SafetyWithout Suspensions

Many schools are reducingsuspensions and expulsionsthrough a comprehensive approachcalled School-wide PositiveBehavioral Support.

Russell Skiba and Jeffrey Sprague

Disruptive behavior consistently tops the list ofteachers' and parents' concerns about education.ln an effoit to address this concern, many U.S.schools began adopting zero-tolerance policiesin the L990s, which led to substantial increases

in out-of-school suspensions and expulsions (Wald &r Losen,20Û3)- These policies have sparked controversy because oíracial disparities in suspension and expulsion rales as well asincidents in which students have been suspended or expelledfor seemingly trivial infractions, such as making a paper gun(American Psychological Association, 2006). In today's climate,principals seem to face a tough choice between keeping theirschool safe and ensuring that all students have continuededucational opportunity.

But do these two goals have to be mutually exclusive? If, asresearch suggests, exclusionary, zero-tolerance approaches toschool discipline are not the best way to create a safe climate, howcan school leaders maintain discipline and safety? School-widePositive Behavior Support is one effective, positive approach.

Exclusionary Approaches to DisciplineLet's first look at two frequently used disciplinary methods.Suspension refers to the relatively short-term removal of

38 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP/SEPTEMBER 2008

students from schooi for a disciplinary infraction. Suspensionis among the most widely used disciplinary procedures inschools today The Frequency of suspension appears to varygreatly among schools: Studies of school suspension at thelocal level have reported rates of suspension ranging from 9percent to 92 percent of the student body; one statewidestudy reported that 10 percent oí schools were responsible for50 percent of the suspensions in the state (Skiba &r Rausch,2006).

Expulsion, used far less frequently than suspension, refers toa more procedural removal of a student, for a longer period oftime, typically involving a decision by the superintendent andschool board. Most often, 10 days is considered the dividingline between suspension and expulsion, but schools some-limes expel students for a semester, a year, or longer (Skiba,Eaton, &r Sotoo, 2004).

Suspension and expulsion are used more at the middle andhigh school levels than at the elementary school level; urbanschools use these methods more often than suburban or ruralschools do; boys are more likely to be suspended or expelledthan girls are (Skiba & Rausch, 2006).

A Devil's BargainClearly, schools have a right and responsibility to use all effec-tive means to ensure that students can learn and teachers canteach. Yet school suspension and expulsion are something ofa devil's bargain, lt is hard to justify interventions that rely onexcluding a student from school when we know that timespent in learning is the single best predictor of positiveacademic outcomes.

For principals, the question becomes one of costs andbenefits. Does the removal of troublesome students fromschool reduce disruption and improve school climate enoughto offset the inherent risks to educational opportunity andschool bonding? Research indicates that the answer is no.

Poor OutcomesIf anything, the data indicate that disciplinary removal hasnegative effects on student outcomes and the learning climate.Students suspended in 6th grade are more likely to receiveoiïice referrals or suspensions by 8th grade than students whohad not been suspended, prompting some researchers toconclude that suspension may aci more as a reward than as a

A S S O C I A T I O N FOR S U P E R V I S I O N A N D C U R R I Í . U I Ü M DtfviM O I - M I N I 39

The challenge for edi|cationleaders is to implement more 'effective, less exclusionarymethods for maintaining safe,productive school climates.

punishment for some students(Tobin, Sugai, &r Colvin, 1996).

Studies have found schoolsuspension to be moderatelyassociated with higher dropoutrates (Ekstrom, Goertz, Pollack,& Rock, 1986). In some cases,suspension may be used to ridthe school of perceived trouble-makers. Yet, counted niuitively,purging the school of suchsttidents does not appear to improveschool climate. Schools vvith higher ratesof scbool suspension tend to have loweracademic quality, pay significantly lessattention to school climate, and receivelower ratings on quality of schoo! gover-nance measures (.Amedcan PsychologicalAssociation, 2006). Most important,emerging data indicate that schools v ithhigher suspension and expulsion rateshave lower outcomes on standardizedachievement tests, regardless ofeconomic level or student demographics(Da\is & Jordan, 1994; Skiba & Rausch,2006),

Inconsistent ImplementationResearch shows that school suspensionand expulsion are applied inconsistentlyacross schools and school distdcts. Thatinconsistency appears to be connected asmuch to classroom, school, and principalcharacteristics as to student beha\áor.

We often assume that schools reservesuspension for serious offenses, such asfighting. But schools actually usesuspension in response to a wide range

i

of behaviors, including tardiness andtruancy, disruptive behavior, non-compliance, and msubordination. Onlya small percentage of suspensions occurin response to behaviors that threatenschool safety or security (Heaviside,Rowand, Williams, &r Farris, 1998).

