when can get my assignment back?

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT SCHOOL D IS C IP L IN E REFORM?

ASSESSING THE ALTERNATIVES TO SUSPENSIONS AND EXPULSIONS TH E U.S. D E P A R T M E N T OF E D U C A T IO N 'S OFFICE for Civil Rights a n n o u n c e d th is sp rin g th a t th e n u m b e r o f su sp en sio n s a n d expulsions in th e n a tio n ’s public schools h a d d ro p p e d 20 p e rc e n t betw een 2012 a n d 2014.

The news was welcomed by those who oppose the frequent use o f suspensions and expulsions, know n as exclusionary discipline. In recent years, m any policymakers and educators have called for the adoption o f alternative disciplinary strate­ gies that allow students to stay in school an d n o t miss valuable learning time. Advocates for discipline reform contend that suspensions are m eted o u t in a biased way, because m inority students and those with disabilities receive a disproportionate share o f them . Some also assert th at reducing suspensions would im prove school climate for all students.

G overnm ent leaders have taken steps to encourage school discipline reform. The O bam a adm inistration has em barked o n several initiatives to encourage schools to m ove away from suspensions an d tow ard alternative strategies. In 2011, the D e p artm en t o f Education (DOE) an d the D epartm ent o f Justice (DOJ) launched the Supportive School Discipline Initiative to coordinate federal efforts in this area. In January 2014, the D O E released a resource package w ith a variety o f inform ational materials designed to support state and local efforts to improve school climate and discipline. The packageincluded a “D ear Colleague” letter, issued jointly by DOE an d DOJ, warning against intentional racial discrim ination b u t also stating th at schools unlawfully discriminate even “if a policy is neutral o n its face—m eaning that the policy itself does n o t mention race—and is administered in an evenhanded m anner but has a disparate impact, i.e., a disproportionate and unjustified effect o n students o f a particular race.” D iscipline re fo rm efforts are also u n d erw ay at the state a n d sch o o l-d istrict levels. As o f M ay 2015, 22 states a n d th e D istrict o f C o lu m b ia h a d revised th e ir laws in o rd e r to re q u ire or encourage schools to: lim it th e use o f ex c lu sio n ­ ary d iscip lin e pra ctices; im p le m e n t s u p p o rtiv e (th a t is, n o n p u n itiv e ) discipline strategies th a t rely o n behavioral in terv e n tio n s; a n d p ro v id e s u p p o rt services such as c o u n ­ seling, d ro p o u t p re v en tio n , a n d guidance services for at- risk stu d en ts. A n d as o f th e 2 0 1 5 -1 6 school year, 23 o f the 100 largest school districts n atio n w id e h a d im p le m e n ted policy refo rm s re q u irin g n o n p u n itiv e discipline strategies a n d /o r lim its to th e use o f suspensions. In an A pril 2014 survey o f 500 d istric t su p e rin te n d e n ts co n d u c te d by the School S u p erin ten d e n ts A ssociation (AASA), 84 p ercen t o f re sp o n d e n ts re p o rte d th a t th e ir d istricts h a d u p d a te d th e ir code o f c o n d u c t w ith in the pre v io u s th re e years.

W h a t evidence su p p o rts the call fo r discipline reform ?

by MATTHEW P. STEINBERG and JOHANNA LACOE 44 EDUCATION NEXT / WINTER 2017e d u c a t io n n e x t . o r g educationnext.org W IN TE R 2017 / EDUCATION NEXT 45 ! " # $% & ' ( # ) ' $* $ ! ' + ), $' " ' '# '" '+ " - " $. / How m ight 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 th a t are gaining traction in America’s schools and present the evidence on their efficacy. T hroughout, we consider what we know (and d on’t yet know) about the effect of reducing suspensions on a variety of im portant 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 o f alternativestrategies is relatively thin. In part, this is because many discipline reform s at the state and local levels have only been im plem ented in the last few years. While disparities in school discipline by race and disability status have been well d ocum ented, the evidence is inconclusive as to whether or not these disparate p rac ­ tices involve racial bias and discrim ination. Further, the evidence on alternative strategies is mainly c o r­ relational, suggesting th at m ore research is necessary to uncover how alternative approaches to suspensions affect school safety and student outcomes.

