. In Connecticut, Latino students experience considerably higher rates of exclusionary
discipline than their White peers. While the percentage of Latino students who were suspended
between SY 2011-2012 and SY 2016-2017 decreased by 4 percentage points, Latino students are still
suspended at more than double the rate of White students.
Despite recent legislation limiting exclusionary discipline for Pre-K through 2nd graders, racial/ethnic
disparities in schools’ use of exclusionary discipline for very young children persists. Of the 1,674
Pre-K through 2nd graders who were suspended from Connecticut public schools in the 2015-16
school year, 1,198 (71%) were Black or Latino and 979 (58%) were Black or Latino boys.51
Additionally, Latino students are often subjected to far more severe forms of discipline such as inschool arrests and referrals to law enforcement, which are direct pipelines to the justice system. In
7

 the 2014-2015 school year, the rate that Latino students were arrested in school (5 per 1,000
students) was almost three times the rate that White students were arrested in school (2 per 1,000
students).52

Figure 5: Percentage of Students Suspended between 2011-12 and 2016-17 School Years by

Race/Ethnicity

Percent of Students Suspended

16%

14%

13%

12%

12%

11%

10%

10%

8%
5%
4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17

0%
2011-12

Latino

White

Source: Connecticut Department of Education – EdSight – Suspensions Trends 2011-2017

It is important to note that even though Latino students are punished at higher rates than White
students, it does not necessarily mean that they misbehave more. Research suggests that Latino youth
are significantly more likely to be punished for discretionary violations (violations that are subjective
and not punishable under the law, such as failure to remove a hat and disruptive classroom behavior)
than their White peers. 53 Implicit bias (also known as subconscious bias) likely plays a large role in
creating this disparity. Over the last 20 years, several studies have suggested that students of color are
often treated less favorably than their White peers by teachers, administrators, and law enforcement
officials due to both explicit and implicit racial biases. 54
According to a statement issued by the American Psychological Association, there is little evidence
that punitive, zero-tolerance disciplinary policies positively impact school climate. 55 Rather,
exclusionary discipline – especially in its more severe forms including expulsions and in-school
arrests – strongly correlates to more negative educational and social outcomes than to positive
changes in student behavior. In Connecticut, students who had been disciplined did significantly
worse on both Math and English Language Arts assessments than their peers who were not subjected
to similar disciplinary actions. 56 Furthermore, a study done in Texas found that students (regardless
of race/ethnicity) who had been suspended or expelled were nearly three times more likely to end up
in contact with the juvenile justice system than students who had not been suspended or expelled for
8

 similar infractions. 57 A study conducted in Connecticut examined the unique predictors of youth
outcomes. This study found that even after adjusting for co-occurring variables such as poverty and
residential segregation, exclusionary discipline rates significantly predict juvenile arrests in
communities, suggesting that exclusionary discipline practices are linked to some of the most
negative outcomes for youth. 58

Linking Disparities in Access to Educational Opportunities to Disparities in Student Success
Outcomes
Each of these indicators – lack of access to Latino teachers, chronic absence, low levels of
representation in challenging classes, and high rates of exclusionary discipline all have an impact on
outcomes for Latino students. Latino students who have Latino teachers are less likely to drop out
and are more likely to attend college.59 Latino students who are disciplined harshly do worse on
Connecticut standardized tests and are more likely to experience involvement with the juvenile
justice system.60, 61 Latino students who have access to college preparatory courses (like Advance
Placement and advanced math) are more prepared for the expectations of college and future
careers. 62
The following section examines the educational outcomes for Latino students in Connecticut and
finds that the state’s data confirms what the scholarly research suggests: Latino students do not just
experience less access to educational opportunity, they also experience poorer educational outcomes
as measured by standardized tests, graduation rates, and college admissions exams.

Disparities in Educational Outcomes
For the purposes of this paper, we define academic outcomes using standardized measures such as
graduation rate within four years and achievement on state exams. 63 Indicators like graduation rates
and standardized testing are often incomplete assessments of individual student aptitude, but taken
together these measures can indicate if a school system is meeting its stated student achievement
goals for the majority of its students. When analyzing state-wide trends in outcomes, it is clear that a
significant gap exists between Latino and White students in graduation rates, Smarter Balanced
scores, and college entrance exams.

Disparities in Graduation Rates
In the 2015-2016 school year, 76 percent of Latino students graduated in four years as compared to
92 percent of their White counterparts. When looking at English Learners (ELs), of whom, 72
percent are Latino, the rates are lower.64 In the 2015-2016 school year, only 67 percent of ELs
graduated in four years. Although the number of Latino students graduating has risen by about 8
percentage points in the last five years, the gap in graduation rates between Latino students and
White students remains wide. Policymakers, advocates, and community leaders still have much work
to do in helping Latino students attain graduation rates at levels similar to White students.