Further, who gets suspended orexpelled depends not only on studentcharacteristics and behavior, but aiso onschool factors. The quality of schoolgovernance, demographics, and staffattitudes all play roles in determining therates of school disciplinary actions. It isnot surprising, for instance, that princi-pals who favor zero tolerance havehigher rates of suspension and expulsionin their schools (Advancement Project &rCivil Rights Project, 2000; Skiba &Rausch, 2006).

Unfair ApplicationResearch has found a high degree ofracial dispanty in school suspension andexpulsion. Black students are consis-tently suspended at rates two to threetimes higher than those ior other

students, and they are similarly over-represented in office referrals, expul-sions, and corporal punishment (Skiba,Michaei, Nardo, & Peterson, 2002).Race remains a significant contributor tothe likelihocid of being disciplined inschool, even after controlling statisticallyfor poverty (Skiba et al., 2002; Wallace,Goodkind, Wallace, & Bachman, in press).

Such discrepancies are not due tohigher rates of misbehavior by blackstudents. If anything, black students arepunished more severely for less seriousand more subjective infractions (Skibaet al , 2002), The overrepresentation ofblack students appears to begin at thestage of office disciplinary referrals fromclassroom teachers. Some evidencesuggests that tbese disparities are causedat least in part by cultural mismatch orinsufficient training in culturally respon-sive classroom management (Townsend,2000; Vavrus & Cole, 2002).

An Effective AlternativeIn our work with schools and schooldistricts throughout the United States,

40 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP/SEPTEMBSR 2008

we have observed thai school adminis-trators do not use suspension and expul-sion because they wish to removestudents from the opportunity to leam.Rather, most administrators turn toschool exclusion as a disciplinar)' toolbecause they need to do something anddon't know what else to do. Principalsarc looking for effective, practical alter-natives to suspension and expulsion.

One such alternative is a comprehen-sive, proactive approach to disciplinecommonly known as School-wide Posi-tive Behavior Support. This approach isbased on the assumption that wheneducators across the school activelyteach, expect, and acknowledge appro-priate behavior, the proportion ofstudents with serious behavior problemsdecreases and lhe schools overall climateimproves.

The process for adopting andsustaining School-wide Positive BehaviorSupport typically revolves around aschool team composed of 5-10 individ-uals, including an administrator, repre-sentative staíí members, and family andcommunity members, as well asstudents at the secondary level. Thisgroup, representing all school stake-holders, Ieams the key practices ofSchool-wide Positive Behavior Supportand sets goals for improvement. Theteam members then function as leadersor coaches during the improvementprocess. The team generally meets aboutonce a month.

School-wide Positive BehaviorSupport has three main components thatwork together: prevention, multitieredsupport, and data-based decisionmaking.

Preven (ionEffective prevention depends on(1) defining and systematically teachingschoolwide core behavioral expectationsand (2) establishing a consistent systemto acknowledge and reward appropriatebehavior, such as compliance withschool rules, safe and respectful peer-to-

peer interactions, and academic effort.For example, at Kennedy Middle

School in Eugene, Oregon, the imple-mentation team adopted the general ruleframework of Be Safe, Be Respeaful andBe Responsible. Teachers directly taughtlessons throughout the year on thepatterns of behavior associated withthese personal qualities. In addition, theschool posted the rules in haliways andclassrooms, in school newsletters, in thelocal media, in the morning announce-ments, and during assemblies. Theschool also established a consistentsystem of enforcement, monitoring, andpositive reinforcement to enhance theeffects of rule teaching and maintain

School suspensionand expulsionare something ofa devil's hargain.

patterns of desired student behavior. Alladults in the building gave tickets tostudents whom they observed followingschool rules; each ticket had a picture ofthe school mascot and a statement of thespecific rule the student had followed.These tickets were redeemable forrewards and were backed up withweekly drawings and rewards for theteachers of exemplary students as well.

Multitiered SupportA second important component ofSchool-wide Positive Behavior Supportis establishing a consistent, multitieredcontinuum of consequences andsupportive reteaching for students whoexhibit problem behavior. The greaterthe student's need for support, the moreintense the support provided.

Schools with clear rule and rewardsystems and businesslike, predictablecorrections and sanctions experiencefewer discipline problems. When rules

are consistent with stated expectationsand are applied fairly, students develop arespect for rules and faws and believethat the system of governance works.