Addressing such questions is vitally im portant, Declines in Exclusionary Discipline (Figure 1) The percentages o f students with a t least one out-of-school suspension a n d with an expulsion declined modestly f r o m 2006 to 2011, the m ost recent y e a r f o r which comprehensive data are available.

NOTE: Numbers are fo r students who are not classified as disabled under IDEA or Section 504.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights 46 EDUCATION NEXT / W I N T E R 2017educationnext.org S C H O O L D I S C I P L I N E STEINBERG & LACOE because a safe school climate is essential for stu d e n t success. A recent N a tio n al C en ter for Education Statistics re p o rt docum ented dow nw ard trends in suspensions, student vic­ timization, and reports o f bullying. Since 2006, out-of-school suspensions have declined, with m ore recent declines in expulsions (see Figure 1). Still, m ore th an o n e-th ird o f teachers in 2012 reported that student behavior problems an d tardiness interfered with their teaching.

Regardless o f the kind o f discipline districts choose to employ, policymakers and school leaders m u st recognize th at school disorder an d violence have adverse effects on all stu­ dents. For example, students who were exposed to H urricane Katrina evacuees with significant behavior problem s experienced sh o rt-term increases in school absences an d discipline problem s themselves. Recent evidence also shows that exposure to disruptive peers during elementary school worsens student achieve­ m ent and later life outcomes, including high school achievement, college enrollment, and e a rn in g s (see “D o m in o Effect,” research, Sum m er 2009). These findings highlight the im portance o f closely m onitoring the effects o f discipline reform o n all students.

Critiques of Exclusionary Discipline Disproportionate suspension rates. There is little doubt that students o f color and those w ith disabilities face exclusionary discipline m uch m ore often th an their peers do. Racial disparities in suspensions begin as early as preschool, w ith black children com prising 18 percent o f enrollm ent in preschools b u t 48 p ercen t o f preschool children experiencing one o r m o re suspensions, according to the federal Office for Civil Rights. These dispari­ ties extend through primary, middle, and high school, where black students comprise 16 p e r­ cent o f all enrolled students b u t 34 percent o f students suspended once (and 43 percent o f students receiving multiple out-of-school suspensions) (see Figure 2). Furthermore, gaps in suspension rates between black students and white students have grown over time, doubling between 1989 and 2010. Youth enrolled in spe­ cial education also experience higher rates o f suspension: in 2011, students with disabilitiesDisproportionate Discipline (F igure 2) (2 a ) D u rin g t h e 2011-12 sc h o o l y e a r, b la ck s tu d e n t s w e re m o re th a n f o u r tim e s as lik e ly as w h it e s tu d e n t s t o r e c e iv e m u ltip le o u t- o f- s c h o o l su sp e n s io n s .

In - s c h o o l One o u t - o f - s c h o o l M u ltip le o u t- o f- s c h o o l s u s p e n s io n s u s p e n s io n s u s p e n s io n s (2b) As a r e s u lt, th o u g h b la c k c h ild r e n c o m p r is e d j u s t 16 p e r c e n t o f s tu d e n t s e n r o lle d in g ra d e s K-12, t h e y m a d e up 4 3 p e r c e n t o f s tu d e n t s w h o r e c e iv e d m u lt ip le o u t - o f- s c h o o l s u s p e n s io n s d u rin g th e 2011-12 s c h o o l y e a r.

E n r o llm e n t In -s c h o o l One M u ltip le E x p u ls io n s u s p e n s io n o u t - o f - s c h o o l o u t- o f- s c h o o l s u s p e n s io n s u s p e n s io n s ■ W h ite ■ B la c k H is p a n i c / L a t i n o 31 O t h e r N O T E S : " O t h e r " s t u d e n t s i n c lu d e A s ia n s , A m e r i c a n I n d ia n s , P a c if ic I s la n d e r s , a n d s t u d e n t s w i t h t w o o r m o r e r a c e s .

