Addressing Student Discipline Issues in Schools

Helping students learn to manage their own behavior in ways that promote learning is a long-standing goal for educators. In general terms, discipline is defined as teaching, but in schools, it's often a way to modify behavior so that teaching can occur. In many cases, discipline is a means to punish behavior deemed unacceptable in school.

Creating a Positive Classroom Environment

To foster a positive learning environment, educators should strive to create an atmosphere of fairness, positivity, and consistency. Being approachable and trustworthy is crucial; teachers should be firm, fair, friendly, courteous, enthusiastic, and confident.

Establishing Clear Expectations

Provide students and parents with a clear list of standards and consequences, ensuring they align with district and building policies. Maintain an orderly classroom and learn students' names quickly, using them both inside and outside of class to show you care.

Engaging Students in the Learning Process

Work with the class to determine acceptable behavior and achievement standards. Make learning fun, interesting, and relevant to students' lives. Avoid threats or sarcasm, and never use threats to enforce discipline. Keep your voice at a normal level and give reasonable assignments, avoiding the use of schoolwork as punishment. Keep rules simple.

Understanding the Reasons Behind Misbehavior

In defining student discipline, it's essential to explore the reasons why discipline is necessary. The reasons students "act out" in school are numerous, but some common factors include:

Read also: Executive Orders on Education

Seeking attention and acceptance from peers: Students may "act out" to gain popularity or acceptance from classmates.
Seeking attention and acceptance from teachers or other adults: Students may "act out" to receive a response from a school adult.
Poor self-esteem: Students may "act out" to mask their true feelings about themselves and their situation.
Dysfunctional home life: Students in precarious home situations may "act out" as a way to cry out for help.
Lack of understanding or fear of being wrong: Students may mask feelings of not understanding or fear of being wrong by "acting out" to avoid the subject at hand.
Physical or mental problems: Students may "act out" to cover an undiagnosed physical or mental challenge.
Abuse outside of school: Students may act out due to abuse outside of school.

Strategies for Handling Student Misbehavior

When addressing student misbehavior, it is imperative to handle each case individually. Administrators should thoroughly investigate each incident and be willing to ask questions of all stakeholders. Strategies for handling student discipline are wide and varied. Discipline should be administered carefully and with as little loss of class time as possible for the offending student and their peers.

The LEAST Approach

There are several good methods of classroom discipline. One effective approach is the LEAST Approach, developed by NEA, which helps determine the appropriate level of involvement:

Leave it alone: Sometimes, the best course of action is to ignore minor misbehavior.
End the action indirectly: Use nonverbal cues or proximity to discourage the behavior.
Attend more fully: Give the student your attention and try to understand the reason for the behavior.
Secure more information: Ask the student about the who, what, when, where, and why of the situation.
Spell out directions: Clearly explain expectations and consequences.
Treat student progress: Recognize and reward positive behavior.

The Student Conference

The student conference is an opportunity for the administrator to ask questions of the student in an informal manner. The goal is to get the student relaxed and talking to get to the root of the problem. This is also a great time to have the student reflect on what just happened and upon reflection, hopefully, realize where he went wrong.

Parent Involvement

Parents are high-ranking stakeholders in their child’s education. Involve parents throughout any behavioral situations. Parents can often offer insights that the student would never confide.

Counseling Services

Enlisting counseling services both in and out of school is an effective way to help with student behavior. Counselors can often get to the root of a problem because they employ strategical means to get to the answers we are seeking. There are times when professional help must be sought for our children. Psychologists can assess and monitor students from a different perspective to help root out the cause of the behavior.

Read also: Corporal Punishment in Schools

Additional Tips

Don't refuse to let a student tell you his or her side of the situation.
Don't talk about the misdeeds of students except to those who have a right to know.
Try to keep the student seated.
Be reassuring to the student as well as the rest of the class. Explain the importance of protecting every student’s right to learn.
Send another student for help.
After the incident is over, immediately document everything that happened. This documentation should include time, name(s) of student(s) involved, a brief description of the events that occurred, and any information that pertains to the student(s) or the incident. This report should be submitted to the administration.
If you “blow” the first week, don’t worry. Schedules will be changed without warning and unanticipated events will occur.

Trends in Student Discipline

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) asks public school principals how often certain disciplinary problems happen in their schools during the school year. This indicator focuses on reports of various discipline problems occurring at least once a week. These discipline problems include student behaviors at school as well as cyberbullying. The most recent SSOCS data available are for 2019-20.

