This article addresses long-standing data from federal government agencies documenting concerns regarding the use of school discipline and suspension indicating that Black students are referred for discipline and/or suspended at a higher rate than students of other ethnicities. Available data from a local school district reflected similar troubling patterns of discipline referral and suspension. The purpose of this study was to determine if variables such as students’ ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and gender predicted the likelihood of receiving discipline referrals or being suspended at an affiliated charter high school in a local school district. Guided by Bandura’s social learning theory and Skinner’s behaviorism, this correlational explanatory quantitative study examined archival school discipline data for 2,536 students enrolled (n = 1,570 students who received at least one discipline referral or suspension) during the 2013–2014 school year at a local high school. Binomial logistic regression results showed that Black students from low socioeconomic backgrounds were significantly more likely to be suspended compared to other ethnicities. Negative binomial regression analysis indicated students who were Black, male, and were from low socioeconomic backgrounds were at significantly greater risk of receiving a referral than other ethnicities. These results suggest that by investigating school discipline patterns, disproportionality can be identified and later addressed in a manner that respects the unique needs of all students. <br /><em></em>
The Eleventh Circuit issues numerous unpublished decisions in criminal cases each term. However, these cases are not accessible through computer assisted legal research, such as Westlaw or Lexis. 3. 530 U.S. 466 (2000). In Apprendi the Supreme Court held, "[oither than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt." Id. at 484. This holding has been applied to numerous federal statutes, including 21 U.S.C. § 841. See infra Part IV.B.2. 4. From June 26, 2000 (when Apprendi was decided) through the end of 2000, almost 200 federal district and circuit court opinions were reported that cited Apprendi. Also, in 20011 III. CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL APPLICATION PRINCIPLES A. U.S.S.G. Section 1B1.3(a)(1)(B)-Relevant Conduct (Reasonably Foreseeable Acts of Others) In addition to being accountable for one's own acts, U.S.S.G. section 1B 1.3(a)(1)(B) holds defendants liable for "all reasonably foreseeable acts and omissions of others in furtherance of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, that occurred during the commission of the offense of conviction, in preparation for that offense, or in the course of attempting to avoid detection or responsibility for that offense." 34 As more fully discussed under the robbery guidelines section of this Article, 35 section 1B1.3(a)-(1)(B) was applied to hold a defendant liable for his accomplice's acts of carjacking and kidnapping in United States v. Cover. 36 In Cover the district court found that the carjacking and kidnapping were reasonably foreseeable to defendant. 37 The district court reasoned that "pretty much anything that happens" when a defendant robs a bank .with firearms and with other people intending to do whatever is necessary to effect that robbery" is reasonably foreseeable to all the defendants. 3 " In finding that this reasoning was "sound," the Eleventh Circuit rejected defendant's argument that his accomplice's carjacking and kidnapping were not foreseeable to him because he "had brought his car to the bank to be used as the getaway car." 39 The court explained that "[tihe fact that the co-conspirators agreed to a plan that did not involve carjacking or abduction does not preclude the district court from finding that cayjacking and abduction were reasonably foreseeable if 'the original plan went awry' and the police became involved." 4 The court noted that "an act is reasonably foreseeable if it is 'a necessary or natural consequence of the unlawful agreement.'" 4 1
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.