Russell Skiba & Clarissa Snapp

Russ Skiba, Ph.D.
Safe and Responsive Schools Project, IU School of Education

Dealing with Public School Violence and Safety

In his introduction, Dr. Skiba indicated that it is time to consider more comprehensive approaches to behavior management and more effective alternatives to suspension and expulsion (S&E) and noted that the IDOE’s work in this arena is placing Indiana at the forefront in school safety.

Dr. Skiba has been studying data on school S&E since 1995; consequently, the data for this presentation was based on data from 1995 to date. Dr. Skiba indicated that his work cannot be considered as a longitudinal study because the IDOE data collection methods have changed over the years; however, the data regarding S&E for this period shows extreme representation of minorities in the figures, thus raising questions such as: What causes this extreme representation of minorities? How does this data compare to school corporations across the nation? Is this extreme representation of minorities in S&E particular to IN?

Background and Statement of the Problem

In general, S&E is more likely to be used at secondary grade levels, although its use is increasing in middle-grade levels; however, minority disproportionality is greatest at elementary levels. Minority boys are over 6 times as likely as their classmates to be suspended or expelled at the elementary level.

Dr. Skiba stated that when he first began studying this data, there was more use of S&E in urban schools, but now S&E is increasingly being used in all locales. This tool, however, is neither a fair nor an effective discipline method.

At all levels, locations and locales, black children are more likely to suffer from suspen-sion and expulsion, but rates of minority S&E are higher at urban schools.
Interestingly, disparities are not occurring among serious behaviors such as fighting, smoking, skipping class, etc., but in less measurable behaviors such as threatening, unruliness in class, being too loud in class, etc.

From what does this disparity derive? Is it related to socio-economic status (SES)? While this might be a logical conclusion, the effects of race remain after controlling for SES. Do black students misbehave more than their counterparts? Not only is there no supporting evidence that black students misbehave more often, but also black students may be treated more severly for the same offenses as their fellow students.

Dr. Skiba referred to the Color of Discipline study of 2000, which evidenced that black students are sent to the office for less serious or more subjective reasons. It also showed that these same students were treated fairly once they arrived at the office. When these researchers looked at the classroom, they found that when things were getting out of control, for some reason, students who seemed to be in the wrong place at the wrong time got sent to the office instead of the real troublemakers. Why did these scapegoats tend to be black students??????

Dr. Skiba also recommended Bad Boys by Ferguson as being good background reading on this issue.

So, what is at the root of minority discipline disproportionality? While it doesn’t seem to be related to African American enrollment, it seems to originate at the classroom level, might correlate with overuse of S&E, and/ or might be the result of cultural discontinuity based on interactional style of African American males or teachers’ sensitivity to stereotypes.

Outcomes of Exclusionary Methods of Discipline

Dr. Skiba indicated that there are many negative outcomes to exclusionary discipline. This group is at increased risk for negative outcomes and these students tend to be re-peat offenders, thus indicating that exclusionary discipline techniques aren’t working effectively. In fact, suspension acted as a reinforcer of bad behavior rather than a punisher for bad behavior. S&E also correlates positively to the school dropout rate and juvenile incarceration level.

Schools with a lower useage of S&E have higher ISTEP passage and schools with higher usage of S&E have lower ISTEP passage rates. Even controlling for demographics and SES - there is a negative correlation between S&E usage and ISTEP passage.

Are There Alternatives to School S&E?

At the bottom tier or general education level, all kids need instruction in how to behave, thus making a strong case for the use of School Wide (SW) programs for greater student success.

Successful SW behavior programs do three things: 1) create the climate for successful student behavior at school, especially in employing culturally competent classroom management; 2) utilize early identification of behavior problems and early intervention not just at school, but also at home and in the community; and 3) utilize effective responses that are evidenced based.

What do effective principals do to reduce S&E while still maintaining safe schools (based on high-ranking school behavioral climates in IN)?
They do not compromise on discipline, but seek to minimize negative behavior via pre-vention.

How do they achieve this goal?

• Clarify behavior expectations;
• Identify character values expectations;
• Communicate and collaborate with parents and teachers;
• Communicate and connect with students, especially at-risk or alienated students;
• Employ creative options for challenging students - in-school suspension and probationary expulsion instead of traditional S&E, which reinforces negative behavior patterns;
• Refer students who must be suspended or expelled to alternative schools designed to educate suspended or expelled students.

Doing Discipline Differently

Dr. Skiba shared the story of Greenfield Middle School, whose principal cut the school’s suspension and expulsion rates almost in half from 1996 to 2000, while raising ISTEP passage rates over four years from 2000 to 2003: 2000 passage rate of 49.16 (compared to IN State median of 57.28) dramatically raised to 65.61 in 2001 (compared to IN State median of 58.26) and remaining about 3 points above the IN State median in 2002 and 2003.