Bullying and Cyberbullying

In 2019-20, student bullying and cyberbullying were among the most prevalent discipline problems reported by public schools. Specifically, 15 percent of public schools reported that bullying occurred among students at least once a week. Sixteen percent of public schools reported that cyberbullying occurred among students at least once a week.

Verbal Abuse and Disrespect

Student verbal abuse and other acts of disrespect for teachers were also relatively common. Ten percent of public schools reported student verbal abuse of teachers, and 15 percent reported acts of student disrespect for teachers other than verbal abuse. In addition, 4 percent of public schools reported widespread disorder in the classroom and 4 percent reported student racial/ethnic tensions.

Changes Over Time

Of the discipline problems occurring at least once a week in 2019-20, some problems were more prevalent and some were less prevalent compared with a decade ago. Specifically, a higher percentage of public schools reported cyberbullying in 2019-20 than in 2009-10 (16 vs. 8 percent). Additionally, higher percentages of public schools in 2019-20 than in 2009-10 reported student discipline problems related to teachers and classrooms. Specifically, higher percentages reported student verbal abuse of teachers (10 vs. 5 percent), student acts of disrespect for teachers other than verbal abuse (15 vs. 9 percent), and widespread disorder in the classroom (4 vs. 3 percent) in 2019-20 than in 2009-10.

In contrast, behaviors at school that targeted fellow students were generally less prevalent compared with a decade ago. Specifically, lower percentages of public schools in 2019-20 than in 2009-10 reported student bullying (15 vs. 23 percent), student sexual harassment of other students (2 vs. 3 percent), and student harassment of other students based on sexual orientation or gender identity (2 vs. 3 percent) at school.

Variations by School Characteristics

During the 2019-20 school year, the percentage of public schools reporting student bullying varied by school characteristics. For instance, about 25 percent of middle schools reported that student bullying occurred at least once a week, which was higher than the 16 percent of secondary/high schools, 11 percent of elementary schools, and 10 percent of combined/other schools that did so.

In 2019-20, the percentage of public schools reporting student bullying was generally higher for public schools with higher enrollments. Specifically, a higher percentage of public schools with 1,000 or more students (21 percent) than of those with 300 to 499 students enrolled (13 percent) or those with under 300 students enrolled (9 percent) reported student bullying.

Reports of student bullying also differed along other school characteristics. In 2019-20, about 21 percent of public schools in cities reported student bullying, compared with 13 percent of schools in suburban areas, 12 percent of schools in towns, and 12 percent of schools in rural areas. The percentage of public schools reporting student bullying was lower for those where 25 percent or less of the students were students of color4 (11 percent) than for those where 51 percent to 75 percent of the students (19 percent) and 76 percent or more of the students (16 percent) were students of color.

Cyberbullying by School Characteristics

Public schools’ reports on the occurrence of cyberbullying at school or away from school also varied by school characteristics in 2019-20. Higher percentages of middle schools (33 percent) and secondary/high schools (29 percent) than of combined/other schools (10 percent) and elementary schools (7 percent) reported cyberbullying among students.

The percentage of public schools that reported cyberbullying was generally higher for schools with larger enrollment sizes. For instance, 36 percent of schools with an enrollment size of 1,000 or more students reported cyberbullying, compared with 16 percent of schools with 500 to 999 students enrolled, 13 percent of schools with 300 to 499 students enrolled, and 9 percent of schools with 300 or fewer students enrolled.

Public schools’ reporting of student cyberbullying did not measurably differ by locale or by percent of students of color but did differ by eligibility for free- or reduced-price lunch.

Addressing the Needs of Homeless Students

Homelessness can result in major obstacles to student success. Unstable living conditions and lack of transportation may prevent students from attending school regularly, or arriving in class on time. Lack of clothing, hygiene supplies, or access to laundry equipment may create barriers to adhering to school uniform or dress requirements. Suspensions and expulsions worsen academic outcomes for all students, but are especially harmful for students experiencing homelessness, because homeless students often depend on schools for a safe stable place to be during the day, and a place to receive meals and access to other supports.