Figure 6: Percentage of Students Graduating in Four Years between SY 2011-12 and SY 2015-16 by

Race

9

 Percent of Students Graduated

100%

80%

91%

69%

75%

74%

70%

93%

92%

91%

93%
76%

60%

40%

20%

0%

2011-12

2012-13

Latino

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

White
Source: Connecticut Department of Education - EdSight

Disparities in Standardized Testing Scores
When looking at Smarter Balanced test scores, the disparities between Latino and White students are
even larger than the disparities in graduation rates. As can be seen in Figure 7, 47 percent of Latino
students did not meet the Math achievement standards and 42 percent of students did not meet the
English Language Arts standards in the 2016-17 school year. Amongst ELs, 64 percent did not meet
math standards and 68 percent did not meet English standards. Comparing these results to those of
White students—of whom only 16 percent did not meet math standards and 13 percent did not
meet English language arts standards—highlights a stark disparity in outcomes for Latino students.
While standardized tests are not always the best indicator of whether students are succeeding in
school, 65 they provide important information about where students struggle and can be used to help
raise achievement. 66 For example, when students do not meet English Language Arts standards on
the Smarter Balanced test, this indicates that they may struggle with the mechanics, complexity, or
analytic processes involved in reading, and it may help schools identify students who need additional
or differentiated instruction. 67
Developing these reading skills is critical for students to be able to learn independently from texts—a
necessary skill in order to do well across subject areas where students are reading to learn. These skills
are important for success in middle and high school, as well as college. Furthermore, reading
proficiency is an important predictor of which types of careers children will be able to access later in
life. 68 Many entry-level jobs have higher reading requirements than those required for high school
10

 graduation. These disparities mean that some Latino students will struggle to access professions that
provides the economic security that allows themselves and their communities to thrive.

Figure 7: Percent of Latino and White Students who “did not meet” or “met/exceeded” English Language

Students Who Took 2016-17 Smarter Balanced Exam

Arts and Math Smarter Balanced Exam SY 2016-17 69
80%

67%

70%

59%

60%
50%

47%
42%

40%

32%

30%
20%

24%
16%

13%

10%
0%
English Language Arts

Mathematics

English Language Arts

Did not meet achivement standards

Latino

Mathematics

Met or exceeded achivement standards

White

Source: Connecticut Department of Education – EdSight – Smarter Balanced Assessments 2016-17

Disparities in College Entrance Exam Scores
Latino students in Connecticut score significantly lower than their White peers on the “school day”
SAT. The “school day” SAT is given once a year to all Connecticut 11th graders, as compared to the
proctored SAT given on weekends which students must sign-up for themselves. In the 2016-17
school year, Connecticut’s overall average “school day” SAT score was 1031 (out of 1600), and the
national average score for students in 2017 was 1083 out of 1600.70 Latino students in Connecticut,
on the other hand, scored well below the state mean; the average score for Latino students in
Connecticut was 900. ELs had a lower score of 771. The means for Latino students and EL students
fall well below the mean for White students in Connecticut of 1092. In college admissions, SAT
scores are a significant factor in the college admissions process. As a result, having a low SAT score
may prevent Latino students from attending the college of their choice. To provide context for the
impact of these disparities, the incoming classes of the University of Connecticut had an average
composite score of 1000. 71
11

 Figure 8: Average Scores on the “School Day” SAT in School Year 2016-17
1600

SAT Composite Score

1400

1092

900

1200

National Avg.
CT Avg.
UConn

1000
800
600
400
200
0
Latino

White

Source: Connecticut Department of Education – EdSight – “School Day SAT” Scores 2016-17

