Only Viewing School Discipline Disparities Through a Keyhole: Disproportionality in Nontraditional Disciplinary Alternatives

• In Event: 31.057 - Discipline Disparities on the Ground Level: Examining School and Classroom Contributions to Disproportionality

Abstract

Objectives
The objective of this paper is to describe how school and classroom processes of discipline are much more complex than analyses of large-scale databases would imply.

Theoretical and Empirical Framework
The Office of Civil Rights (OCR), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and the United States Department of Education have outlined procedures for collecting and reporting school discipline data. As helpful as large-scale data collections may be in documenting the extent of disproportionality, such data may fail to capture the entire picture of how discipline is acted out in schools and classrooms or its effects on students.

Methods
An embedded multi-case study (Yin, 2013) of four middle schools differing on dimensions of disproportionality and school locale was used for this study. This method was selected because multiple cases are regarded as yielding more robust and compelling evidence (Herriott & Firestone, 1983). Subunits of this inquiry include classroom dynamics, the disposition of teachers, their philosophies of education and discipline, discipline techniques, the referral process, and the overall discipline policy.

Data Sources
This study draws from a larger multi-year analysis of disproportionality in school discipline for African American students among four secondary schools in one Midwestern state. The present study draws from the analysis of interviews, classroom observations and ethnographic descriptions of school features.

Results
School-level outcomes and alternatives involved in the process of discipline are much more complex than national or state data imply. For example, even in schools with documented lower rates of discipline disproportionality, nontraditional disciplinary alternatives may still replicate racial disparities in school discipline. While school discipline is often perceived as a linear process comprised of actions, reactions, and consequences (Mendez & Knoff, 2003), it was found that the process of moving from student behavior to disciplinary response is much more rhizomatic and non-linear than commonly conceived. Classroom and school observations and interviews revealed a more complex array of disciplinary responses that go well beyond traditional categories of office referrals, in-school-suspension (ISS), out-of-school suspension (OSS), and expulsion. Examination of these schools' processes suggested that disciplinary responses can also include nontraditional methods, such as 1) specialized in-house discipline/behavioral programs 2) temporary cross-classroom transfers of students, and 3) negative pervasive classroom dynamics that effect students and their behavioral responses. The data suggest that, despite their status as being "under the radar" of official school disciplinary data, disproportionality persisted in these methods as well.

Significance
The pervasiveness of disproportionality in discipline extends beyond officially counted data reported to state and federal officials. The results of this analysis imply that simply reducing disparities in suspension and expulsion is insufficient for comprehensively addressing racial/ethnic inequity. Comprehensive school and classroom approaches to reducing inequity must look beyond official reported numbers and critically investigate the extent to which other school and classroom systems that are a part of a school’s disciplinary system (Skiba & Rausch, 2006) show signs of inequity.

Author

• Nathaniel A. Williams, Indiana University - Indianapolis