S O U R C E : U.S. D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a ti o n , O ffic e f o r C iv il R ig h ts e d u c a t i o n n e x t . o r g WINTER 2017/ EDUCATION NEXT ! " # $ % & ' $ ! ( ! " $ ) $ $ ! ( * ! & + !! & ' ,-..$ +/ ! 0 % 123 / # / ) 4 $5 ! ! $ $ $ & 6 $ " $ ! ' $ +/ 7 / ! ! !! ! 8 $ / ! $ $ / ! - -9 & $ ! $ ! $ ! % $ ) - .- ! ! ) : / ! $ . $ 1 ! ;$ ! < %! $ ! & ( $ $ ! $ ! = $ 8 ! 4 / 5 $ ! ( :+ !; ! ! $ WHILE DISPARITIES IN SCHOOL DISCIPLINE BY RACE AND DISABILITY s t a t u s h a v e b e e n w e l l d o c u m e n t e d, th e e v id e n c e is in c o n c lu s iv e as to w h e th e r o r n o t th e s e d is p a ra te p ra c tic e s in v o lv e racia l bias and d is c r im in a tio n .

th at w ould w arrant higher rates o f exclusionary discipline th a n white peers.

Recent evidence from Arkansas confirm s th at black stu d e n ts a tte n d in g public schools th e re are p u n ish e d m o re harshly th a n th eir white peers, b u t also suggests th a t m ost o f the difference is attributable to the schools th a t stu d en ts attend. Researchers fo u n d that, over the course o f th re e school years, black stu d en ts received, o n average, 0.5 m o re days o f p u n ish m e n t (including i n ­ school an d out-of-school suspension and expulsion days), even w hen controlling for special-education status an d co m paring students at the same grade level. However, they showed th at cross-school differences explained m ostFurtherm ore, schools serving students from neighbor­ hoods w ith the highest crime rates and the fewest social resources predominantly serve African American students; thus, m ost o f the schools in Chicago where students and teachers report the lowest levels o f safety serve a m ajo r­ ity African A m erican student population. These findings suggest the need for increased attention to how neighbor­ hoo d disadvantage influences stu d en t conduct, an d for policymakers and school leaders to consider the kinds o f school resources that could support students facing adverse hom e an d com m unity circumstances.

Overuse o f suspensions f o r m inor offenses. Critics also say th a t exclusionary discipline is used too frequently 48 EDUCATION NEXT / W I NT E R 2017 e d u c a t i o n n e x t . o r g S C H O O L D I S C I P L I N E S T E I N B E R G & L A C O E in response to lower-level, non v io len t stu ­ d e n t behavior. For example, nearly h a lf o f all su sp ensions issued in C alifornia public schools d u rin g the 2011 -1 2 school year were for “willful defiance,” a category o f stu d en t m isco n d u ct th a t includes refusing to remove a hat o r tu r n off a cell p hone, o r school u n i­ fo rm violations. N ationw ide, in s u b o rd in a ­ tio n has ac counted for an increasing share o f all serious discip lin a ry ac tio n s—th a t is, suspensions for five o r m ore days, transfers to specialized schools, a n d expulsion—from 22 p ercen t d u rin g the 1999-2000 school year to 43 p ercen t in 2007-08 (see Figure 3). Over the sam e period, the p ro p o rtio n o f serious disciplinary actions for m o re serious stu d en t m isco n d u ct (such as possession o f alcohol, dru g s, o r a w e ap o n ) dec lin e d fro m 50 to 22 percent.

Negative effects on school climate. A dvo­ cates o f d iscip lin e re fo rm c o n te n d th a t ex clusionary discipline m ay have adverse consequences for school climate. W hile zero- to lera n ce policies aim to im p ro v e school climate and safety by removing disruptive stu­ dents, research evidence finds that teachers and students in schools w ith high suspension rates re port feeling less safe th a n their counterparts in schools serving similar students th at have lower suspension rates. Schools with higher suspension rates also have greater teacher attri­ tion and turnover. According to the American Psychological A ssociation’s Zero Tolerance Task Force, there is no h ard evidence th at exclusionary policies reduce school violence.

W hile the evidence does suggest th at school climate is worse w hen exclusionary discipline practices are m ore widespread, this evidence is not causal. W e d o n ’t know w hether the use o f exclusionary discipline causes school climates to deteriorate, o r if adm inistrators respond to unruly climates by clamping dow n on school discipline.

Therefore, policymakers an d practitioners m u st remain cautious a b o u t th e p o ten tial effects th a t newly im ple­ m en ted reform s may have on school climate and student safety. A nd even if schools reduce their use o f exclusionary practices, it doesn’t necessarily follow th at they will cease to mete o u t these punishm ents disproportionately by race.

