Out-Of-School Suspension Report

The procedures and laws that protect students from arbitration and wrongful discipline are important, for schools to discipline disruptive and dangerous students (Arum & Preiss 2009, para. 1).

Out of school suspensions (OSS) are often enforced with the assumption that students receiving the suspension are less likely to repeat the problem behavior in the future. However, this has been proven to be false. Suspending a student for engaging in a certain behavior does not in fact serve as a deterrent from the behavior but as a deterrent from attending school instead. In actuality, receiving just a single suspension can increase the probability of a student experiencing academic failure, school dropout, and involvement in the juvenile justice system. Knowing this, some educators still believe that for many students, suspension can serve as an effective lesson. One of the greatest concerns that educators and administrators face is the matter of classroom management. It is part of their job to ensure a safe, productive and supportive classroom allowing students to learn and grow to their greatest potential. Though there are several strategies gauged towards managing a classroom, the most severe offences often lead to either in or out of school suspension. Some of the largest concerns faced with out of school suspensions is that they are often ineptly applied, used unfairly against students of color and seemingly ineffective at producing better behavior. Also known as exclusionary discipline, the majority of offenses that led to OSS have not been centered around violence but instead emphasised issues of classroom insubordination and defiance. In some rather extreme cases

Often times it’s the student’s needs and the school being unable to meet the student’s needs that lead to the student being disciplined. Kids who are behind academically, and unable to perform at the same level as their peers often act out in frustration or humiliation (Noguera, 2003). Once these students are labelled as difficult, incorrigible, and unteachable they tend to believe these things about themselves and act out more in class which leads to a cycle of discipline that can ultimately lead to permanent expulsion. For some of these students, these continued rule violations lead to run-ins with the police and the criminal justice system. School administrators who are at times frustrated themselves from failed attempts to steer children from a “bad path” don’t realize that in throwing their hands up and giving up on these students, are in a way helping shuttle students from school to the penitentiary (Noguera, 2003).

Schools that are low performing have the highest rates of suspension and expulsion and the lowest graduation rates. According to Mississippi Today, “the dropout rate for students fell slightly to 11.8 percent in 2016, the lowest in five years.” If I were to eliminate funding as a barrier, zero tolerance policies would still exist- especially in public school systems in the South, amidst people of color. Zero tolerance policies are obstacles put in place for small infractions performed by students, which can lead to disciplinary actions such as: corporal punishment, detention, and suspension. These small infractions may be in the form of getting up without permission, excessive talking, etc. Schools should offer more alternative measures, which counsel students on their misbehavior and give the student an opportunity to amend his or her actions. These methods fall under a restorative justice model. Community organizations, like Nollie Jenkins Family Center, have proposed alternatives such as peer mediation and conflict resolution to help keep youth in a learning environment, off the streets, and away from a life of crime. A case study performed by Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program, discovered that after counseling students for infraction their number of juvenile arrests and suspension “dropped by 54%.” This could potentially be a catalyst in bending the moral arc in the direction of justice,

When I think back to when I attended grade school, I remember suspensions were common. You could say I was a good kid, because I never got suspended, but that was not so for the class clowns, trouble makers, ditchers of the school. One of the reasons for the increase in suspension rates had to do with zero tolerance policies. Did zero tolerance help shape these children to be better students, or did it simply aid in pushing them out of school? In the news right now there is great controversy surrounding a new approach to help at risk children it is called restorative justice. Does it help, or is it just another way for students not to held accountable for their actions. There are pros and cons I am sure for both but in the end what method helps keep students in school, and learning? Is it Zero Tolerance with its strict guidelines or Restorative Justice where offender is made to feel accountable for his action that aid with at risk kids.

Schools should leave their old ways and get rid of school suspension because this makes the student feel as though there voice is being heard in the matter. Cindy attends Turner Falls High School , Cindy has gotten herself into trouble because two boys were making racist jokes therefore she felt threatened so she throws two lunch trays at them causing her to be in the restorative justice room.Cindy has the chance to explain her point of view to the teacher without feeling pressured or frightened.One might say that it would be more efficient if

Many schools implement the concept of restorative justice, in particular; Good Shepherd Catholic College Mount Isa. The college implements restorative justice in their disciplinary system, they’ve created a new process in dealing with misbehavior through the Responsible Thinking Process (RTP). This process allows the the students to identify what's wrong in their behavior and gives them a chance to reflect upon this. The student is first warned when they misbehave then the teacher proceeds to give them a second chance to correct said behavior after a warning. If the student continues to misbehave, the teacher will go through the responsible thinking process in which they ask “What are you doing? What should you be doing? Where will you go if this continues to happens again?” This allows the students to take responsibility for their actions and think about their wrongdoings which allows them to correct themselves. This is more effective than sending a student away and punishing them, because without verbally addressing the issue, they don’t understand the repercussions of their actions and will often re-offend. If the student then chooses to misbehave again they will be sent to The Responsible Thinking Classroom (RTC), in which they will have to further reflect on their actions. Once this process has occurred, they then have to negotiate with their teachers about returning to the class and what they have to do, in order to be allowed in. (Good Shepherd Catholic College, 2017)

