The School Violence Dilemma

Abstract

Focus group interviews were used to investigate teachers' perceptions of school violence and their sense of safety in schools. Analysis of these data revealed that teachers perceived a discrepancy between their rights to maintain a safe classroom environment and the rights of students in special education to receive a free and appropriate public education. Four major themes emerged: (a) safety in the classroom, (b) disciplinary double standard, (c) limited disciplinary options, and (d) perceived tension in the educational environment. These emergent themes create a complex dilemma for schools as they are faced with balancing their duty to provide a safe working and learning environment with their duty to provide a free and appropriate public education to students with disabilities.

Manifestation Determination Decisions and Students With Emotional/Behavioral Disorders

“…Although participants were unable to agree that the student's behavior was directly related to his disability, they were able to come to a consensus on the word "substantial" when describing the relationship. This supports the research conducted by Bon et al (2006) that found that teachers in disciplinary teams for students with disabilities experienced confusion and conflict as they attempted to decipher the guidelines for disciplining students with disabilities. Without a clear-cut method to determine whether behavior is a manifestation of a disability, team members in this research were also forced to negotiate their own definitions for the language in the guidelines.…”

“…Although the MDR has been described as a dual standard of discipline and an unfair and unjust process for teachers and students alike (Bon et al, 2006;Frick & Faircloth, 2007;Koch, 2000;McCarthy & Soodak, 2007), the general educators in this research were not challenged by this aspect of the MDR provision. Instead, the general educators reported that the process was straightforward and one general educator reported that the meeting seemed to be a fair way of working with students with disabilities during behavioral incidents.…”

“…It has been hypothesized that special education teachers may lack an understanding of functions of behavior and may focus on punitive versus positive behavioral interventions (Buck et al, 2000). There is an absence of research on the preparedness of general educators and the MDR process but perceptions about the process include confusion about procedural guidelines (Bon, Faircloth, & LeTendre, 2006). Requiring teams to carry out difficult tasks in the absence of clear guidelines is likely to lead to unnecessary problems, suboptimal functioning, and arbitrary decisions (Gerstein & Ellsberg, 2008).…”

“…General education teachers on disciplinary teams for students with disabilities also experience a great deal of confusion and conflict as they attempt to decipher the guidelines for disciplining students with disabilities (Bon et al, 2006). Katsiyannis and Maag (2001) suggested that a poor understanding of disabilities, particularly EBD, may lead professionals to conclude that making a decision about whether a behavior was caused by a disability is impossible.…”

“…Concerns regarding equity or fairness also affect MDR team members. The use of MDR with students served by special education is sometimes viewed as a dual standard of discipline that is unfair and unjust for teachers and students alike (Bon et al, 2006;Frick & Faircloth, 2007;Koch, 2000;McCarthy & Soodak, 2007). For example, Dupre (2000) described a case where a middle-school-aged student committed from 11 to 19 aggressive acts per week over a 2-year period, the results of many of which required treatment by the school nurse.…”