Negative effects on student outcomes. Critics also co n ­ tend that exclusionary discipline can trigger a dow nw ard spiral in students’ lives inside and outside o f school, leading to the so-called school-to-prison pipeline. Unfortunately, research on the causal effect o f suspensions o n academicEscalating Response to Insubordination (Figure 3) N ationw ide, insubordination has accounted f o r an increasing share o f all serious disciplinary action— th a t is, suspension f o r f i v e or more days, transfers to specialized schools, a n d expulsion—f r o m 22 percent in 2000 to 43 percent in 2008.

S c h o ol d is c ip lin a r y a c t io n s NOTES: Data are presented by calendar year in which the school year ends. "O the r" offenses include distribution, possession, or use of alco­ hol or illegal drugs, or use or possession of a firearm, explosive device, or other weapon.

SOURCE: Authors’ calculations from U.S. Department of Education, Indicators of Crime and Safety, 2012 achievem ent a n d o th e r stu d e n t outco m es is lim ited.

Students who are removed from school do ten d to have lower achievement on standardized exams; are less likely to pass state assessments; and are m ore likely to repeat a grade, dro p o u t o f school, and become involved in the juvenile justice system. The AASA’s 2014 survey found th at 92 percent o f superintendents believe th at o u t-o f­ school suspensions are associated with negative student outcomes, including lost instructional time and increased disengagement, absenteeism, truancy, and dro p o u t rates.

These correlations, however, do not tell us w hether sus­ pended students would have experienced these adverse outcomes even if they h a d n ’t received suspensions.

Alternative Practices W h a t are the alternative approaches to exclusionary discipline th at are curren tly being im plem ented? A nd w hat is the evidence th a t they “w ork”—th a t is, do they educationnext.org WINTER 2017 / EDUCATION NEXT 49 ! " ! # $ %! & ! !' ! ( ! ) * + + ) ) unintended effects m ight they have o n students?

Program-Based Interventions Targeted programs. Program s th a t use the Response to Interv en tio n (RTI) m odel provide services to specific y outh, w ith th e goal o f pre v en tin g fu r th e r behavioral Typology o f Discipline Policy Reform (Table i)problem s by responding to behavioral issues as they arise.

A key goal o f the approach is to tailor the in tervention to the student: if a stu d en t does n o t appear to re sp o n d to a given approach, a m o re intensive intervention is applied.

W hile one case study by Sarah Fairbanks a n d colleagues in 2007 suggests th a t office referrals decreased following im p lem entation o f RTI, an d teachers ra te d stu d en t m is­ behavior to be less intense an d less frequent, few rigorous evaluations o f RTI have been conducted.

A n o th er targeted p rogram , restorative justice, uses peaceful and nonpunitive approaches to address misbehav­ ior and solve problems in school. While rigorous evidence on the causal im pact o f restorative justice on student o u t­ comes is scarce, Trevor Fronius an d colleagues reviewed the descriptive literature an d found th at all studies d o cu ­ m ented decreases in the use o f suspensions, expulsions, or violent student behavior, as the program was implemented.

Some program s com bine m ultiple approaches, such as the P reventing Recidivism th ro u g h O p p o rtu n ities, M e n to rin g , In te rv e n tio n s, S u p p o rts, a n d E d u ca tio n (PROMISE) p ro g r a m in B row ard C o u n ty , Florida.

PROMISE em ploys b o th restorative justice principles and an RTI approach to prom ote conflict resolution and prevent gang involvement, drug use, and violence am ong students. Q ualitative research by Joan Collins-Ricketts an d A nne Rambo sug­ gests that PROMISE is associated with lower suspension rates. However, given the lack of empirical evidence on the p ro ­ gram, we cannot discern w hether such outcomes result from PROMISE or from other, independent factors. N o r do we know about the im pact o f the program on school climate, order, and safety—or outcom es for students in general.

N ot all studies o f targeted program s show promise. The Reconnecting Youth p ro g r a m p ro v id e d c la ssro o m -b a se d instruction for high school students at risk o f dropping out or who exhibited problematic behavior. Hyunsan Cho and colleagues conducted an experim ental study o f the program ’s impact and found n o significant effect o n delin q u en c y immediately following the intervention or at the six-m onth follow-up.