Policy Recommendations
(1) Require anti-bias/anti-racism training for all school personnel, especially teachers and
administrators.
Implicit biases influence which students are disciplined by teachers and administrators and the
methods of discipline chosen. These biases contribute to the high rates of suspension and expulsion
for students of color. 72 Requiring teachers and school administrators to undergo anti-bias training
may reduce the incidence of disproportionate punishment of Latino students. 73 Pursuant to
Connecticut General Statutes 10-220a and Connecticut General Statutes 10-145a, cultural
competency is already required for both educator prep programs and as in-service training, but more
must be done to ensure that anti-bias training are routine and commonplace in schools.
In addition to anti-bias training, teachers and administrators also need ongoing support as they
implement skills and strategies in complex classroom and school system environments. Professional
development training without ongoing practice and feedback is often ineffective for producing longterm change that is integrated across different contexts. 74, 75 Learning environments similar to those
teachers provide for their students—that is, environments that allow for safe practice, that provide
benchmarks and feedback, and that gradually increase the complexity of information and skill
mastery—are more likely to yield results than one-time training experiences. 76 Particularly, given the
necessity for individuals to receive non-judgmental feedback and experience trust in order to break
down implicit biases, 77 it is important to create a system to provide ongoing support to teachers and
administrators as they seek to make lasting change in their classrooms and schools. 78 One suggestion
might be for districts to employ anti-bias coaches similar to content-area coaches that provide
12

 teachers ongoing professional development, unit and lesson planning ideas, observation, and
constructive skill improvement feedback. This would ensure not only that teachers and
administrators see short-term gains, but also help to ensure that the training has a long-term impact.

(2) Increase the number of Latino teachers and expand support for teachers of color overall.
The nurturing anti-racist environment that Latino children need to thrive will not be created simply
through trainings, but also through a teaching workforce that is as diverse as the children in
Connecticut’s schools. Latino teachers often share experiences and cultures with their students and
have higher expectations for them than White teachers often do.79 Given these important factors,
there is a strong relationship between having Latino teachers in the classroom and students’ academic
success, 80 and in light of the increasing number of Latino students in the state of Connecticut, the
need to increase the number of Latino educators is great.
Connecticut Voices for Children supports the recommendations of the State Department of
Education (SDE) and the Minority Teacher Recruitment Policy Oversight Committee to increase
the hiring and retention of teachers of color in the state. 81 Both SDE and local school districts have
introduced promising programs to meet this challenge. Danbury, Hartford, and Waterbury Public
Schools have created “Grow Your Own” programs to incentivize students in their districts to pursue
careers in teaching.82 While the success of Connecticut’s “Grow Your Own” programs is currently
unstudied, research on similar programming in other states suggests that these programs can have an
especially positive impact on high school students’ interest in pursuing teaching. 83 Furthermore,
partnerships between SDE, The Center on Great Teachers, and the Northeast Comprehensive
Center has yielded a six-session informational series to examine the potential for unconscious bias in
hiring and selection practices. 84

(3) Expand access to programs that involve Latino parents and community members in
interventions regarding chronic absenteeism.
Latino children have the highest rates of chronic absenteeism in the state. 85 This reality has severe
impacts on Latino students’ academic success. While lack of parental involvement is not always the
cause of chronic absence, parental involvement in interventions once a child has been habitually
absent can help correct the problem. This is especially true of programming that opens up channels
of communication between schools and parents regarding attendance, celebrates improvements in
attendance with students and their families, and connects chronically absent students with
community-based mentors. 86 A study of the chronic absenteeism reduction practices of 39 schools
nationwide found that programs which engage parents and community members in the process saw
greater reductions in chronic absenteeism than those that did not. 87 These quantitative findings are
echoed within qualitative research where focus groups of Latino students discuss how they often see
parents as a significant source of motivation and emotional support who are essential in the
monitoring of attendance—especially during elementary school. 88

13

 (4) Expand access to data on discipline including detailed suspension and expulsion data

(including a breakdown of offenses) by district, disaggregated by race/ethnicity and gender .
Effective policy development to combat disproportionality in exclusionary discipline rates requires
that researchers, advocates, and families have access to more robust data than is currently available.
The published data must include not only the number of school suspensions and expulsions but also
reasons for these disciplinary actions disaggregated by race/ethnicity and gender. Furthermore,
schools need to review their data regularly to enact appropriate reforms, improve school policy, and
assist specific teachers in formulating appropriate responses to student behaviors.
(5) Ensure that schools have necessary funding and support to offer a full range of courses and
programs.
Existing educational funding disparities in the state have resulted in under-resourced urban schools,
which disproportionately serve Black and Latino youth. 89 Insufficient funding results in reduced
offerings of higher-level courses and gifted and talented programs and accounts for some of the racial
disparities in access to advanced coursework. As Connecticut’s economy demands higher-level skills,
it is imperative that schools afford Latino students the same opportunity to access upper-level classes.
Closing gaps in access to advanced courses will help narrow gaps in access to well-paid and
challenging employment that exist between White and Latino communities. Currently,
Connecticut’s system for raising revenue to fund education as well as systems for distributing this
funding has severe flaws.
We urge lawmakers to prioritize fully funding the Payment-In-Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) program that
reimburses cities for property tax losses due to exemptions applicable to state-owned property,
certain federally-owned property, and non-profit property including colleges and hospitals. 90 These
tax-exempt properties are accessed by and benefit residents across the state; fully funding PILOT
using General Fund dollars is the fair policy and would help urban municipalities recapture this lost
revenue and use it to improve their schools.
Additionally, we urge the General Assembly to consider implementing a statewide property tax to
more equitably raise and distribute education resources across the state without placing an unfair tax
load onto less affluent communities. 91 In Connecticut, property tax is the chief revenue stream for
municipalities; towns and cities use this revenue to provide public services including education,
public safety, infrastructure maintenance, and social services. 92 However, because municipalities vary
in the affluence of their residents as well as how much of their property is taxable, many towns find
that they are unable to provide adequate services without setting unfairly high mill rates. A statewide
property tax such as the one used in Vermont could partially solve this problem by stabilizing the
mill rate that supports education statewide while maintaining municipal autonomy over how much
money they choose to spend on education.93