When using expulsion and suspension the school administrators are excluding students from educational instruction, which is contradictory to the mission of education. In addition, when further behavior incidents were added to school districts' zero-tolerance policies, it gave permission to school administrators to apply suspensions more frequently and freely. If zero-tolerance were truly an effective deterrent, then it would be an expected reduction in the use of suspension, but in reality, there has been an increase in the use of suspension. Drug policy organizations like the Drug Policy Alliance supports replacing failed zero tolerance policies with honest, reality-based drug education and programs. Recommended Changes As mentioned before the Drug Policy Alliance wants to do away with the zero tolerance policy and offer reality-based drug education. The reality-based model is described as including education, intervention/assistance, and restorative

The purpose of this paper is to describe how restorative justice can benefit school districts by helping them change the behavior of students who fail to comply with school rules and policies. Educational institutions that rely less on suspension or expulsion and more on methods that teach children how to understand their actions and how they impact others can have a positive difference in their lives as well as the people close to them. I believe that restorative justice can be used in a similarly to the way probation is offered to adults that are guilty of perpetrating a crime and are less likely to offend again.

As a major source of referrals to the juvenile justice system, eliminating the use of zero tolerance policies by public school administrators is a critical step in ameliorating detrimental effects on minority adolescents and in efforts to close the school-to-prison pipeline. Currently, research suggests zero tolerance policies are ineffective at increasing school safety and that suspending or expelling students puts them at higher risk for dropping out of school and committing delinquent acts [citation-Black]. Nonetheless, minor disciplinary problems should not involve law enforcement.

The following discussion of practice and policy related issues found within the article puritan to a “qualitative” study “conducted in the Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota metropolitan area from September 2009 to May 2012” (Gibson & Haight, 2013, p.264). The main objective of the study was to evaluate the “culturally nuanced” definitions and perceptions on out-of-school suspensions; In hopes of discovering new ways in which “schools and families can work together to decrease racial disparities in out-of-school suspensions” (Gibson & Haight, 2013, p. 263). Thirty participants were interviewed within their own homes through “in-depth, individual, and audiotaped interviews.” (Gibson & Haight, 2013, p. 263). In reviewing the study interviews, a few practice-related issues were discussed, concerning educators lack of understanding of cultural diversity among their students, as well as school personnel 's failure to fully listen to each individual 's concerns when addressing discipline issues.

Rancho Minerva Middle School (RMMS) is located in the rural area within the Vista Unified School District (VUSD). A major issue occurring at RMMS is corresponding to sixth to eighth grade male students being recipients of ineffective punishments as a result of their disruptive behavior. Students’ disruptive behavior refers to those who engage in altercations, disrupt teachers during instruction time, and become involved in substance use. The ramifications for students with disruptive behaviors are followed by disciplinary approaches such as expulsions, suspensions, Saturday school, and after school detention. Such approach has resulted in students achieving lower academics which can also increase the chances of engaging in risky behavior outside the school. According to RMMS School Accountability Report Card (SARC), in the 2014-2015 school year, RMMS reported 10.4% suspensions which demonstrated to be higher than the previous years. Additional factors that have had an effect on suspension rates are the limited in house services provided to this particular population at RMMS. Though RMMS does not have an appointed mental health provider or personnel to assist with mental health support on site, students are granted the opportunity to be referred to outside providers/therapist for counseling services. However, this has been a major limitation for our

School can become tedious. Everyone can agree with that, yet students know they must endure the long days and heavy workloads to further their education and stay out of trouble. Those who refuse to behave have no concept of the consequences of their disorderly actions. These students continually disrupt classrooms and prohibit others from receiving a full education. In addition to being a distraction, they can also pose a threat to the safety of their classmates. Alternative schools are a logical solution. These correctional facilities are beneficial to not only the delinquent but also to the community because they help to produce a productive member of society. Disruptive students should be placed in alternative schools because it will allow

However, not all theories this subject offers can be applied with a sociological standpoint due to the psychological effects a student undergoes experiencing a harsh policy. Literature provided in support constantly reminds the community about the disparities, the gender factors, minorities, socioeconomic levels, and the ever-growing barriers. Recently, research is further exclaiming the crisis America’s public education system is undergoing. It is becoming apparent how the rise of suspensions and expulsions in middle schools, further affects the future decisions a student makes (Losen, Skiba 2010); further in, the role reversal from being a student to becoming criminal/prisoner. Hence, the research is pure. It further examines and exclaims the damage, zero-tolerance policies have in the education system and students; further on, the penetration into the criminal justice system. Overall, there is a deficit on the in-depth explanations why and what are the internal/external factors that continuously push a student to fail, and further on becoming a number in the criminal justice

The swift zero tolerance policies in place to crackdown on student transgressions are often ineffective and have lasting long term effects on student behaviors and severe implications on academic achievement. There are stark disparities still in the suspension and expulsion rates among African Americans and their counterparts. According to the US Department of Education they are expelled or suspended at a rate of three and half times as often. Title I schools which employ these zero tolerance policies and have a police presence in the schools are often cited as having poor ratings in academic achievement levels as well. I would like to examine effective and alternative approaches to school/classroom discipline and exploring model schools that have effectively reduced their disciplinary