Examining Commitment to Prevention, Equity, and Meaningful Engagement: A Review of School District Discipline Policies

IF 1.4 3区 心理学 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions Pub Date : 2020-08-22 DOI:10.1177/1098300720951940
Ambra L. Green, Heather L. Hatton, Sondra M. Stegenga, Bert Eliason, Rhonda N. T. Nese
{"title":"Examining Commitment to Prevention, Equity, and Meaningful Engagement: A Review of School District Discipline Policies","authors":"Ambra L. Green, Heather L. Hatton, Sondra M. Stegenga, Bert Eliason, Rhonda N. T. Nese","doi":"10.1177/1098300720951940","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although there is increasing awareness of policy decisions contributing to disproportionality in exclusionary practices, few studies have empirically examined common elements of discipline policies across the nation. We utilized a methodological review and the Checklist for Analyzing Discipline Policies and Procedures for Equity (CADPPE) to examine the extent to which current policies reflect recommendations from research regarding best practices for encouraging appropriate behaviors and preventing undesired behaviors, as well as correlations between those policies and exclusionary disciplinary outcomes for all students of color and students of color with disabilities. Data came from 147 district discipline policies and disciplinary outcomes (i.e., suspension and expulsion) from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. The analyses indicated the majority of policies do not include most of the research-based recommendations for preventing the overuse of exclusionary practices. Furthermore, there was no correlation found between CADPPE ratings and the risk ratios for exclusionary discipline for students of color and students of color with disabilities. Implications for policy development and implementation and limitations are provided.","PeriodicalId":47652,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions","volume":"23 1","pages":"137 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1098300720951940","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300720951940","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Although there is increasing awareness of policy decisions contributing to disproportionality in exclusionary practices, few studies have empirically examined common elements of discipline policies across the nation. We utilized a methodological review and the Checklist for Analyzing Discipline Policies and Procedures for Equity (CADPPE) to examine the extent to which current policies reflect recommendations from research regarding best practices for encouraging appropriate behaviors and preventing undesired behaviors, as well as correlations between those policies and exclusionary disciplinary outcomes for all students of color and students of color with disabilities. Data came from 147 district discipline policies and disciplinary outcomes (i.e., suspension and expulsion) from all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. The analyses indicated the majority of policies do not include most of the research-based recommendations for preventing the overuse of exclusionary practices. Furthermore, there was no correlation found between CADPPE ratings and the risk ratios for exclusionary discipline for students of color and students of color with disabilities. Implications for policy development and implementation and limitations are provided.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审视对预防、公平和有意义参与的承诺:学区纪律政策综述
尽管人们越来越意识到政策决定会导致排斥行为的不均衡,但很少有研究对全国各地纪律政策的共同因素进行实证研究。我们利用方法论审查和公平纪律政策和程序分析清单(CADPPE)来检查当前政策在多大程度上反映了关于鼓励适当行为和防止不期望行为的最佳实践的研究建议,以及这些政策与所有有色人种学生和有色人种残疾学生的排斥性纪律结果之间的相关性。数据来自美国50个州和哥伦比亚特区的147项地区纪律政策和纪律结果(即停职和开除)。分析表明,大多数政策都没有包括大多数基于研究的建议,以防止过度使用排斥性做法。此外,有色人种学生和有色人种残疾学生的CADPPE评级与排斥性学科的风险比之间没有相关性。提供了对政策制定和执行的影响以及限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: ...offers sound, research-based principles of positive behavior support for use in school, home and community settings with people with challenges in behavioral adaptation. Regular features include empirical research; discussion, literature reviews, and conceptual papers; programs, practices, and innovations; forum; and media reviews.
期刊最新文献
Intensifying Tier 1 Classroom Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Practices to Support Students With Disabilities: A Pilot Study An Adaptation of Stay Play Talk for Young Children Who Exhibit Social Withdrawal Examining Immediate and Sustained Effects of Check-In/Check-Out in Finnish Elementary Schools Examining the Impact of PBIS Experience on MTSS Implementation in Secondary Schools: A Mixed Methods Study Examining Use of the Schoolwide Expectations Survey for Specific Settings to Build Expectation Matrices: A Pilot Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1