Each state has its own solution for handling students who are deemed unfit for the traditional classroom. In Texas, that “solution” is called Disciplinary Alternative Education Programs (DAEPs). These programs are much maligned for questionable educational quality, as well as the many adverse effects students suffer when removed from their school and placed in these alternative educational programs.

As attorneys dedicated to helping students, we have personally witnessed the harm that DAEP programs can cause. We have also seen how inconsistently school districts and principals select students for DAEP placement, and how this inconsistency often violates students’ rights and harms their well-being.

Whether your student is in a charter school or public school, DAEP placement will likely hinder them socially, intellectually, and possibly even financially—we will get into these consequences in this article. Even so, it’s important to understand the unique differences in how charter and public schools handle discipline, including their DAEP placement processes.

If your student is facing potential DAEP placement, call the LLF National Law Firm Team today at 888-535-3686 or contact us online. The outcome of this stage in your student’s life could define several critical aspects of their life, so you cannot afford to wait before contacting us.

A Quick Primer on DAEP in Texas

We need to set the stage so that everything we discuss in this article will make more sense. Some of the big-picture facts you should know about DAEP are:

• The DAEP system came to prominence in 1995: DAEPs were formally codified into Texas law in 1995 as part of the Safe Schools Act. Over time, DAEPs have changed in several ways, including by expanding the range of offenses that can lead to students being placed in DAEPs. Yet, such changes have never altered the fundamental idea of these programs—to create safer schools by removing students who educators (typically, principals) deemed too uncontrollable or dangerous to keep in the traditional classroom.
• DAEPs have been imperfect from the start: It is easy to sell voters on the idea of “safer schools,” which is a critical reason why DAEPs were able to become a part of Texas law. Yet, from the start, concerns about students’ right to due process, criminalizing and stigmatizing young people, and inconsistent handling of DAEP placement have been valid. These concerns have only become more pressing with time, especially as Texas’s student population has grown and those students are more likely to be viewed as numbers, rather than people.
• Schools typically have a choice in assigning students to a DAEP: In the majority of cases (two-thirds, approximately), students are assigned to DAEPs not because the law requires it, but instead because school employees choose to assign the student to a DAEP. This fact suggests that administrators have little hesitancy in using DAEPs as a disciplinary crutch—perhaps, rather than putting in the work to rehabilitate a student, some administrators would rather pawn that student off via an alternative education program.
• There are some cases where Texas law mandates DAEP placement: Though the majority of DAEP placements are discretionary (at the choosing of administrators), some offenses call for mandatory placement in an alternative education program. For instance, Texas law states that a student “must” be placed in a DAEP (and expelled) in certain circumstances, including but not limited to bringing a firearm to school—though the student’s age and other factors can influence how the student is disciplined.
• Different districts and schools vary in their DAEP policies: Though Texas law imposes some non-negotiable mandates when it comes to DAEPs (like mandatory placement), school districts can also mold their own DAEP-related policies. This influence over DAEP placement means that students never really know how their discipline will be handled, and may be vulnerable to the unpredictable decisions of individual principals and other administrators—rather than the more predictable framework of unified laws and procedures.
• Being placed in a DAEP is a severe measure: One more fact to recognize is that DAEP placement is always a severe form of discipline. We will explain the specific consequences of DAEP placement in a bit, but for now, just know that no student or guardian should take this measure lightly.

With this, you have a solid grasp of DAEP in Texas. Let’s now look more closely at the laws that govern DAEP, how DAEP placement looks in practice, and the most critical differences in how public and charter schools approach DAEP placement.

There Are Many Similarities Key in How Public and Charter Schools Handle DAEP Placement

Charter schools and public schools are, put simply, different. We know this not only because they have different names, but also because Texas law specifically addresses charter schools, including the “right of a [charter] school…to place a student who has engaged in certain…behavior in a disciplinary alternative education program.”

This is a right that public schools also share, which brings us to the many similarities in how charter schools and public schools handle DAEP placement:

• All schools in Texas must comply with Texas law: While charter schools are often noted for their greater autonomy over all aspects of education, these schools must still comply with the mandates of Texas law. For instance, charter schools must remove a student and place them in a DAEP when Texas law requires it.
• Both charter and public school districts have the flexibility to adopt their own disciplinary policies: Both public school districts and charter schools must craft their own disciplinary policies, which should spell out their DAEP-specific procedures.
• All Texas schools are subject to the oversight of the Texas Education Agency (TEA): The TEA is the agency responsible for enforcing Texas law. No school, whether it is a charter or public institution, is exempt from the oversight of the TEA. Should any school violate or fail to comply with Texas law, it should expect a response from the Texas Education Agency.
• Both charter and public schools can seriously alter students’ lives through DEA placement: Though it’s not a legal point, it’s a fact that both charter schools and public schools can drastically change the course of a student’s life through disciplinary decisions, including whether to place a student in a DAEP.

