What Do We Know about School Discipline Reform? Assessing the Alternatives to Suspensions and Expulsions

THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S OFFICE for Civil Rights announced this spring that the number of suspensions and expulsions in the nation's public schools had dropped 20 percent between 2012 and 2014. The news was welcomed by those who oppose the frequent use of suspensions and expulsions, known as exclusionary discipline. In recent years, many policymakers and educators have called for the adoption of alternative disciplinary strategies that allow students to stay in school and not miss valuable learning time. Advocates for discipline reform contend that suspensions are meted out in a biased way, because minority students and those with disabilities receive a disproportionate share of them. Some also assert that reducing suspensions would improve school climate for all students. Government leaders have taken steps to encourage school discipline reform. The Obama administration has embarked on several initiatives to encourage schools to move away from suspensions and toward alternative strategies. In 2011, the Department of Education (DOE) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched the Supportive School Discipline Initiative to coordinate federal efforts in this area. In January 2014, the DOE released a resource package with a variety of informational materials designed to support state and local efforts to improve school climate and discipline. The package included a "Dear Colleague" letter, issued jointly by DOE and DOJ, warning against intentional racial discrimination but also stating that schools unlawfully discriminate even "if a policy is neutral on its face--meaning that the policy itself does not mention race--and is administered in an evenhanded manner but has a disparate impact, i.e., a disproportionate and unjustified effect on students of a particular race." Discipline reform efforts are also underway at the state and school-district levels. As of May 2015, 22 states and the District of Columbia had revised their laws in order to require or encourage schools to: limit the use of exclusionary discipline practices; implement supportive (that is, nonpunitive) discipline strategies that rely on behavioral interventions; and provide support services such as counseling, dropout prevention, and guidance services for atrisk students. And as of the 2015-16 school year, 23 of the 100 largest school districts nationwide had implemented policy reforms requiring nonpunitive discipline strategies and/or limits to the use of suspensions. In an April 2014 survey of 500 district superintendents conducted by the School Superintendents Association (AASA), 84 percent of respondents reported that their districts had updated their code of conduct within the previous three years. What evidence supports the call for discipline reform? How might alternative strategies affect students and schools? In this article, we describe the critiques of exclusionary discipline and then examine the research base on which discipline policy reform rests. We also describe the alternative approaches that are gaining traction in America's schools and present the evidence on their efficacy. Throughout, we consider what we know (and don't yet know) about the effect of reducing suspensions on a variety of important outcomes, such as school safety, school climate, and student achievement. In general, we find that the evidence for critiques of exclusionary discipline and in support of alternative strategies is relatively thin. In part, this is because many discipline reforms at the state and local levels have only been implemented in the last few years. While disparities in school discipline by race and disability status have been well documented, the evidence is inconclusive as to whether or not these disparate practices involve racial bias and discrimination. Further, the evidence on alternative strategies is mainly correlational, suggesting that more research is necessary to uncover how alternative approaches to suspensions affect school safety and student outcomes. …

[1]  S. Carrell,et al.  The Long-Run Effects of Disruptive Peers , 2016, American Economic Review.

[2]  Gary W. Ritter,et al.  Do School Discipline Policies Treat Students Fairly? A Second Look at School Discipline Rate Disparities , 2017 .

[3]  Anlan Zhang,et al.  Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2015. NCES 2016-079. NCJ 249758. , 2016 .

[4]  C. Gentile,et al.  The Educational and Behavioral Impacts of the Ewing Marion Kauffman Charter School , 2016 .

[5]  A. Petrosino,et al.  Restorative Justice in U.S. Schools: A Research Review. , 2016 .

[6]  N. Bracy,et al.  School Order, Justice, and Education: Climate, Discipline Practices, and Dropping Out , 2015 .

[7]  A. Rambo,et al.  The PROMISE Program Case Examples: From Get Tough to Solution Building , 2015 .

[8]  J. Owen,et al.  Instead of Suspension: Alternative Strategies for Effective School Discipline , 2015 .

[9]  Michael A Keith,et al.  Are We Closing the School Discipline Gap , 2015 .

[10]  Kevin M. Beaver,et al.  Prior problem behavior accounts for the racial gap in school suspensions , 2014 .

[11]  Stephen L. Hoffman Zero Benefit , 2014 .

[12]  R. Skiba,et al.  Discipline and Achievement 1 The Academic Cost of Discipline : The Relationship Between Suspension / Expulsion and School Achievement , 2014 .

[13]  Matthew P. Steinberg,et al.  Student and Teacher Safety in Chicago Public Schools: The Roles of Community Context and School Social Organization , 2013 .

[14]  J. Allen,et al.  The Promise of a Teacher Professional Development Program in Reducing the Racial Disparity in Classroom Exclusionary Discipline , 2013 .

[15]  J. Lacoe Unequally Safe , 2013 .

[16]  P. Gleason,et al.  KIPP Middle Schools: Impacts on Achievement and Other Outcomes. Final Report. , 2013 .

[17]  Parag A. Pathak,et al.  Explaining Charter School Effectiveness , 2011, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[18]  Michael D. Thompson,et al.  Breaking Schools' Rules: A Statewide Study on How School Discipline Relates to Students' Success and Juvenile Justice Involvement , 2011 .

[19]  Tary J. Tobin,et al.  Race Is Not Neutral: A National Investigation of African American and Latino Disproportionality in School Discipline , 2011 .

[20]  C. Dodd,et al.  'Dear Colleague' letter , 2011 .

[21]  Elina Saeki,et al.  Response to Intervention (RtI) in the Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Domains: Current Challenges and Emerging Possibilities , 2011, Contemporary School Psychology.

[22]  Catherine P. Bradshaw,et al.  Examining the Effects of Schoolwide Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports on Student Outcomes , 2010 .

[23]  P. Gleason,et al.  The Evaluation of Charter School Impacts: Final Report. NCEE 2010-4029. , 2010 .

[24]  G. Bear,et al.  How Can We Improve School Discipline? , 2010 .

[25]  Bruce Sacerdote,et al.  Katrina&Apos;S Children: Evidence on the Structure of Peer Effects from Hurricane Evacuees , 2009 .

[26]  S. Carrell,et al.  Domino Effect: Domestic Violence Harms Everyone's Kids , 2009 .

[27]  Catherine P. Bradshaw,et al.  A Social Disorganization Perspective on Bullying-Related Attitudes and Behaviors: The Influence of School Context , 2009, American journal of community psychology.

[28]  Anne W. Todd,et al.  A Randomized, Wait-List Controlled Effectiveness Trial Assessing School-Wide Positive Behavior Support in Elementary Schools , 2009 .

[29]  Peter L. Sheras,et al.  Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in the Schools? , 2008 .

[30]  G. Sugai,et al.  Response to Intervention: Examining Classroom Behavior Support in Second Grade , 2007 .

[31]  R. Skiba,et al.  The Safe and Responsive Schools Project: A school reform model for implementing best practices in violence prevention. , 2006 .

[32]  F. Gresham Response to Intervention: An Alternative Means of Identifying Students as Emotionally Disturbed. , 2005 .

[33]  D. Hallfors,et al.  Evaluation of a High School Peer Group Intervention for At-Risk Youth , 2005, Journal of abnormal child psychology.

[34]  Linda M Mendez,et al.  Predictors of suspension and negative school outcomes: a longitudinal investigation. , 2003, New directions for youth development.

[35]  J. Ferron,et al.  School demographic variables and out‐of‐school suspension rates: A quantitative and qualitative analysis of a large, ethnically diverse school district , 2002 .