14

 Conclusion
Latino students make up a significant proportion of students in the Connecticut public school
system, and that proportion continues to grow. Although most Latino students in Connecticut are
clustered within its urban core cities, they vary along several factors critical for providing a safe and
responsive education including the primary language spoken in their homes and family immigration
status. Understanding how these factors may impact Latino students’ ability to access educational
opportunities is a critical first step to reducing the Latino-White education gap in Connecticut.
Across the state, Latino students experience disparities in access to same race teachers, fair discipline
policies, and rigorous courses, leaving many of them unprepared to succeed in college and to access
challenging career paths. Although Latino children in Connecticut work hard to learn and thrive,
disparities in the opportunity to access a high-quality education lead to disparities in educational
outcomes. 94, 95, 96 Engaging Latino students’ parents is an important step for all schools to ensure that
students attend school and are supported throughout their studies. When schools engage with
parents, it can help teachers and administrators understand the specific external pressures Latino
families face and the educational needs of each student.
The state’s educational policies also shape whether or not Latino students have access to
opportunities for successful completion of their public school education. Reforming Connecticut’s
mechanisms for raising and distributing education revenue so that it is more equitable will be vital to
funding the policies and services Latino children and youth need to thrive in school. For example,
more funding ensures that all students can access AP or gifted and talented programs. Implicit bias
training for educators and administrators could have a positive impact on the ways in which all
school personnel respond to Latino students and decrease the number of Latino students suspended
and expelled each year.
Connecticut is in a period of slow economic growth and changing demographics, 97, 98 which makes
improving educational opportunities for Latino students both the right thing to do and the smart
thing to do. Disparities in access and outcomes limit the ability of Latino students to reach their full
creative, academic, and professional potentials. They also stifle the ability of Latino students and the
communities that they come from to contribute to a prosperous Connecticut. Reducing these
disparities is an essential part of a comprehensive economic development strategy and will help
ensure not only that these children thrive but that Connecticut continues to thrive as a state well
into the future. 99

15

 1

Connecticut State Department of Education. (2017). [Latino Student Enrollment Counts by School District].
Retrievable from http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do
Latino is defined by the State Department of Education as a student who “traces their origin or descent to Mexico,
Cuba, Puerto Rico, Central and South America and other Spanish Cultures regardless of race”.
http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/CSDE_LDS_PhyscialDictionary.pdf
2

Laboissier, M., & Mourshed, M. (2017). Closing the Skills Gap: Creating workforce-development programs that work for
everyone. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/social-sector/ourinsights/closing-the-skills-gap-creating-workforce-development-programs-that-work-for-everyone.
3

According to the Connecticut State Department of Education, In the last 6 years, the population of Latino students
rose from 20 percent in 2011-2012 to 25 percent in the last school year. Retrieved from
http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do

4

Hudson, C. S. (2018, January). The Black-White Education Gap in Connecticut: Indicators of Inequality in Access and
Outcomes. Connecticut Voices for Children. Retrieved from: http://www.ctvoices.org/publications/black-whiteeducation-gap-connecticut-indicators-inequality-access-and-outcomes
6
The Smarter Balanced Assessment is a statewide assessment given to all 3rd-8th graders in the state on reading and math.
7
The Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) offered by the College Board given to all Connecticut 11th graders free of charge
during the school day, often used for college admissions.
5

This year reflects the first available year for data from the Connecticut State Department of Education data portal EdSight

8

Connecticut State Department of Education, State Department of Education. (2017, January). EdSight Data
Dictionary. Retrieved from http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/CSDE_LDS_PhyscialDictionary.pdf
9