Best Practices for Supporting Homeless Students

Require collaboration between McKinney-Vento liaisons and SROs to address student discipline. This could include specific training for the SRO, and engagement with the broader police department.
Engage with community partners to coordinate support for students.
Ensure a student’s housing status is taken into consideration as part of regular practice prior to any decision regarding removal from school, particularly whether or not the student has a safe place to go if suspended.
Provide accessible, alternative dress code options in schools which require uniforms. Use existing funds within the LEA such as Title 1 Part A set aside funds for clothing.
Consider who within the SEA provides support to LEAs on school discipline, mental health, SROs, absenteeism, etc.
Review and revise SEA policies, or submit revisions for SEA review, that encompass practices for students experiencing homelessness.
Provide professional development to homeless liaisons on school discipline practices.
Consider highlighting LEAs and liaisons who can share strategies and best practices that other LEAs could implement.
Utilize additional sources of funding to address the barriers that might be causing students experiencing homelessness to come into conflict with school discipline policies.
Partner with SEA staff to access any available school discipline data for students experiencing homelessness, making sure to compare data among students who are non-economically disadvantaged, economically disadvantaged, and experiencing homelessness.
Provide data to homeless liaisons or help homeless liaisons to access their own LEA data. Provide training or professional development on how to analyze and use the data within the LEA.

State Policies Addressing Disproportionate Discipline

Increasingly, states are changing policies to address disproportionate discipline in schools. Below are examples of state laws, regulations, and policies enacted to curb trends of disproportionate discipline for students experiencing homelessness.

Minnesota: Created a Student Discipline Working Group tasked with analyzing data on suspensions, exclusions, expulsions, and other disciplinary measures, disaggregated by categories including race, ethnicity, homelessness, disability, and foster care status.
Washington: Established and renewed a work group to improve educational outcomes for students experiencing homelessness, in foster care, and exiting juvenile rehabilitation facilities. Includes a review of data on a number of topics including Kindergarten readiness, high school completion, postsecondary enrollment, school attendance, school discipline.
Texas: Eliminates out-of-school suspensions for students experiencing homelessness with the only exceptions related to weapons, violence, and drugs and alcohol. Requires educators to consider mitigating factors such as whether the child is experiencing homelessness or in foster care, prior to making a determination of whether or not to suspend, expel, transfer a child to a disciplinary alternative education program, or place in a juvenile justice alternative education program.
New Mexico: Requires each school board to modify their school discipline policy so that suspensions and expulsions are only to be used as a last resort, following a process which takes into account circumstances such as a student’s homelessness, foster care placement, or other adverse childhood experiences.
Nevada: Requires consideration of homelessness as a factor in any conduct that could lead to exclusion from school, and includes McKinney-Vento liaisons in disciplinary decisions. Increases use of positive behavioral and trauma-informed supports. Allows UHY to participate in their own discipline hearing.

Positive School Discipline

Punitive discipline is associated with negative student outcomes, such as lower academic performance, higher rates of dropout, failure to graduate on time, decreased academic engagement, and future disciplinary exclusion. In contrast, positive school discipline is an important strategy to increase high school graduation rates.

To create physically safe and emotionally supportive environments for all students, schools must adopt evidence-based approaches such as restorative justice that can be used to build and repair relationships while also holding students accountable for their actions.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic continues to take a toll on students’ mental health and well-being. The National Center for Education Statistics found that 56% of school leaders said the pandemic led to increased classroom disruptions from student misbehavior.

Even though school leaders have reported a dramatic uptick in students “acting out,” it is not without valid reasons. Whether it’s the devastating impact of losing a loved one, or the disruptions to routines, relationships, and learning environment due to months-long quarantines, the pandemic resulted in economic and health challenges, increased stress, social isolation, and anxiety for students. As reports demonstrate, school staff has had increasing challenges with responding to student behavior.

The pandemic has ushered in a new era of student discipline, both in and outside of the school building. Public schools report that the pandemic has negatively impacted student behavior and socio-emotional development. There has been a high level of aggressive student behavior - from brawling and bringing weapons to school to cyberbullying and scathing social media posts.

For example, Duval County schools in Florida saw a 47% increase in infractions for fighting in 2021-22 compared with the 2018-19 school year - the last that was unaffected by the pandemic. In Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, the increase was 26%.

Schools must respond, but while a renewed focus on student conduct seems universal, specific challenges can vary from district to district and student to student. Local context, school culture, and school resources are just a few factors at play. For example, some districts are observing fewer but more severe student behaviors. Others report an overall increase in behavior challenges. Some places are practicing zero-tolerance policies and enacting strict crackdowns on students.

Increased Parental Aggressiveness

Another factor worth noting is that parental anger and aggressiveness have increased dramatically since the start of the pandemic. Parents are advocates for their children, of course, which has always been an essential aspect of the student experience. But sometimes they go beyond what is reasonable and in response to disciplinary measures taken by schools because of extreme student behavior, they can become hostile - verbally and physically - threatening educators, school leaders, and even other students and parents. Many observers have found this to be much more prevalent in the last few years.