School-based programs. Schoolwide Positive Behavioral In te rv e n tio n s an d S u p p o rts (SWPBIS) takes a “system s ap p ro a c h ,” targ e tin g a school’s overall social cu ltu re a n d p ro v id in g intensive b eh a v io r su p p o rts, such as functional Level of ImplementationR e fo rm T y p e Programs Policies TargetedR e s p o n s e t o In t e r v e n t io n R e s t o r a t iv e J u s t ic e R e c o n n e c tin g Y o u thE a r ly - w a r n in g in d i c a t o r s y s te m s School-levelS c h o o lw id e P o s itiv e B e h a v io r a l I n t e r v e n t io n s and S u p p o rts (SW PBIS) S a fe and R e s p o n s iv e S c h o o ls" N o e x c u s e s " d is c ip lin e a p p ro a c h e s D istrict-levelT e a c h e r T ra in in g s (M y T e a c h e r P a r tn e r P ro g ra m ) S c h o o l R e s o u rc e O f f ic e r P r o g r a m sD is c ip lin e co d e o f c o n d u c t c h a n g e s 50 EDUCATION NEXT / W I N T E R 2017 educationnext.org STEINBERG & LACOE b e h a v io r a l asse ssm e n ts, id e n tify in g c o n te x ts w h e re beh a v io rs occur, a n d te ac h in g c o m m u n ic a tio n , social, a n d self-m a n ag em e n t skills, as needed. T he ap p ro ach aims to change school culture by setting clear behavioral expectations, designing a c o n tin u u m o f consequences fo r in fra c tio n s , a n d r e in f o r c in g p o sitiv e b e h a v io r.

SWPBIS is o n e o f th e o n ly in te r v e n tio n s s u p p o rte d by stro n g ev a luation research. M ultiple ex p erim ental studies, in c lu d in g th o se by C a th e rin e B radshaw an d R obert H o rn e r a n d th e ir colleagues, find th a t SWPBIS decrea ses sch o o l s u s p e n s io n s a n d im p ro v e s s tu d e n t p e rc e p tio n s o f school safety.

While SWPBIS focuses primarily on building social and em otional skills, the Safe and Responsive Schools (SRS)agreem ents between districts, family courts, an d police departm ents to resolve discipline issues using alternative strategies; an d limit the ability o f SROs to arrest students.

Some school districts have reported decreases in court referrals after im plementation o f SRO programs, especially for m inority students, b u t there is little rigorous evidence on the efficacy o f this approach.

Policy-B ased Interventions In contrast to program matic approaches, some reforms involve changing the policies that guide districts, schools, an d teachers as they respond to student misbehavior.

Targeted policies, such as early-w arning in d ic a to r CRITICS CONTEND THAT EXCLUSIONARY DISCIPLINE CAN TRIGGER A DOWNWARD SPIRAL in STUDENTS' l i v e s insid e and o u ts id e o f school, lea d in g to th e so -ca lle d s c h o o l-to -p ris o n p ip e lin e.

project aims to reduce school violence an d improve stu­ d en t behavior. SRS focuses on preventative efforts, such as conflict resolution an d crafting a civility code, and on developing specific responses to disruptive behaviors, such as behavior-support classrooms as an alternative to office referrals. A descriptive analysis o f four schools using SRS conducted by Russell Skiba an d colleagues in 2006 found overall decreases in suspensions from the first year o f SRS im plem entation to the end o f the fourth year, with larger decreases in suspensions for students w ith disabilities.

D istric t-leve l program s. P ro g ra m s a t th e d is tr ic t level o ften involve re d efining h o w teachers a n d school re so u rc e officers (SROs) in te ra c t w ith stu d e n ts. (An SRO is a law e n fo rce m e n t o r security officer assigned to a school w ho has th e ability to m ake arrests an d re sp o n d to calls for service.) T ea ch er tra in in g p ro g ram s, such as th e M y T ea ch er P a rtn e r P ro g ra m (M TP), pro v id e s u p p o r t fo r te a c h e rs to re flect o n in te ra c tio n s w ith s tu d e n ts a n d develop strateg ie s to a d d re ss b e h a v io r issues to achieve positive outcom es. O n e expe rim en tal stu d y in 2014 by A n n e G regory a n d colleagues fo u n d th a t teac h ers in th e M TP p ro g ra m su sp en d e d stu d en ts less often th a n teachers in th e co n tro l group, a n d w hen suspensions did occur, M TP teachers h a d equal su sp en ­ sion rates fo r A frican A m eric an a n d w hite students.