Kennedy Middle School redesigned itsoffice discipline referral form to clearlydefine minor versus major behavioralviolations. When a teacher or staffmember observes a minor behaviorproblem, be or she first reminds thestudent of a school rule using a calm,respectful voice: "Hold on, Billy. You arerunning. Tell me the rule about hall-ways." Usually, Billy responds with therule, but if he either can't or won't, theadult tells him the expectation and hashmi repeat it: "Oh yeah! Walk in thehallways." The adult then asks why("Because it's safe!") or reminds him howthe behavior connects to the broaderschoolwide rule. The adult then asks thestudent to "show me how you walk inthe hallway" and praises him if he issuccessiul. If the student continues tomisbehave or does not comply, the adultgives a brief warning and small conse-quence, such as loss of a privilege.

For major problems (includingchronic minor misbehavior), the studentis sent to the administrator in charge ofdiscipline, who develops an appro-priate, individualized consequence andreteaching plan. Kennedy staff membersdecided that a predetermined, inflexibleset of consequences for problem behav-iors would be less effective than asystem of consequences and reteachmgadapted to the unique needs of eachstudent.

Data-Based Decision MakingData-based decision making is inter-woven throughout School-wide PositiveBehavior Support. Access to regular,accurate information about studentbehavior enables educators to design themost effective preventive and reactivesupports. The approach requires thatschools adopt practical strategies forcollecting, summarizing, reponing, andusing data on regular cycles.

A S S O C I A T I O N F O R S U P E R V I S I O N A M I C U R R I C U I U M D u v h i o p M F N T 4 1

More than 6,000schools across theUnited States nowactively implementSchool-widePositive BehaviorSupport.

Kennedy Middle School adopLed aWeb-based system for tracking disci-pline patterns called the School-wideInfon-nation System. The school devel-oped and adopted a standard officereferral form, whicb the school secretaryuses to enter the data weekly. Theadministrator and Positive BehaviorSupport team members review the datamonthly and report any patterns at themonthly staff meeting. The reportsinclude the total number of referrals,suspensions, and expulsions (comparedwith previous years and disaggregatedby race); types of behaviors; location ofthe incidents; time of day; and the

proportion of students with 0-1, 2-5,or 6 or more referrals. Using these datapatterns, ihe school develops andimplements strategies to reduce thespecific problems revealed.

Evidence of EffectivenessMore than 6,000 schools across theUnited States now actively implementSchool-wide Positive Behavior Support.These schools are reporting reduciionsIn problem behaviors, improved percep-tions of school safety, and improvedacademic outcomes.

A series of studies has documentedsome of the effects of the interveniion inelementary and middle schools(Metzler, Biglan, Rusby, & Sprague,2001; Sprague et al . 2002). Studieshave shown dramatic reductions inoffice discipline relerrals tup to 50percent), with continued improvementin schools that sustain the intervention(Irvin, Tobin, Sprague, Sugai, &Vincent, 2004). In addition, school staffmembers report greater satisfaction wilhwork and increased time for teaching(Scott & Barrett, 2004). Administratorsreport more time to provide support tothe most at-risk students. Student

ratings of school climate and inter-persona! interactions improve, andstudenls reporl lower levels oí aggres-sion and engagement in risk behavior(Metzler et al., 2001). Comparisonschools consistently show increases orno change in office discipline referrals,along with general frustration with theexisting school discipline programs.

Safe Schoois Without ExciusionShocking acts of violence in U.S.schools have caught (he nation's atten-tion and made it clear that maintainingthe safety and integrity of school climatemust be one of the country's highestpriorities in education. As we continueto gain new understandings about thelink between student behavior andachievement, the challenge for educa-tion leaders is to implement more effec-tive, less exclusionary methods formaintaining safe, productive schoolclimates.

Evidence shows that School-widePositive Behavior Support can changethe trajectory of students who are on apath loward destructive outcomes, aswell as prevent the onsel of negativebehavior in typically developingstudents. More and more schools arefinding that such comprehensive,systemic programs can reduce schooldismpiion and improve school climatewithout reducing students' opportunityto learn. S!

ReferencesAdvancement Project & Civil Rights Projecl.

(20001 Opportunities suspended: Thedevastating conséquences of zero toleranceand school (/isc"i(i/iiif policies. Cambridge,MA: Harvard Civil Rights Projecl,

American Psychological Association ZeroTolerance Task Force. t2006). Are zerotolerance policies tffeclivc in ihe schools?Washington, DC: American PsychologicalAssociation. Available; wwM-'.apa.org/ed/cpse/zt Lfrepo ri. pd f

Davis, J. E., & Jordan, WJ. (.1994). Theeffects of school context, structure, andexperiences on African American males inmiddle and high schools. Jouintil oj NegroEducation, 63, 570-587.

42 EDUCATIONAL LE.^DERSHIP/SEPTEMBER 2008

Eksirom, R. B.. Goenz, M. E„ Pollack, J. M„& Rock, D. A. (1986). Who drops outand why? Findings from a national study.Teachers Colkge Record, 87, 35^373.

