Three words show up on the 268 as though every candidate already owns them: removal, DAEP, expulsion. Most candidates know what those words mean in a hallway. The exam is testing whether you know what they mean in statute, and those are not the same thing.
Texas Education Code Chapter 37, titled Discipline, Law and Order, is the statute behind every one of those words. You can read the current text yourself at statutes.capitol.texas.gov. I am going to describe its shape, not summarize every subsection, because the shape is what the exam actually tests.
A ladder, not a menu
Chapter 37 is built as three rungs of increasing consequence, and each rung has its own rule about who decides and what happens next.
- Removal from the regular classroom. The least severe rung, and the one closest to a
teacher's daily authority.
- Placement in a Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP). A campus-level
consequence that moves a student out of their regular program but keeps them enrolled and receiving instruction.
- Expulsion. The most severe rung, reserved for the conduct the statute treats as the
most serious a campus can face.
A principal who treats these as interchangeable, picking whichever one feels proportionate in the moment, is not applying the Code of Conduct. They are substituting their own judgment for a structure the legislature already built. That substitution is exactly what a 268 item is usually testing for.
Removal from the classroom
A teacher can remove a student from the regular classroom when that student's behavior repeatedly interferes with the teacher's ability to teach the class or with other students' ability to learn. The decision to remove sits with the teacher. What happens to the student afterward does not.
Once a student is removed, the principal has to decide where that student goes: back into the same class, into a different class, or into DAEP. A principal who simply returns a removed student to the same seat without addressing the underlying behavior has not resolved the removal. They have delayed it.
DAEP placement
Chapter 37 treats DAEP placement two ways. For a defined set of serious conduct, mostly Penal Code violations involving things like assault, weapons, or controlled substances on or near campus, placement is not discretionary. The district places the student.
For everything else, DAEP placement is a decision made under the district's own Code of Conduct. That local document is not optional reading. It is the operative text for most discipline decisions a principal actually makes, because it fills in the discretionary space Chapter 37 leaves open. A principal who has not read their own Code of Conduct closely is missing the document that governs most of their actual discipline calls, statute aside.
Expulsion
Expulsion sits above DAEP for a reason. It is reserved for conduct the statute itself identifies as the most serious a campus can face, including bringing a firearm onto school property, which Chapter 37 treats as mandatory. For other serious conduct, expulsion is a decision the district is authorized to make, not required to make, and the Code of Conduct again fills in where that discretion sits.
The distinction between "the district must expel" and "the district may expel" is a favorite exam distinction, because it separates a rule from a judgment call dressed up as one.
The due process the Code requires
Removal, DAEP placement, and expulsion are not decisions a campus can make quietly. Chapter 37 requires notice of the reason for the action and an opportunity to respond before a DAEP placement or expulsion becomes final, except where an immediate safety removal has to happen first and the opportunity to respond follows afterward. Expulsion carries a further right to appeal the decision through the district.
None of that requires a courtroom. A hearing under Chapter 37 is not a trial, and the statute does not entitle a student to the same procedure a criminal defendant would get. What it requires is a defined, documented process: the family knows why the action was taken, has a chance to be heard before the decision is final, and has somewhere to take it if they disagree with the outcome.
Students receiving special education services carry an additional layer of protection under federal law before a significant change in placement, which Chapter 37 does not replace. That is a large enough topic to earn its own post rather than a paragraph here.
Why this is exam vocabulary, not campus advice
Everything above describes what Chapter 37 says. It is not a guide to handling a specific student, a specific family, or a specific fight on your campus. If something like this is actually happening where you work, the current text at the sources above and your district's own counsel are the authority, not a study post.
For the exam, the payoff is narrower and more useful: when a Domain I item puts a safety or order problem on your desk, or a Domain VI item tests whether you know what a rule requires versus what feels fair, the words removal, DAEP, and expulsion are doing real statutory work. Knowing which rung you are on, and whether the next step is required or discretionary, is often the whole difference between the keyed answer and the one that merely sounds right.
The weight these two domains carry in the full blueprint is on the 268 exam page, and the Code of Ethics side of Domain VI, the other statute candidates underestimate, is in the Texas Educators Code of Ethics on the 268. If you want practice items built the way Chapter 37 actually tests, the free seven-day trial opens the strategy module and Domain I drills.