The racial composition of Connecticut’s Schools in School Year 2016-17 was as follows: 54% - White (non-Hispanic),
24% - Hispanic/Latino (of any race), 12.8% - Black (non-Hispanic), 5.06% - Asian, 2.91% - Two or More Races,
0.27% - Native American, Alaskan Native, 0.10% - Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander. Retrieved from
http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do
10

Connecticut State Department of Education. (2017). [Latino Student Enrollment Counts by School District].
Retrievable from http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do
11

Orfield, G., Ee, J., Frankenburg, E., & Siegel-Hawley, G. (2016, May). Brown at 62: School Segregation by Race, Poverty
and State(Rep.). Retrieved https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-anddiversity/brown-at-62-school-segregation-by-race-poverty-and-state/Brown-at-62-final-corrected-2.pdf
12

Connecticut State Department of Education, State Department of Education. (2017, January). EdSight Data
Dictionary. Retrieved from http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/CSDE_LDS_PhyscialDictionary.pdf
13

Grosjean, F. (2016). “What Does it Mean to be Dominant in a Language: domains of Language Use and Dominance
in Bilinguals.” Psychology Today. Retrieved from: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/life-bilingual/201604/whatdoes-it-mean-be-dominant-in-language
14

Connecticut State Department of Education, Bureau of Data Collection, Research, and Evaluation. (2015,
August). Data Bulletin: Connecticut's English Learners (Grades K-12) in School Year 2014-2015. Retrieved from
http://portal.ct.gov/-/media/SDE/English-Learners/el_databulletin_aug2015.pdf?la=en
15

16

 Duties of boards of education regarding bilingual education programs. Development of state English mastery standard.
Regulations, § 164-10-17f. Retrievable at https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_164.htm#sec_10-17
16

Connecticut State Department of Education, Bureau of Data Collection, Research, and Evaluation. (2015,
August). Data Bulletin: Connecticut's English Learners (Grades K-12) in School Year 2014-2015
18
Connecticut, Connecticut State Board of Education. (2010). Position Statement on the Education of Students Who Are
English Language Learners. Retrieved from https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/SDE/Board/esl.pdf?la=en
17

American Immigration Council. (2017). Immigrants in Connecticut(Rep.). Retrieved from
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/immigrants_in_connecticut.pdf
19

Ibid.

20

Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2016). [Children in immigrant families by parent's region of origin, Connecticut].
Retrievable at https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/5923-children-in-immigrant-families-by-parents-region-oforigin?loc=8&loct=2#detailed/2/8/false/870,573,869,36,868/1767,1768,1769,1770/12549,12550
21

Ibid.

22

Noguera, P. A. (2006). Latino Youth: Education, Immigration and the Future. Latino Studies,4, 313-320. Retrieved
from http://www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Noguera-Latino-Youth-Immigration-Educationand-the-Future.pdf
23

24

Ibid.

Gandara, P., & Ee, J. (2018, February). U.S Immigration Enforcement Policy and its Impact on Teaching and Learning in
the Nations Schools(Working paper). Retrieved https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12education/integration-and-diversity/u.s.-immigration-enforcement-policy-and-its-impact-on-teaching-and-learning-inthe-nations-schools/EMBARGOED-Immigration-enforcement-on-schools.pdf
25

26

Ibid.

Gershenson, Seth, Cassandra M. D. Hart, Constance A. Lindsay, and Nicolas W. Papageorge. The Long-Run Impacts
of Same-Race Teachers. Rep. IZA Institute of Labor Economics, Mar. 2017. http://ftp.iza.org/dp10630.pdf
27

Attendance Works, and Campaign for Grade Level Reading. Attendance in Early Grades: Why It Matters for Reading.
Issue brief. Attendance Works, Feb. 2014. http://www.attendanceworks.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/Attendance-in-the-Early-Grades.pdf
29
The Albert Shanker Institute. The State of Teacher Diversity in American Education. The Albert Shanker Institute,
2015, The State of Teacher Diversity in American Education,
www.shankerinstitute.org/sites/shanker/files/The%20State%20of%20Teacher%20Diversity_0.pdf,
28

The Long-Run Impacts of Same-Race Teachers. Rep. IZA Institute of Labor Economics, Mar. 2017.
http://ftp.iza.org/dp10630.pdf,
30

Attendance Works, and Campaign for Grade Level Reading. Attendance in Early Grades: Why It Matters for Reading.
Issue brief. Attendance Works, Feb. 2014. http://www.attendanceworks.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/Attendance-in-the-Early-Grades.pdf
31

