Does anyone benefit from exclusionary discipline? An exploration on the direct and vicarious links between suspensions for minor infraction and adolescents’ academic achievement.

Abstract

The intended purpose of exclusionary discipline is to improve the learning environment by removing disruptive students; however, emerging evidence has suggested that these practices may have the opposite effect. Exclusionary discipline—especially policies that use suspensions as punishment for minor, developmentally normative behavioral infractions—is a known threat to suspended students’ academic achievement, but few have examined whether and how these suspensions may vicariously affect nonsuspended classmates’ academic achievement. This article uses a two-study approach to examine the mechanisms linking suspensions for minor infractions and educational outcomes in science (N-student = 558; N-classroom = 41; Mage = 12.83; age range = 10–16; 40% Black, 55% White, 5% other race; 51% girls; 62% eligible for free/reduced-priced lunch) and math (N-student = 1,302; N-classroom = 64; Mage = 13.00; age range = 10–16; 41% Black, 53% White, 6% other race; 50% girls; 64% eligible for free/reduced-priced lunch) classrooms among both suspended and nonsuspended students. Results showed that students who received a suspension for a minor infraction were more likely to have poorer academic achievement in both studies. In classrooms where suspensions for minor infractions were used more frequently, students had lower academic achievement, with student engagement partially mediating this relation. These results add to a growing body of school discipline literature that advocates for replacing exclusionary discipline with more developmentally responsive policies and practices.

Fostering school equity: A racial socialization approach to creating an equitable school climate and reducing disciplinary infractions.

“…School adults’ racial biases and use of unjust disciplinary practices contribute to prejudiced school environments, and emerging literature has shown that school climates characterized by inequitable disciplinary policies have negative consequences for youth regardless of their racial background (Huang & Cornell, 2018; Skiba et al, 2014; Wang, Henry, & Del Toro, 2022; Wang, Scanlon, & Del Toro, 2022). To address such disparities and establish practices that promote equity in the school context, this longitudinal study (a) examined the link between school racial socialization practices (i.e., cultural socialization and promotion of cultural competence as perceived by students) and suspensions for minor infractions and (b) explored whether this link was mediated by school climate.…”

The spillover effects of classmates’ police intrusion on adolescents’ school-based defiant behaviors: The mediating role of institutional trust.

“…Indeed, empirical studies have found that excessive punishment of students can affect the school adjustment of nondisciplined adolescents. For instance, frequent suspensions have been found to undermine nonsuspended students’ engagement and performance in school (Lacoe & Steinberg, 2019; Perry & Morris, 2014; Wang et al, 2022). In a separate but related literature, parental incarceration has spillover consequences that dampen the long-term academic success of children without incarcerated parents (Foster & Hagan, 2016; Hagan & Foster, 2012).…”

Vicarious severe school discipline predicts racial disparities among non‐disciplined Black and White American adolescents

“…Despite widespread research examining the consequences and racial disparities linked to school discipline, we know little regarding how severe discipline toward suspended students may affect their non‐suspended classmates. Within the small literature examining the consequences linked to vicarious school discipline (i.e., spillover effects of school discipline; Lacoe & Steinberg, 2019; Wang, Scanlon, & Del Toro, 2022), most studies do not distinguish between suspensions for minor versus serious infractions (i.e., minor vs. serious infraction suspensions). This distinction may reveal how youth may question the fairness of suspensions for subjectively minor infractions but may equivocally view suspensions as legitimate for serious infractions.…”