A nother district-level approach involves working with SROs to im prove interactions with students an d prevent the escalation o f school-based incidents that are referred to juvenile court. SRO program s can provide training for SROs in cultural competence and teen psychology; forgesystems, use large administrative databases to systemati­ cally predict which students will struggle with academics o r behavioral problems, with the intention o f targeting those students early, before problem s escalate. While little impact-evaluation research exists on the efficacy o f early- warning indicator systems in reducing the use of exclusion­ ary discipline, im plem entation research suggests th at if early-warning systems are n o t paired with a behavioral- support approach, they are unlikely to be effective.

School-level policies. Schoolwide disciplinary codes, such as the “no excuses” policies employed in KIPP schools, aim to set high behavioral expectations for all students. U n d e r such a policy, students often receive detentions for m inor infractions (such as u niform violations) and autom atic suspensions for other offenses. While this approach would seem to resemble an exclusionary policy, it aims to remove a sense o f unfairness from the disciplinary scheme by hold­ ing all students to uniformly high standards. Evidence on the impact o f no-excuses discipline on student behavior and suspensions is rigorous, b u t results are mixed. Two recent studies, one by Joshua Angrist and colleagues and another by M atthew Johnson an d colleagues, fo u n d th at a tte n ­ dance at urban charter middle schools with high behavioral expectations is associated w ith a higher n u m b e r o f days suspended relative to attendance at traditional schools in the same districts. A nother study by Philip Gleason and colleagues found no difference in suspensions between charter school attendees and students who did n o t win the admissions lottery. A fourth study by Christina T utde and colleagues found no difference in student perceptions o f e d u c a t i o n n e x t . o r g WINTER 2017/ EDUCATION NEXT S C H O O L D I S C I P L I N E STEINBERG & LACOE th e d iscip lin ary e n v iro n m e n t a m o n g m id d le school KIPP lo tte ry w in n e rs relative to lo ttery losers.

District-level policies. C hanges to d istric t policies g u id ­ in g sch o o l d iscip lin e a n d s tu d e n t c o n d u c t c o n s titu te a direct a p p ro a c h to re d u c in g exclusionary discipline. M a n y states a n d d istricts across th e c o u n try have revised th e ir s tu d e n t codes o f c o n d u c t in re c e n t years to rem o v e h a rs h responses to m in o r disciplinary infractions a n d sh o rten th e length o f suspensions. Revising s tu d e n t codes o f c o n d u c t to re d u c e th e use o f susp en sio n s, particu larly for lower-level offenses, show s p ro m is e as a strategy to red u ce s u s p e n ­ sio n usage (as in a stu d y we c o n d u c te d in Philadelphia).

N otably, n e w evidence fro m N ick M a d e r a n d colleagues in C hicago finds th a t th e re m a y b e few (if any) costs to school c lim a te asso c ia te d w ith re d u c in g th e le n g th o f o u t- o f ­district reform ed its code o f c o n d u c t to lim it suspensions for n o n v io len t a n d m in o r m isbehavior, th e use o f sh o rt­ term suspensions decreased in 60 percent o f Buffalo’s public schools, a n d long-term suspensions dro p p ed in h alf o f them.

Yet black a n d H ispanic stu d en ts c o n tin u ed to receive 80 p e rc e n t o f all suspensions, a n d were 6.5 a n d 3.7 tim es m o re likely to be susp en d ed th a n w hite students, respectively.

T h ird , w h a t are th e im pacts o f discipline policy reform s o n s tu d e n ts w h o are d iscip lin ed , a n d d o re fo rm s have “s p illo v e r” effects o n t h e i r peers? M a k in g sig n ific a n t changes to codes o f c o n d u c t o r im p le m e n tin g p ro g ra m s to shift th e cu ltu re o f a school m a y cause difficulties for te a c h ­ ers a n d stu d en ts, at least in th e s h o r t term . Evidence fro m C hicago in dicates th at, following a district re fo rm aim ed at re d u c in g th e le n g th o f su sp e n sio n s fo r m o re serious WE NEED FURTHER RESEARCH TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF DISCIPLINE POLICY REFORMS: how th e y a ffe c t su spe nsio n use, and also how th e y ch an ge school c lim a te ; in te r a c tio n s a m o n g s tu d e n ts , peers, and te a c h e rs ; and th e a c a d e m ic p e r fo rm a n c e o f all s tu d e n ts .

school susp en sio n s for m o re serious s tu d e n t m isco n d u ct.