One reason for the increase may be that the remote education demanded by the COVID crisis prompted parents to contact teachers 24/7, rather than mainly during regular school hours. Inevitably, some of those exchanges are hostile. Commentators have suggested that such unrestricted contacts seem disproportionately “aggressive and accusatory” since the start of the pandemic.

Addressing Disproportionate Discipline

With student behavior currently in the spotlight, it is critical that school leaders not forget about the intersection of behavior and students with disabilities. Sobering data highlight that students with disabilities are still disproportionately subjected to exclusionary discipline compared to other students.

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights issued non-regulatory guidance addressing the disciplinary exclusion of students with disabilities. This guidance should serve as another ringing of the alarm bell. It is time to take tangible action toward reducing disproportionately (of all kinds) in student discipline.

When we examine students with disabilities across categories of race and class, it seems clear that Black and Brown students and students living in poverty are experiencing harsher disciplinary action at much higher rates.

The Need for Mental Health Resources

COVID has also increased the need for mental health resources and support. In many instances, support for students with these needs has been lacking. Any conversation about student behavior should be rooted in equity and mental health.

Creating Equitable and Supportive School Environments

School discipline policies and practices are a critical part of creating a school’s overall climate. Although the rules may be intended to be applied equally regardless of a student’s race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, disability status, or other personal characteristic, harmful school discipline policies are often disproportionately used on underserved students, particularly students of color and students with disabilities.

Harsh discipline practices, such as corporal punishment, restraint, and seclusion can result in serious and life-threatening physical injuries. While districts and schools are supposed to reserve these various school discipline policies for serious offenses, many also employ these measures for minor and subjective infractions, including dress and hair code violations, talking in class, truancy, tardiness, “willful defiance,” and more.

Decisions at the local level can ensure that state and federal discipline policies are implemented with fidelity or can even go beyond current policies by utilizing better or more evidence-based practices. District leaders have the power to set equity-focused policies and develop educator capacity for implementing positive discipline practices.

Key Strategies for Improvement

We can learn from and replicate the successes of states and districts that have dramatically lowered disciplinary exclusions, provided robust therapeutic support for students struggling with mental health challenges, and minimized the presence of law enforcement.
We can ensure that remote learning is used responsibly and ethically and does not contribute to improperly removing students from instruction.
And through targeted legislation, local policies, and school practices, we can eliminate the disproportionate representation of students with disabilities experiencing exclusionary discipline.

Legal Considerations in Missouri

Section 160.261, RSMo, requires the local board of education to establish rules for student conduct and that school district teachers, administrators and staff hold every student accountable for any disorderly conduct in school. The definition of acts of violence and any other acts that constitute a serious violation of the discipline policy. All employees of the district shall annually receive instruction related to the specific contents of the policy and interpretations necessary to implement the provisions of the policy in the course of their duties.

Suspensions are usually for a fixed amount of time with the student automatically returning to class after the suspension is completed. Most penalties under the school district's discipline policy are set by the district’s board of education. The length of a suspension or expulsion is based upon the seriousness of the offense and the student’s past disciplinary history. The building principal is authorized to suspend a student for up to ten days.

School boards have the authority to immediately remove a student upon a finding by school officials that the student poses a threat of harm as evidenced by prior conduct. Among other things, the board may base its determination on past disciplinary actions taken and the student's criminal or juvenile record. A school board may also suspend a student who has been charged with, convicted of, or pled guilty to a felony criminal violation in a court of general jurisdiction whether or not the violation occurred on or off school premises. In the above-mentioned situations, the board must afford the student a hearing before rendering its decision. 167.161, RSMo; Yarber v. McHenry, 915 S.W.2d 325 (Mo.

Student Rights in Missouri

Students have a right under Missouri law to attend school. If that right is to be taken away, the school district must follow certain procedures designed to insure fairness in that decision. If the suspension is ten days or less, the student must at least be given an oral or written notice of the charges. If the suspension is in excess of ten days or an expulsion, state statute requires that the school must provide the student with appropriate due process. Though statute does not define "appropriate due process" the presumption is that the proceeding would be more formal in nature. Appropriate due process must also be provided to a student when academic credit earned by that student has been removed for disciplinary reasons.

State statute requires all public school boards, as part of the district's written discipline policy, to include a statement on the use of corporal punishment within the district. If the district uses corporal punishment as a form a discipline, the local board of education must adopt a policy regarding the use and administration of corporal punishment.

tags: #students #discipline #issues