Race, Class, and School Discipline

Abstract

School discipline exerts a notable impact on students and school operations. It is a crucial element in order to maintain class control, enable learning, and encourage harmony and the safety of students and school staff. In the United States, there is ongoing controversy as to the role that discipline should play in public schools, and its implementation. Mandatory methods such as exclusionary and zero tolerance policies, have created lively debate among school administrators, parents, teachers, policymakers, and advocates. Many argue that these methods have been shown to disproportionately and unjustly target minority students of color, while others support these methods positing they are necessary and effective.

Overview

Modern school discipline aims to manage student behavior, gain student compliance, and establish parameters that will allow the development of self-control. With these goals in sight, educators and administrators establish discipline methods that promote obedience to rules and regulations. In general, school discipline seeks to act as deterrence for truancy, insubordination, and other forms of disorderly behavior. Exclusionary discipline methods such as suspension have proven successful with students if they are viewed as just and fair. Nevertheless, research shows that when students deem punishment as unjust, the rates for non-compliance, truancy, and dropping out increase. Therefore, punishment methods are effective deterrents when they are applied within a framework of consistency, transparency, and a coherent discipline plan. When applied arbitrarily, too frequently or unfairly, it increases negative results (Skiba & Rausch, 2006).

Research has shown that exclusionary measures such as school suspension are harmful to students—particularly those in marginal situations. Exclusionary practices increase educational inequalities. In fact, a look at suspension rates shows bias along gender, race, and disability lines. Nevertheless, over 3.45 million students are suspended yearly from school for disciplinary problems (Losen, 2014).

The United States has one of the highest rates of incarceration worldwide, disproportionate to its level of crime and population. Moreover, its prison system is overwhelmingly filled with young people of color, many of whom end there through the phenomenon known as the "school-to-prison pipeline." Harsh and punitive disciplinary measures that disproportionately target minority students are viewed by many of these as arbitrary and unjust. Already marginalized, their self-regard and educational opportunities are further diminished by practices that, as experts posit, increasingly resemble those of the criminal justice system, such as relying on police authorities (Weissman, 2015).

Further Insights

The social inequalities that prevail in American society are reflected in the public school system. For example, between 2009 and 2011, fourth and eighth grade African American students—on average—scored significantly lower than white and Asian students. Moreover, statistics reflect that minority students are punished more frequently and harshly than non-minority students (The National Center for Educational Statistics, 2011). These policies and practices violate the educational rights of children, according to many scholars, and also violate notions of fairness and justice (Reyes, 2006). Consequently, students realize they are victims of injustice and lose faith in the system. Shedding light on these punitive policies is important so that school administrators and educators may fully comprehend the effects of zero tolerance policies on the most vulnerable students and develop more effective and inclusive student-centered disciplinary policies and strategies.

Case studies reflect the disparities in disciplinary practices in public schools. In one study, African Americans composed about 21 percent of the school population, but received removal suspensions up to three times that number. The juvenile justice system reflects this imbalance: African American minors enter the juvenile system at rates disproportionate to their numbers in the general population. Studies have shown that up to 50 percent of African Americans aged ten to seventeen were referred for delinquency, even though they account for only 22 percent. The situation became glaring enough that the U.S. Attorney General and the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education co-wrote a letter urgently calling for an end to racial disparities in school disciplinary practices to end (Walker, 2014).

This inequality has a historic trajectory. Since Brown v. Board of Education (1954), minority students have been suspended more frequently, for similar offenses, than white students. By the 1970s, African Americans were suspended at twice the rate of white students in some states. The higher rate of punishment for minority students is a nationwide pattern. In fact, African American students are not only suspended, but also referred to administration office at a higher rate, at all school levels (Skiba & Rausch, 2011; Walker, 2014).

This disparity increased after the implementation of zero tolerance policies in the 1980s. Zero tolerance policies were worsened by the War on Drugs and the Columbine school shooting of 1999. These policies appropriately aim at deterring drug and weapons infractions, by imposing suspensions, expulsions, and other mandatory sanctions for clear-cut violations. However, data shows that rather than applying mandatory sanctions solely to drug or weapons infractions, zero tolerance developed a set of ambiguously defined rules and policies applied to behavior that poses no security threat, such as disrespect and disorderly conduct (Walker, 2014).

In fact, suspension rates for minority students have increased since the inception of the twenty-first century. Besides racial minorities, low income students and students with disabilities are often targeted. Students with disabilities tend to be racial minorities, and are suspended at thrice the level of students without disabilities. This is exacerbated along gender lines, with the numbers of African American females punished at even higher rates than any other racial minority group (Walker, 2014).