Though charter schools tend to have unique features, we see here that they are not radically different from public schools when it comes to expelling students and placing them in alternative educational settings.

Some charter schools may even partner with public school districts to place students in common DAEPs. Some charter schools may not have the resources for their own DAEP framework, so they may rely on the existing programs and facilities that public schools also use for alternative education.

There Are Also Key Differences Between How Public and Charter Schools Handle DAEP Placement

Yes, charter schools and public schools are similar in some of the most important ways related to DAEPs. However, there are some critical distinctions we must make, as they can have an impact on students and guardians facing potential DAEP placement. These differences include:

• Charter schools tend to have even more flexibility in their disciplinary policies than public schools do: One of the most defining characteristics of charter schools nationwide is autonomy. These schools are not as tied to collective curricula, disciplinary procedures, staffing decisions, and other criteria that unite most public schools. This freedom may even include a charter school adopting a uniquely “no-nonsense” disciplinary approach that results in more students being placed in DAEPs.
• Public schools are generally beholden to the policies of their district: It’s true that independent school districts in Texas have some leeway to enact uniquely disciplinary policies and procedures. However, individual public schools must generally follow the procedures and guidelines established by the district. In this way, administrators at public schools have less autonomy in disciplinary matters than charter school administrators—for better or worse.
• Though not always, charter schools may take a greater interest in protecting the student: While we noted that charter schools may take a stronger disciplinary stance than public schools, the inverse can also be true. In part because charter schools tend to have smaller student bodies, administrators may take greater interest in the well-being of students. This dynamic might actually lead to fewer instances of DAEP placement, as administrators may want to avoid the harm that comes from removing a student from their home school.
• Charter schools’ expulsion decisions may not be appealed: The aforementioned Texas statutes specific to charter schools state that “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a final decision of the governing body of an open-enrollment charter school with respect to actions taken under the code of conduct may not be appealed.” While the student should have the opportunity to argue against DAEP placement, their inability to appeal a final decision is worth noting.
• Here’s one perspective to take away: Though they have similarities, the way in which charter and public schools handle DAEP placement is undeniably different, too. If your student is facing potential DAEP placement, understanding these differences may prove the difference in whether they’re ultimately placed in an alternative education program.

The LLF National Law Firm Team is composed of attorneys who consider themselves students of Texas law. They have helped many students facing discipline in both the public and charter-school systems, and we understand the differences that define each system’s disciplinary procedures.

Let us assist your student. The time you might otherwise spend researching the finer points of Texas law is better spent preparing their defense, and that’s what our service allows.

Why DAEP Placement Is, for Many, a Worst-Case Scenario

Whether a student attends a 300-person charter school in Dallas County or a 2,300-student public high school in Austin, they will suffer harm if they are removed from school and placed in a DAEP. It’s difficult to generalize about anything, but we can confidently make such a statement because we have seen:

• How socially devastating it can be for a student to be removed from the friends, teachers, counselors, and social network that they have at their school (only to be placed in an unfamiliar, often sterile DAEP environment)
• The mental health challenges that, more often than not, arise when a student is taken away from a familiar environment and placed in an unfamiliar, generally unwelcoming one
• How such severe discipline diminishes a student’s likelihood of being accepted into a quality college and, by extension, pursuing a high-paying and fulfilling career
• That the full-fledged consequences of placing a student in a DAEP may not be fully apparent until years, or even decades, down the road

Young people often wrestle with angst, bullying, social awkwardness, difficult home lives, and other challenges that contribute to “disruptive” behavior. Rather than getting that student help, educators too often respond by isolating the student in a DAEP—which only worsens the challenges they’re already facing.

Our team provides the compassion and advocacy that Texas students too often fail to get from school administrators and teachers.

How an Attorney from the LLF National Law Firm Team Will Advocate for Your Student

Our firm is dedicated to upholding students’ rights and preventing potentially calamitous disciplinary decisions. We may do this in your student’s case by:

• Immediately establishing a respectful relationship with those who make disciplinary decisions at your school
• Also making clear that we intend for those decision-makers to honor the student’s rights
• Seeking a resolution that most benefits the student, and one that does not impose the severe consequences of DAEP placement
• In making your student’s case, we plan to cite any extenuating circumstances that may influence whether a student has to be assigned to a DAEP, such as:
• Their age
• Where the alleged offense happened
• Whether the student was defending themselves
• The student’s intent (or lack thereof) in committing an infraction
• The student’s prior disciplinary record

Along the way, we will provide you and your student guidance, assurance, and peace of mind. We know the DAEP-specific statutes and procedures, and we are the team to have fighting for your student at this pivotal juncture in their life.

Call the LLF National Law Firm Team today at 888-535-3686 or contact us online to discuss how we will start helping your student right away.