The “school-to-prison pipeline” describes a national trend where students are funneled out of public schools and into the criminal justice system due to zero-tolerance policies that criminalize minor infractions of school rules (ACLU, n.d.). Non-white students, low-income students, students in special education, and academically low-achieving students are most vulnerable to the discriminatory application of discipline (Martinez, 2009). While advocates of exclusionary discipline believe that removing disruptive students from the classroom creates a better learning environment for students and teachers, research shows that suspensions and expulsions do not effectively reduce misbehavior and can even worsen outcomes for students (Kervick et al., 2019). For example, students who are suspended or expelled from school were more than twice as likely to be arrested in the same month (United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2019). Additionally, exclusionary discipline can cause students to disengage with school, feel like they do not belong, and exacerbate feelings of apathy and anger, all of which are correlated to increased recidivism and poor academic performance (Perry & Morris, 2014). Students attending schools with high rates of suspensions also experience lower academic achievement, even if they were not suspended (Perry & Morris). This suggests that exclusionary discipline can create volatile school environments for all students.
While the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was intended to prevent the exclusion of students with disabilities from public schools, students with disabilities are still at a greater risk of exclusionary discipline than any other student subgroup and continue to be excluded from their right to a fair and appropriate public education. According to the United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights (2014, 2019):
- Students with disabilities are more than twice as likely to receive an out-of-school suspension than students without disabilities;
- While students with disabilities make up 12% of the overall student population, they make up 25% of all students involved in a school-related arrest;
- Students of color with disabilities make up 61% of the students of disabilities that were suspended at least once; and
- While Black students with disabilities make up 17% of total enrolled students with disabilities, they represent 39% of students with disabilities who received at least one out-of-school suspension and make up half of all special education students in correctional facilities.
Although discipline has been a part of the American education system since the beginning, we must understand that exclusionary discipline practices do not improve behavior or learning and instead negatively impact all students. We must also recognize that there are effective alternatives that address student behavior without punishing them and denying them their right to an education.
Recommendations
1) Schools must move towards evidence-based alternatives to exclusionary discipline such as positive behavior intervention supports, restorative justice practices, and peer mediation.
Instead of having students be punished and removed from the classroom, students can learn skills related to conflict resolution, communication, mindfulness, emotion regulation, empathy, and accountability; feel empowered to resolve conflicts and boost their self-esteem; and build community with their classmates and teachers. These alternatives not only improve student behavior and foster healthy learning environments, but also increase school safety (United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2019).
2) Schools must partake in transformative justice at the system-level along with implementing restorative justice practices at the individual-level.
We cannot forget that the school-to-prison pipeline is rooted in our country’s long history of racism and ableism. Just under 70 years ago, segregation by race in public schools became illegal under Brown v. Board of Education (1954), and 46 years ago, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (1975) was put into place to protect the educational rights of students with disabilities. Before this legislation was enacted, some children with disabilities were educated in the public schools, some were underserved in public schools –tracked into repetitive menial training programs, some remained at home, and sadly some were institutionalized. Introducing non-exclusionary practices to address student misbehavior will not reform implicit bias that school administrators and educators may hold which isolated, punished, and pushed out students with disabilities and students of color from schools in the first place. It is critical that along with using restorative practices at the individual level, schools and school districts look further into the conditions at their school and in the school’s surrounding community that allowed harm or misbehavior to happen in the first place. This means treating students as individuals within communities rather than as an offender and providing teachers and schools with the necessary resources and support to ensure the student gets help. This also means introducing or abolishing policies and practices that contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline by revising school discipline policies and providing all school staff with necessary training and accountability systems to change and address beliefs and practices related to exclusionary discipline, racism, and ableism.
We must reimagine student behavior reform by shifting towards non-punitive, evidence-based alternatives to exclusionary discipline, and looking at the systemic conditions in schools and their surrounding communities that have contributed to discriminatory and exclusionary discipline. All children have the right to a quality education regardless of their race, disability, and behaviors, and it is important that we work towards dismantling racism, ableism, and punishment in the American education system.
Sabrina Aponte
Sabrina M. Cabaccan Aponte (she/they)
Candidate for Graduate Certificate in Disability Studies at Temple University
M.S. in Social Policy
B.A. in Urban Studies & Urban Education Minor
University of Pennsylvania ’18 & ’19
References
ACLU. (n.d.). School-to-prison pipeline. ACLU. https://www.aclu.org/issues/juvenile-justice/school-prison-pipeline
Kervick, C. T., Moore, M., Ballysingh, T. A., Garnett, B. R., & Smith, L. C. (2019). The emerging promise of restorative practices to reduce discipline disparities affecting youth with disabilities and youth of color: Addressing access and equity. Harvard Educational Review, 89(4), 588-703. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-89.4.588
Martinez, S. (2009). A system gone berserk: How are zero-tolerance policies really affecting schools? Preventing School Failure, 53(3), 153-158. https://doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.53.3.153-158
Perry, B. L. & Morris, E. W. (2014). Suspending progress: Collateral consequences of exclusionary punishment in public schools. American Sociological Review, 79(6), 1067-1087.
The right to education. (2020, December 4). Disability Justice. https://disabilityjustice.org/right-to-education/
United States Department of Education. (n.d.) About IDEA. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/about-idea/
United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2014, March). Civil Rights Data Collection Data Snapshot: School Discipline. United States Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/crdc-discipline-snapshot.pdf
United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2019, July). Beyond Suspensions: Examining School Discipline Policies and Connections to the School-to-Prison Pipeline for Students of Color with Disabilities. United States Department of Education. https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2019/07-23-Beyond-Suspensions.pdf