These practices not only set children up for failure, they also steer them into the school-to-prison-pipeline, according to experts. Experts also see a greater shift of school discipline strategies toward law enforcement procedures. These include a greater reliance on practices such as arrest and detention, often by officers unfamiliar in dealing with children and youth. These scenarios often lead to violations in due process, as several prominently broadcast cases of police violence against unruly minority adolescents have evidenced. In short, zero tolerance policies were developed with the best intentions, but results run contrary to best practices. They worsen racial inequality and failure-to-graduate rates, criminalize student behavior, and ignore the needs of special education and low-income children (Reyes, 2006). In this manner, they contribute to institutionalized racism and diminished opportunities for minority children and youth.

Discourse

There are many educational discipline ideologies and strategies, and people feel strongly about them. In the U.S. public schools system, a preference exists for exclusionary methods that are considered appropriate for serious offenses, usually related to drugs, weapons, or physical injury. It is understood that exclusionary methods, such as suspension, must be applied fairly, judiciously and as a last resort. Upon considering when and how to apply exclusionary discipline, educators and administrators must balance and safeguard both the rights of the sanctioned student and the welfare of the school population. Ideally, punishment must be effective and serve as deterrence for others, as well as a learning experience for the suspended student. Punishment should always align with notions of fairness and justice and be based on evidence and coherent standards.

Ideal approaches to school discipline include teachable moments; for example, those that model self-discipline for students to emulate. Effective sanctions can deter or correct problematic behaviors, or remove those students whose misbehavior is too serious for basic school discipline. In order for punishment to be effective, it is important to establish some fundamental strategies that are clear and coherent to all students. These strategies should also be considered to be reasonable and sustainable by the school community at large.

Many experts have tried to develop strategies in order to implement school discipline in a way that fosters equality and democracy and improves the public school community. Legal and education scholar Brenda L. T. Walker (2014) recommends that educators, policymakers, and other education experts engage in group study and critical discussion of issues related to people of color. Participants should deconstruct available data related to disciplinary actions such as suspension and expulsion, by running them across race and gender lines, in order to more accurately illuminate the extent to which minorities are disproportionately overrepresented along lines of disciplinary practices.

Other strategies include:

1. Peace-oriented workshops.

These should use narratives that counter violent activity in urban or underserved communities. Group interaction and work should lead to peaceful resolutions.

2. Studying equality legislation.

Learning Brown v. Board of Education, as well as due process rights as guaranteed in the fourteenth Amendment. School personnel, parents and even students should understand students’ rights to equality and to fair due process.

3. Foster a culturally affirming school climate.

That is, schools should work towards an environment that welcomes and respects all cultural backgrounds.

4. Analyze disciplinary policies through a critical framework.

Policies should define clearly and specifically what school infractions are punishable under its policies. School authorities and students must abide by what is delineated and documented in its policy. Therefore, infractions and sanctions related to school safety, for example, should be spelled out clearly.

Educators can also foster a more inclusive, democratic environment in the classroom without sacrificing class control and discipline. The National Forum of Educational Administration (2015) offers a detailed guideline for teachers, which begins by recommending educators engage in self-evaluation. Students usually carry the burden of blame in teacher-student disciplinary problems. However, there are different ways of achieving results than seeking to place the blame on somebody. In order to practice self-evaluation that leads to best practices and positive results, the forum presented a list of suggestions, which include the following.

• Organize and routinize. When teachers spend too much time looking for supplies and other things, it invites unruly behavior. Time management and organization allow teachers and students to focus efficiently on the teaching and learning process.
• Clarity. Instructions and assignments should be as detailed as possible. Note the difference between "Now you may review for a while" and "During the next 10 minutes see how many of the gas law problems you can complete. They are found on page X of your book."
• Naturalness. In other words, a teacher should be herself or himself, rather than present a personae she or he believes would be more pleasing. Students can figure out dishonesty.
• Acting age appropriate. Students do not expect teachers to be peers. Instead they expect their teachers to behave like mature adults and to offer guidance. In an effort to be popular with students, teachers can create or exacerbate disciplinary problems.
• Fairness and consistency. Students become confused when teachers accept some types of behavior one day and punish it another. Consistency implies fairness; that is, teachers should not show favoritism. This is especially important in ethnically diverse classrooms. Perceptions of favoritism or discrimination invite or worsen disciplinary problems.
• Avoid arguments. Teachers must be firm and fair but not become involved in prolonged arguments with a student or group of students. For example, it is often better to handle something privately and quietly, such as changing disruptive students from one place to another, instead of engaging in verbal confrontations with a student in front of the class, or else, sending a student to the office for disruption.
• Avoid temper tantrums. A teacher must model maturity, self-discipline and emotional maturity. This does not occur if a teacher yells or breaks down.
• Values. Learn the school policy and uphold it. Some teachers may develop their own set of values or standards and end up taking rigid stands on issues that are not important in the long run. Upholding a school policy allows the teacher to let school administrators enforce it when necessary.
• Do not threaten. Students should be informed of behavioral standards and expectations. When students are aware of expectations, it is not necessary to make threats when an infraction occurs. If the infraction calls for a specific sanction, the teacher must sanction. It is not necessary to enter into arguments or threats. It is also not recommended to continuously postpone action or repeatedly threaten a student with sanctions the next time he or she violates the rules.
• Do not humiliate students. Sometimes a teacher must engage in sanctioning a student. Actions or statements that offend or humiliate a student, however, are counterproductive. Addressing students in public to comment on their speech patterns, attire, ethnic background, or other personal elements can cause disruptive behavior if a student feels publicly shamed. It is also important to understand, in a culturally diverse population, that some words carry different meanings to different people.
• Give students responsibility if appropriate. If students are mature or prepared enough to manage some class projects or endeavors, give them responsibility. This makes them feel respected and engaged in classroom work.