N in th -g ra d e stu d e n ts th e re re p o rte d n e ith e r increases in bullying b e h a v io r n o r a w o rse n in g o f p e e r re latio n sh ip s in th e year th e code o f c o n d u c t re fo rm was im p le m e n te d . In fact, stu d en ts re p o rte d th a t stu d en t-teach er tru s t im p ro v ed b y th e second p o st-re fo rm year.

Looking Ahead A cross th e co u n try , discip lin ary p ro g ra m s a n d policies are tre n d in g aw ay fro m exclusionary practices a n d to w a rd a v a rie ty o f altern ativ es, w ith th e e n d o r s e m e n t o f federal a n d sta te g o v e rn m e n ts . Yet th e ev id en ce base a b o u t th e h a r m cau sed b y susp en sio n s, an d th e p o te n tia l benefits o f o th e r a p p ro a c h e s, is s u rp ris in g ly th in . Clearly, th e r e is a g reat n eed for rig o ro u s evaluation research, w h ich sh o u ld focus b o th o n th e im p a c t o f school discipline re fo rm s a n d o n th e ir p o te n tia l u n in te n d e d c o n seq u en ces.

F uture research should address som e key questions. First, is th e refo rm a n effective a p p ro a c h to red u cin g s u sp e n ­ sions? H as it b een im p le m e n te d w ith fidelity? Second, even if reform s succeed in decreasing th e n u m b e r o f suspensions, do th ey also succeed in reducing dispro p o rtio n ate su sp en ­ sion rates b y race a n d disability? D escriptive evidence from Buffalo, N ew York, suggests th a t they m ay not. A re p o rt by Citizen A ction o f N ew Y ork in 2015 fo u n d th a t after theoffenses, school a tte n d a n c e increased a m o n g disciplined stu d e n ts w ith n o adverse effect o n th e a tte n d a n c e o f th e ir peers. T h o u g h th e increase in school a tte n d a n c e a m o n g disciplined stu d en ts led to only very m o d est im p rovem ents in th e ir acad em ic p e rfo rm a n c e o n state re a d in g exam s, it d id n o t have a substantively negative effect o n th e ir peers’ academ ic perfo rm an ce.

W ith f u r th e r re se a rc h fo cu sed o n th e se key q u estio n s, we m a y c o m e to b e tte r u n d e r s ta n d th e im p lic a tio n s o f d iscip lin e p o lic y r e f o r m s —h o w th e y affect s u s p e n s io n use, a n d also h o w th e y c h a n g e s c h o o l c lim a te ; i n t e r ­ a c tio n s a m o n g s tu d e n ts , p e e rs , a n d te a c h e rs; a n d th e ac a d e m ic p e r f o r m a n c e o f all stu d e n ts. C h ild re n n e e d a safe, secu re le a rn in g e n v ir o n m e n t if th e y are to th riv e in school. U n til we fully u n d e r s ta n d th e b e n e fits a n d costs o f th e v a rio u s a p p ro a c h e s to discip lin e, b o th e x c lu s io n ­ a ry a n d altern ativ e, w e will fall s h o r t o f p ro v id in g th a t su p p o rtiv e clim ate.

M a tth e w P. Steinberg is a ssista n t professor a t the U niversity o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ’s G raduate School o f E ducation. Johanna Lacoe is a researcher a t M a th e m a tic a Policy Research.

A version o f this article with f u l l references is available a t educationnext.org.

52 EDUCATION NEXT / WINTER 2017 e d u c a t i o n n e x t . o r g Copyright ofEducation Nextisthe property ofHoover Institution Pressanditscontent may not becopied oremailed tomultiple sitesorposted toalistserv without thecopyright holder's express writtenpermission. However,usersmayprint, download, oremail articles for individual use.