Fraga, L. R., Meier, K. T., & England, R. B. (1986). Latino Americans and Educational Policy: Limits to Equal
Access. The Journal of Politics, 48(8), 850-876

32

Connecticut State Department of Education. Reducing Chronic Absence in Connecticut's Schools. 2017, Reducing
Chronic Absence in Connecticut's Schools, www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/publications/chronicabsence/chronicabsence.pdf
34

17

 Ginsburg, Alan, Phyllis Jordan, and Heady Chang. Absences Add Up: How School Attendance Influences Student Success.
Rep. Attendance Works, 2016. Web.
35

Bruner, C., Discher, A., & Chang, H. (2011). Chronic Elementary Absenteeism: A Problem Hidden in Plain Sight.
Attendance Works and Child & Family Policy Center. Retrieved from: https://www.edweek.org/media/chronicabsence15chang.pdf
36

Indiana Department of Education. (2017, May 31). Contributing Factors of Absenteeism. Retrieved from
https://www.doe.in.gov/student-services/attendance/contributing-factors-absenteeism
37

38

Noguera, P. A. (2006). Latino Youth: Education, Immigration and the Future

39

See discussion about immigrant families’ fear of separation on pages 4-5.

Connecticut State Department of Education. Chronic Absenteeism Among CT Students. 2014. Retrieved from
http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/Chronic%20Absenteeism%20Presentation%202014.pdf

40

In that same year, 14 percent of Black students, 7 percent of White students, and 12 percent of Native American
students were chronically absent. Retrieved from http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do
41

Connecticut Department of Education. (2015). Chronic Absenteeism Trends by Race/Ethnicity [Chart]. In EdSight
Data Portal. Retrieved from http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do
42

According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers Jobs Outlook 2018, the top five skills employers are
looking for in recent graduates are: problem solving, teamwork, written communication, leadership and strong work
ethic. Retrieved from http://www.naceweb.org/about-us/press/2017/the-key-attributes-employers-seek-on-studentsresumes/
43

W. Nickens, M.D.. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2001. Inequality in Teaching and Schooling:
How Opportunity Is Rationed to Students of Color in America. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223640/

44

Connecticut State Department of Education. (2017). Gifted and Talented Law. Retrieved from
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/cwp/view.asp?a=2618&q=320938
45

Assuming that the rates of Latino enrollment in gifted and talented programs should be similar to their rates of
enrollment in school overall, this number was calculated as the percent difference between the proportion of Latino
students enrolled in gifted and talented programs and the proportion of students enrolled in the school system overall.

46

Grissom, J.A. & Redding, C. (2016). Discretion and Disproportionality: Explaining the Underrepresentation of HighAchieving Students of Color in Gifted Programs. American Educational Research Association Open, 2(1). Retrieved from:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2332858415622175
47

Grissom, J. A., Rodriguez, L. A., & Kern, E. C. (2017). Teacher and Principal Diversity and the Representation of
Students of Color in Gifted Programs: Evidence from National Data. The Elementary School Journal,117(3). Retrieved
from http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/690274
48

“Advanced Mathematics” courses include - analytic geometry/trigonometry, algebra, pre-calculus, and
statistics/probability
49

“Exclusionary Discipline.” NCSSD, 20 Feb. 2017, Supportiveschooldiscipline.org/learn/reference-guides/exclusionarydiscipline.
50

18

 Connecticut, USA. State Department of Education. Suspensions and Expulsions in Connecticut. By CT Department of
Education. May 2017.
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/board/boardmaterials050317/report_on_student_discipline.pdf
51

Ricks, A. (2016). Persistent Racial Inequality in School Arrest Rates in Connecticut(Rep.). Retrieved
http://www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/juv16racialinequity.pdf
52

Staats, C. (2014, May). Implicit Bias and School Discipline: Exploring the Connection(Issue brief). Retrieved
http://kirwaninstitute.osu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ki-ib-argument-piece03.pdf
53

For a review of this literature, see: Wald, Johanna. Can "De-Biasing" Strategies Help to Reduce Racial Disparities In
School Discipline. 2014, retrieved from: www.indiana.edu/~atlantic/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/ImplicitBias_031214.pdf
54

American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in Schools?: An
Evidentiary Review and Recommendations. American Psychological Association, Dec. 2008.Retrieved from:
https://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.pdf

55

Suspensions and Expulsions in Connecticut. By CT Department of Education Exclusionary discipline presentation
Retrievable at http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/Discipline%20State%20Board%20Presentation%202017.pdf