Effective teachers are not born that way. They learn from their errors and grow. In order to do so, they constantly reflect upon and re-evaluate their teaching methods and practices, including their effect on class discipline. For example, effective teachers are organized, actively learn about and implement educational best practices, and avoid an environment of teacher versus students. The practices delineated above are steps in the right direction towards creating a sense of fairness and mutual respect among students, teachers and school administration.

Studies show that on the issue of deterrence, consistency in disciplinary methods work better than ambiguity and harshness. Exclusionary sanctions tend to be unproductive when students believe these are inconsistent, unfair or when applied to students with emotional disabilities or behavioral problems. In general, removing students from school tends to make students feel alienated from the school community. Removing students from underserved communities from school causes them to be further excluded, barring them from access to other opportunities.

On the other hand, abundant research studies have shown that in schools in which students are well informed about disciplinary rules and perceive these as just and fair, there is significantly less unruliness, insubordination, and truancy. Transparency and information are appropriate steps towards making students feel involved in the disciplinary process, and fosters the development of trust, respect for the system, self-discipline, a democratic environment, and functional schools.

Terms & Concepts

Deterrence: To use the threat of sanctions or punishment as a way to deter people from breaking the rules.

Disability: A term that encompasses a series of impairments and limitations, which may be physical, emotional, or mental.

Discipline: The control of behavior by requiring obedience to rules and orders. It often is linked to the threat of punishment for infractions of the rules.

Exclusionary: Behaviors or policies that exclude others.

Just: A concept that refers to that which is correct and fair.

Tolerance: The capacity to accept behaviors, habits, and beliefs different from one’s own.

Zero Tolerance: Policies aimed at deterring drug and weapons infractions by imposing suspensions, expulsions, and other mandatory sanctions for clear-cut violations.

Bibliography

Bireda, M. R. (2002). Eliminating racial profiling in school discipline: Cultures in conflict. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Greene, R. W. (2014). Lost at school: Why our kids with behavioral challenges are falling through the cracks and how we can help them. New York, NY: Scribner.

Hanna, J. L. (1988). Disruptive school behavior: Class, race and culture. Teaneck, NJ: Holmes and Meier.

Losen, D. J. (2014). Closing the school discipline gap: Equitable remedies for excessive exclusion. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Milner, H. R., & Howard, T. (2015). Rac(e)ing to class: Confronting poverty and race in schools and classrooms. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). Condition of education 2011. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education NCES.

National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision. (2015). How teachers can avoid contributing to discipline problems in schools: Could I be part of the problem? National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 38(2), 64–70. Retrieved December 3, 2015 from EBSCO Education Research Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=103203343&site=ehost-live

Reyes, A. H. (2006). Discipline, achievement, and race: is zero tolerance the answer? New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Skiba, R. J., & Rausch, M. K. (2006). Zero tolerance, suspension and expulsion: Questions of equity and effectiveness. In C. M. Evertson and C.S. Weinstein (Eds.), Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues (pp. 1063–1092). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Walker, B. L. T. (2014). Suspended animation: A legal perspective of school discipline and African American learners in the shadows of Brown. Journal of Negro Education, 83(3), 338–351. Retrieved December 3, 2015 from EBSCO Education Research Complete http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=100739157&site=ehost-live

Weissman, M. (2015). Prelude to prison: student perspectives on school suspension. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Suggested Reading

Hines-Datri, D. (2015). When police intervene: Race, gender and discipline of black male students at an urban high school. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 18(2), 122–133. Retrieved December 3, 2015 from EBSCO Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=102694131&site=ehost-live

Mayworm, A. M., & Sharkey, J. D. (2014). Ethical considerations in a three-tiered approach to school discipline, policy and practice. Psychology in the Schools, 51(7), 603–794. Retrieved December 3, 2015 from EBSCO Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=96956206&site=ehost-live

Singleton, G. E. (2014). Courageous conversations about race: A field guide for achieving equity in schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Triplett, N. P., Allen, A., & Lewis, C. W. (2014). Zero tolerance, school shootings, and the post-Brown quest for equity in discipline policy: An examination of how urban minorities are punished for white suburban violence. Journal of Negro Education, 83(3), 352–370. Retrieved December 3, 2015 from EBSCO Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=100739158&site=ehost-live