Dr. Skiba then shared the APA task force recommendations for reducing S&E:

• Implement a graduated set of consequences;
• Teach alternative ways to get along;
• Improve communication and connection with students and their parents; and
• Increase available options.

Dr. Skiba also shared the APA recommendations for reducing disciplinary disproportionality:

• Teacher training in classroom behavior management;
• Reducing cultural mismatch;
• Avoid one-size-fits-all discipline; and
• Use data to transform.

Dr. Skiba talked about the Safe and Responsive Schools (SRS) Philosophy: Increase Resources to Decrease Exclusion; and the LEAD Process, which is addressing disproportionality in Special Ed; but he noted that few efforts are addressing the racial disparities.

How will we reduce racial disparities in S & E?
Dr. Skiba recommended a multi-step process to address inequities in school discipline:

• Form a team;
• Look at the disparity data;
• Develop hypotheses, making sure that they are culturally competent;
• Choose one and develop a plan; and
• Evaluate and adapt.

What questions should we ask when disproportionality is found?

• What do the preliminary data tell us?
• Who will be on the team? When will it meet? What data will be shared? What is the plan for moving toward action?
• How will the team ensure that the topic of race is not avoided?
• What is the schedule for reporting back?

In conclusion, Dr. Skiba reminded the audience that, no matter what each person’s individual theories might be to explain racial disproportionality in S&E discipline, it is most important that we all work to advance and share knowledge for reducing S&E without leaving children behind.

To download Dr. Skiba's powerpoint presentation, please click here.

Clarissa Snapp. MS, MA
Indiana School Safety Specialists (SSS) Academy

Indiana's Bullying Laws

The Indiana SSS Academy was established under the IDOE in 1999. Every school district must have one SSS by law. The job of the SSS is to develop the school safety plan and resource on violence prevention.

There have been more than 1200 SSS’s trained since 1999 with 900 active today.
cf. state laws re. bullying (went into effect in 2005)

IC 20-33-8-0.2 offers the working definition of bullying.

IC 20-33-8-13.5 defines discipline rules prohibiting bullying that are required by law.

IC 5-2-10.1-12 requires safe school committee under school safety specialist. An amendment to school safety specialist training code, added under Section 12 (b)(2) provides for the professional development needs of faculty and staff to implement methods to decrease bullying.

Bullying of students by teachers and teachers or other staff by teachers and other staff is not covered in the law.

Ms. Snapp recommended the Lend a hand, take a stand. Stop bullying NOW. HRSA web site , which offers anti-bullying webisodes online, posters, fact sheets, etc.

The bullying law was put into effect in on 7-1-05. The IDOE Statewide program sent packets out to all schools and is still on school safety web site to be downloaded, including bullying prevention information. There is information and short videos and the staff can accommodate personal visits.

To download a .pdf of Ms. Snapp's "Bullying Law" handout, please click here.

Biographies of the speakers:

Russell Skiba, PhD.
Professor, Counseling and Educational Psychology

Dr. Skiba is a Professor in Counseling and Educational Psychology at Indiana University. He has worked with schools across the country in the areas of the management of disruptive behavior, school discipline, and school violence. He has directed numerous federal and state research grants and has published extensively in the areas of school violence, zero tolerance, and equity in educatio. Dr. Skiba is currently the Director of the Equity Project, a consortium of research projects offering evidence-based information to educators and policymakers on equity in special education and school discipline. He was a member and the lead author of the APA Task Force on Zero Tolerance. His work has been cited in numerous national media sources, including USA Today, Time Magazine, The Wall Street Journal, and Nightline. He has testified before the US Civil Rights Commission and both Houses of Congress on issues of school discipline and school violence. He was awarded the Push for Excellence Award by the Rainbow Coalition/ Operation PUSH for his work on African American disproportionality in school suspension.

Clarissa Snapp, MS, MA
Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy

Ms. Snapp is currently the Director of the Indiana School Safety Specialist Academy with the Office of Student Services/ Indiana Department of Education. Ms. Snapp assists with the coordination of Indiana's statewide bullying prevention initiative and has presented on threat assessment and bullying prevention to school psychologists, school counselors, school administrators, teachers, social workers, parents, and law enforcement officials and at state and national conferences. Clarissa takes her MS from Butler University (Indianapolis) in Educational Administration and Supervision and her MA from DePauw University (Greencastle) in Secondary Education. She holds a K-12 life license in teaching and a 7-12 administrative license.