The Center for the Study of Scholastic Discipline

          reducing the school to prison pipeline
   Center for the Study of Scholastic Discipline

Champaign Unit 4 School District — Policy Analysis 2026

Grand Total
83 / 106
78.3%
Base Score
75 / 96
Extra Credit
8 / 10

Download complete evaluation

Score by Section

SectionScoreMaxNotes
Culturally Responsive Training58Notes
Clear & Consistent Policies88Notes
Restorative Justice Practices68Notes
Bias Awareness & Mitigation68Notes
Culturally Relevant Curriculum58Notes
Community Engagement & Collaboration88Notes
Professional Development on Equity & Inclusion68Notes
Mental Health & Trauma-Informed Practices68Notes
Data Collection & Analysis88Notes
Student Voice & Leadership28Notes
Equitable Access to Support Services88Notes
Continuous Evaluation & Improvement78Notes
Extra Credit810Notes

Suggestions to Improve the Score

Every item below its maximum, worst gap first, with the reviewer's own notes as the rationale.

Show suggestions (18)
  • 1.2 [Culturally Responsive Training]: Mentorship programs for culturally diverse staff — Currently: Not Implemented (0/2 pts). General new-teacher mentorship programs and a community C-U One-to-One student mentoring program were found, but no public documentation specifically describes a mentorship program targeted at culturally diverse staff.
  • 5.4 [Culturally Relevant Curriculum]: Culturally specific courses/electives — Currently: Not Implemented (0/2 pts). No public documentation was found of a Unit 4-specific African American/ethnic studies course or other culturally specific elective offering in the district's curriculum.
  • 8.2 [Mental Health & Trauma-Informed Practices]: Safe, supportive spaces (mindfulness/sensory) — Currently: Not Implemented (0/2 pts). No public documentation was found describing district-wide sensory rooms, mindfulness spaces, or other designated calming/safe spaces in Unit 4 schools.
  • 10.3 [Student Voice & Leadership]: Students facilitate restorative processes — Currently: Not Implemented (0/2 pts). No public documentation was found indicating that students facilitate or co-facilitate restorative conferences/circles in Unit 4.
  • 10.4 [Student Voice & Leadership]: Student-led peer education — Currently: Not Implemented (0/2 pts). No public documentation was found describing a student-led peer education program (e.g., peer educators on discipline, health, or equity topics) in the district.
  • 1.4 [Culturally Responsive Training]: Regular feedback/measurement on training effectiveness — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The district collects some feedback — "Feedback from staff and administrators regarding the implicit bias training has been consistently positive" — and conducts annual reflective reviews, but there is no evidence of a formal, standardized measurement/evaluation instrument for training effectiveness district-wide.
  • 3.3 [Restorative Justice Practices]: Curriculum integrates conflict-resolution skills — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). MTSS Tier 2/3 supports reference "small group social skills instruction" and behavior plans, suggesting conflict-resolution content is embedded in interventions, but there is no evidence of conflict-resolution skills being integrated into the general academic curriculum for all students.
  • 3.4 [Restorative Justice Practices]: Peer mediation program — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The plan states the district "will formalize restorative conferencing, peer mediation, and de-escalation practices" as a district standard going forward, indicating peer mediation is being developed/expanded rather than confirmed as a fully implemented, district-wide program.
  • 4.3 [Bias Awareness & Mitigation]: Cultural competence checks in hiring — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The district tracks and reports staff diversity metrics through an annual Affirmative Action/Equal Employment Opportunities report to the school board, but no specific evidence was found of a formal cultural-competence assessment built into the hiring/interview process itself.
  • 4.4 [Bias Awareness & Mitigation]: Diverse perspectives & materials in curriculum — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The Board's 2020 anti-racism resolution called for addressing curriculum alongside discipline and school culture, and community advocates explicitly urged curriculum updates "to address race, power and privilege," but no specific district curriculum-audit documentation was found confirming systematic review for diverse materials.
  • 5.1 [Culturally Relevant Curriculum]: Curriculum materials reflect student backgrounds — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The resolution commits the district to addressing curriculum as part of dismantling systemic racism, but no specific public document details curriculum material reviews or adoption criteria ensuring materials reflect diverse student backgrounds district-wide.
  • 7.3 [Professional Development on Equity & Inclusion]: Equity topics in staff meetings/PD — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). Equity and bias topics are clearly part of district-level professional development initiatives, but no specific evidence confirms these topics are a standing, recurring agenda item in regular individual staff meetings at the building level.
  • 7.4 [Professional Development on Equity & Inclusion]: Participation in equity-focused conferences — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). Evidence found relates to a student being selected for a state advisory council rather than staff attendance at equity-focused professional conferences; no direct documentation of staff conference participation was found, though partnerships with national equity experts (e.g., Noguera, IIRP) suggest some exposure.
  • 10.1 [Student Voice & Leadership]: Student advisory councils/leadership groups — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The EEE Committee lists "Student Voice Initiatives with Secondary Schools" among past initiatives, and a Unit 4 student was selected for the state ISBE Student Advisory Council, but no evidence confirms an ongoing, district-wide, mandatory student leadership/advisory structure.
  • 10.2 [Student Voice & Leadership]: Student feedback informs policy/procedures — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The district runs a districtwide Communications Survey inclusive of students and has referenced past "Student Voice Initiatives," but there is no clear documentation that student feedback formally and routinely shapes discipline policy specifically.
  • 12.3 [Continuous Evaluation & Improvement]: Benchmarking vs. state/national comparators — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The district compares its discipline data against ISBE state benchmarks and was previously flagged by ISBE for racial disproportionality, showing some state-level benchmarking, but no evidence of systematic national comparator benchmarking was found.
  • EC4 [Extra Credit]: Public, filterable District Interactive Dashboard updated three times per year, disaggregating outcomes by race/ethnicity, gender, income, and disability status for full public transparency. — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The dashboard "will be static data that is loaded 3 times a year (Fall, Winter, Spring)" and can be filtered by Race/Ethnicity, Gender, FRL, and Special Education/504 status.
  • EC5 [Extra Credit]: Care Solace — a free, district-funded service that screens and matches both students and staff with outside mental-health providers, extending beyond typical school counseling access. — Currently: In-work (1/2 pts). The district "offers free mental health services for students and faculty through Care Solace, a program that provides screenings, assistance with food insecurity, and housing" and matches users with providers based on need.

Source Documents Used

Show source documents (1)
DocumentDateLocal CopySource
Champaign Unit 4 School District Scoring Sheet2026Open filefile:///C:/_CSSD/CSSDWebsite/cssdisc.org_htdocs/DistrictPolicies/Champaign_Unit_4_School_District/2026/Champaign_Unit_4_School_District_Scoring_Sheet.xlsx