56

Fabelo, Tony, Michael D. Thompson, Martha Plotkin, Dottie Carmichael, Miner P. Marchbanks, III, and Eric A.
Booth. Breaking Schools Rules: A Statewide Study of How School Discipline Relates to Student Success and Juvenile Justice
Involvement. Rep. The Council of State Governments: Justice Center and Public Policy Research Institute, 19 July 2011.
Web
57

Ruth, Lauren, Alexandra Ricks, Rachel Leventhal-Weiner, and Daniel Long. The Youth Opportunity Atlas.
Connecticut Voices for Children, 2017. Retrieved from:
http://www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/Youth%20Opportunity%20Atlas%20Final.pdf
58

59

Fraga, L., Meier, K., & England, R. (1986). Hispanic Americans and Educational Policy: Limits to Equal Access.

Suspensions and Expulsions in Connecticut. By CT Department of Education Exclusionary discipline presentation
Retrievable at http://edsight.ct.gov/relatedreports/Discipline%20State%20Board%20Presentation%202017.pdf

60

Breaking Schools Rules: A Statewide Study of How School Discipline Relates to Student Success and Juvenile Justice
Involvement. Rep. The Council of State Governments: Justice Center and Public Policy Research Institute, 19 July 2011

61

W.Nickens, M.D.. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2001. Inequality in Teaching and Schooling:
How Opportunity Is Rationed to Students of Color in America. Available from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223640/

62

Standardized measures refer to measures that can be collected for all students in a school or district and are often
reported using statistics that describe the overall performance of a group such as averages and variance. These measures
are useful for making comparisons between groups and for measuring progress over time.

63

Connecticut Department of Education. “Graduation Rates, Trend by English Learner status.” 2015,
http://edsight.ct.gov/SASPortal/main.do

64

Pennsylvania State University. (2010). Standardized Tests Not Always Best Indicator of Success. Retrieved from:
https://phys.org/news/2010-08-standardized-indicator-success.html

65

Izumi, Lance T. (2009). What Tests Can and Should Do. The New York Times. Retrieved from:
https://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/what-do-school-tests-measure/

66

19

 Daggett, Willard R. (2003). Achieving Reading Proficiency for All. International Center for Leadership in Education.
Retrieved from: https://www1.maine.gov/education/diploma/readingproficiency.pdf

67

68

Ibid.

The two categories we selected captures on one side the students who did not meet those expectations and the students
who met or went above.
70
It should be noted that the scores from the “school day” SAT and the national average differ in one large way – the
“school day” averages include all students who took the SAT during the day at school – this includes students who were
not preparing to take the exam. The national score is comprised mostly of students who had planned to take the SAT.
College Board. SAT Understanding Scores - 2016. Rep. New York: College Board, 2016. Print.
69

71

University of Connecticut. 2017 Fact Sheet. Issue brief. University of Connecticut, 2017. Web.

Gilliam, Walter S., Angela N. Maupin, Chin R. Reyes, Maria Acavitti, and Frederick Shic. Do Early Educators’ Implicit
Biases Regarding Sex and Race Relate to Behavior Expectations and Recommendations of Preschool Expulsions and
Suspensions?
72

73

Wald, Johanna. Can "De-Biasing" Strategies Help to Reduce Racial Disparities In School Discipline

Longenecker, Clinton O., and Joseph A. Scazzero. "The ongoing challenge of total quality management." The TQM
Magazine 8.2 (1996): 55-60.
74

Sugai, George, and Robert R. Horner. “A Promising Approach for Expanding and Sustaining School-Wide Positive
Behavior Support.” School Psychology Review 35.2 (2006): 245-259. Retrieved from:
https://www.mydigitalchalkboard.org/cognoti/content/file/resources/documents/08/08d88012/08d88012b8f0a8bc8d93
783ba791425c9208d5c8/spr352sugai.pdf
75

Lieberman, Ann. “Practices that Support Teacher Development: Transforming Conceptions of Professional Learning.”
Innovating and Evaluating Science Education: National Science Foundation Evaluation Forums, 1992-94, Ed. Floraline
Stevens (1995): 67-78. Retrieved from: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1995/nsf95162/nsf_ef.pdf#page=58
76

Burgess, Diana, Michelle van Ryn, John Dovidio, and Samnath Saha. “Reducing Racial Bias Among Health Care
Providers: Lessons from Social-Cognitive Psychology.” Society of General Internal Medicine 22 (2007): 882-887.
Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2219858/pdf/11606_2007_Article_160.pdf
77

Gregory, A., Allen, J. P., Mikami, A. Y., Hafen, C. A., & Pianta, R. C. (2015). The promise of a teacher professional
development program in reducing racial disparity in classroom exclusionary discipline. Closing the school discipline gap:
Equitable remedies for excessive exclusion, 168-179.