Heaviside, S., Rowand, C, Williams, C , &Farris, E. (1998). Violence and disciplineproblems in V.S. Public Schuols: 1996-97(NCES 98-030). Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Education. NationalCenter íor Education Statistics.

Irvin, L. K,, Tobin, T. J., Sprague, J. R.,Sugai, G.. & Vincent, C, G, (2004).Validity oí office discipline referral meas-ures as indices of school-wide behavioralstatus and effects of school-wide behav-ioral inlervenlions.Journüít)/PositiveBehavior Intei-veniions, 6(3), 131-147.

Metzler, C. W, Biglan. A.. Rusby. J. C , &Sprague. J. R. (2001). Evaluation of acomprehensive isehavior managementprogram to improve schooi wide positivebehavior support. Education and TreatmerKo/Chiicia-n, 24(4), 448-479.

Scott, T. M., & Barrett, S. B. (2004). Usingstaff and student time engaged in discipli-nary procedures to evaluate ihe impact ofschool-wide PBS. Joumal oj PositiveBehavior ¡nlcrventions, 6(1), 21-28.

Skiba, R.J.. Eaton, J.. drSotoo. N. (2004).Factors associated with state rates ojout-oj-school .suspension and expulsion. Bloom-ington. IN: Center for Evaluation andEducation Policy AvaiLibIc: hiip://ceep,indlana.edu/ChildrenLeitBehind/pdl72b.pdf

Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C , &Peterson, R. (2002). The color of disci-pline: Source.s of racial and genderdisproportionality in school punishment.L/rban Rfviw, 34, 317-342.

Skiba. R. J., &• Rausch, M. K, (2006). Zerotolerance, suspension, and expulsion:Questions of equity and effecriveness. InC. M. Evenson ¿¿r C, S. Weinstein (.Eds.),Handbook oJ classroom management:Research, practice, and contemporary issues(pp. 1063-1089). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,

Sprague, J. R., Walker, H., Golly, A., White,K., Myers, D. R., ¿r Shannon, T (2002).Translating research into effective prac-

tice: The effects of a universal staff andstudent intervention on key indicators ufschool safety and discipline. Education andTreatment oj Children. 24(4), 495-511.

Tobin, T, Sugai, G., & Colvin, G. (1996).Patterns in middle schooi disciplinerecords, journal oj Emotional and Behav-ioral Disorders, 4, 82-94.

Townsend, B. (2000). Disproportionatediscipline of African American childrenand youth: Culturally responsive strate-gies for reducing school suspension andexpulsions. Exceptional Childn^n, 66,381-391.

Vavrus, E, & Cole, K. (2002). "I didn't donothin'": The discursive constmction ofschool suspension. The Urban Review, J-í.87-111.

Wald, J., & Losen, D. J. (2003). Defmingand redirecting a school-to-prisonpipeline, ln J. Wald & D. J. Losen (Eds.),Deionstructing the school-to-prison pipeline:New directions joryouth development, no. 99(pp. 9-15), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Wallace, J. M.,Jr, Goodkind, S. G., Wallace,C. M,. (Sr Bachman, J. (in press).Racial/ethnic and gender differences inschool discipline among American highschool students: 1991-2005. NegroEducational Review.

Authors' note: More information onSchool-wide Positive Behavior Support isavailable from the U.S. Depanment ofEducations Office of Special EducaiionPrograms at www.pbis.org. This informationincludes links to district and state initiativessupporting the dissemination of School-widePositive Behavior Support (see www.pbis,org/map.htm),

Russell Skiba is Professor of Counselingand Educational Psychology and Directorof the Equity Project at the Center forEvaluation and Education Policy, IndianaUniversity; skiba@indiana.edu. JeffreySprague is Professor of Special Educa-tion and Director of the Institute onViolence and Destructive Behavior,University of Oregon; jeffs@uoregon.edu.

EL inline

For an example of School-wide Positive Behavior Support in action, go tothe September issue of Educational Leadership online at wwv^/.ascd.org/el."A Lunchroom Solution," by Lori Korinek, describes how an elementaryschool in Virginia achieved a 30-percent reduction in discipline referrals intwo years after implementing School-wide Positive Behavior Support.

Viva La Causa!A New

Documentary Filmabout the DelanoStrike and Grape

Boycott Led by CésarChavez and Dolores

Huerta

GRADES 7 AND UP

Teacher's guide supportsstandards for social

studies and language arts

FREE TO SCHOOLS!

Order your FREE copy atwww.teachingtolerance.org/lacausa

TEACHINGTOLERANCE

A PROJECT OF THESOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER

ASSOCIATION FOR SUPI^RVÜION AND

CHRRIC m DM D l - v r i D T M i N I 4 3