78

The Albert Shanker Institute. The State of Teacher Diversity in American Education. The Albert Shanker Institute,
2015, The State of Teacher Diversity in American Education
79

80

Fraga, L., Meier, K., & England, R. (1986). Hispanic Americans and Educational Policy: Limits to Equal Access.

Minority Teacher Recruitment Policy Oversight Council. (2017). Item – Recommendations In Minutes of Minority
Teacher Recruitment Policy Oversight Council Meeting May 18, 2017. Retrievable at http://portal.ct.gov//media/SDE/Talent_Office/MTR_Council/minutes_mtr_policy_oversight_council_5-18-2017.pdf
81

Connecticut State Department of Education. (2015). An Update on Minority Teacher Recruitment (Connecticut State
Department of Education, Minority Teacher Recruitment Committee). Retrieved from
https://www.cga.ct.gov/ed/tfs%5C20150622_Minority%20Teacher%20Recruitment%5C20151216/SDE%20Update
%20on%20Minority%20Recruitment.pdf
82

20

 Texas Comprehensive Center. (2018, February). Grow Your Own Teachers Initiatives Resources(Rep.). Retrieved
https://texas-cc.org/sites/default/files/2018-02/GYO-Tchrs-Review-508.pdf
83

Northeast Comprehensive Center. (2017). Connecticut Talent Pipeline and Cultural Proficiency. Retrieved from
http://www.northeastcompcenter.org/connecticut-talent-pipeline-and-cultural-proficiency/
84

85

Connecticut State Department of Education. (2016-2017). [Chronic Absenteeism Rates by Race].

Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and Accounted for: Improving Student Attendance Through Family
and Community Involvement. The Journal of Educational Research,95(5), 308-318. Retrieved from
http://www.adi.org/journal/fw04/Sheldon & Epstein.pdf
86

Epstein, J. L., & Sheldon, S. B. (2002). Present and Accounted for: Improving Student Attendance Through Family
and Community Involvement
87

Zarate, M. E. (2007, September). Understanding Latino Parental Involvement in Education: Perceptions, Expectations
and Recommendations(Rep.). Retrieved https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502065.pdf
88

Noonan, Ray. Equal Funding for Equal Effort: A Model to Reform Property Tax Funding for Local Education in
Connecticut. Connecticut Voices for Children, 2017.Retrieved from:
www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/Property%20Tax%20Report%20FINAL.pdf.

89

Office of Policy and Management. (2017). Connecticut’s Financial Support to Municipalities. The State of
Connecticut. Retrieved from: http://ctschoolfinance.org/assets/uploads/files/Gov-State-Support-to-MunicipalitiesReport.pdf
90

Noonan, Ray. Equal Funding for Equal Effort: A Model to Reform Property Tax Funding for Local Education in
Connecticut. Connecticut Voices for Children, 2017.Retrieved from:
www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/Property%20Tax%20Report%20FINAL.pdf.
91

Thomas, Ron & George Rafael. (2016). The Property Tax: How Over-Reliance Jeopardizes Connecticut’s Economic
Future. Connecticut Conference of Municipalities. Retrieved from: http://www.ccmct.org/sites/default/files/files/2016Bulletins_MunicipalFinance_final_rev.pdf
92

Noonan, Ray. Equal Funding for Equal Effort: A Model to Reform Property Tax Funding for Local Education in
Connecticut. Connecticut Voices for Children, 2017.Retrieved from:
www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/Property%20Tax%20Report%20FINAL.pdf
93

State Personal Income Data Visualization. (2018). State Economic Growth Uneven Since Recession Began. Pew
Charitable Trusts. Retrieved from: http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/data-visualizations/2014/fiscal50?sl&utm_campaign=2017-011-09+Fiscal+50&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Pew#ind8
97

Kemple, Erin. (2013). Connecticut Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice. Connecticut Fair Housing Center.
Retrieved from:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/pd/tfs/20131030_Impediments%20to%20Fair%20Housing%20Choice%20Task%20Force/20
131204/Connecticut%20Analysis%20of%20Impediments%20to%20Fair%20Housing%20Choice.pdf
98

Eberts, R., Erickcek, G., and Kleinhenz, J. (2006, April). Dashboard Indicators for the Northeast Ohio Economy:
Prepared for the Fund for Our Economic Future. Retrieved from
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1022345. Page iii

99

21