Menu
» Next Entry (newer): Some thoughts on standardized testing
The Ladder: One idea for serious school discipline problems
April 17, 2004Endless second chances don't exist in the real world, therefore students are not well served in a school environment which gives them endless second chances for serious disruptions.
A recent posting over at Number 2 Pencil got our attention:
Elizabeth Anne Moore, a reading teacher at Trevor G. Browne High School (AZ), claims in a court petition that the 15-year-old student daily tells her in front of other students "to go (expletive) myself." [ . . . ] Tom Horne, state schools superintendent, said Friday that legal action is rare for a teacher, if not unprecedented. "If the facts alleged are true, the student should have been expelled," Horne said.
One classic mistake made by public schools is the lack of consideration to quantity. Sure quality is important, such as if a student sets fire to his desk or injures a teacher we'd advocate immediate expulsion. However, many schools don't tally the lesser suspendable offenses.As a result, there is no limit on how many times a student can be suspended.
Since many students regard suspension as a "get out of school free" card, if that's the only punishment for serious infractions, then there's little incentive for the student to change his behavior. Remember, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
We propose a ladder for serious offenses.
The first principle is that classroom discipline is first and foremost the domain of the classroom teacher, with all petty infractions being handled by the teacher.
Having said that, serious disruptions to the learning environment must be forwarded to a higher level. A five-step ladder can go a long way to eliminating chronic disruption from a school, as the students responsible for such behavior either quickly change their behavior or are expelled. Most students choose to change their behavior.
Here's how the ladder works. For serious offenses, a staff member writes up a discipline referral for the student, including a description of the incident(s) and any steps that were taken before the referral for discipline, such as contact with the parent and discipline measures taken in the classroom.
Each referral will move the student up one step on the ladder, regardless of the staff member writing the referral.
- Student is given a one- to three-day suspension, depending on the seriousness of the offense.
- Repeat step one, but the student must be reinstated by a parent, during which the staff member who wrote up the student can have a brief conference with the parent and the student, to try to stem future incidents.
- Repeat step two, and the student is additionally placed on probation, for one more incident will result in an expulsion hearing.
- Repeat step two. After serving the suspension, the parent and student will attend an expulsion hearing (presided over by board members, administrators, and disciplinary staff). The purpose of this hearing will be again to try to stem future incidents, and to give the student one final chance to change his or her behavior, for the next step will result in expulsion.
- Expulsion. Any questions?
One teacher, who works in an urban public school that uses a very similar ladder, relates a recent incident:
I'd had a lot of difficulty with one 16-year old boy, with him having disruptive outbursts in the classroom, and with him calling me inappropriate names like "boo," "child," "honey," "dear", and "sweetheart" which I most certainly did not appreciate. I'd counseled him privately on his behavior, and spoken with his mother, and he'd insisted each time that he was going to behave.At first glance this may seem a bit cruel, expelling a kid for a bit of yelling and putting his hand in his teacher's face.
One day, he started yelling in my classroom, and walked out into the hallway to be with his friends loitering there, but when I followed and asked him politely to return, he yelled at me, putting his hand in my face, and called me an inappropriate name. He then returned to conversing with his pals.
Though I'd never written him up for any of his previous behavior, this was unacceptable, so I wrote up a referral for discipline. Later that day, he approached me and asked me to rescind my referral (teachers are given this option, at their discretion), because he didn't want to get expelled, as this was his fifth referral. I said no.
Before the end of the day, he again approached me and handed me a very nicely written letter of apology, in which he profusely promised to never misbehave for me again, and would I please rescind his referral, because he didn't want to be expelled.
I told him, "Good luck in your next school."
But the reason why the teacher stood fast and refused to rescind the referral was that this young man had been written up four previous times by other teachers, and still he did not change his behavior.
At some point, we must teach our students that they are responsible for their actions, especially after they've been given fair warnings and second chances.
To do otherwise is the real cruelty.
| ↑ top ↑ | « previous entry | next entry » | ReformK12 home
"At some point, we must teach our students that they are responsible for their actions, especially after they've been given fair warnings and second chances.
To do otherwise is the real cruelty."
Unfortunately, the "self-esteem" mantra permeating the education programs has gained such a strong hold on society that we believe that to hold someone responsible (meaning real consequences for actions) is the real cruelty.
I can hear the educrats now - "But what will become of this young man, now that he's been deprived of his education?"
The response should be, "What would have become of him had the school taught him that putting his hand in his teacher's (boss's, parent's) face and calling names is acceptable or tolerable behavior for success in the real world?"
Expelling this kid teaches him a lesson, teaches the other kids a lesson, and frees the teacher up to actually teach. I'd say that's a win-win-win situation.
Kimberly April 17, 2004 10:44 AMGood in theory... needs some more lower order things like, oh.... Detention maybe? If you could get the Union to agree, maybe some janitorial work around the school might be good, too.
-Michael
Michael E. Lopez April 18, 2004 01:09 PMGood in theory... needs some more lower order things like, oh.... Detention maybe? If you could get the Union to agree, maybe some janitorial work around the school might be good, too.
-Michael
Michael E. Lopez April 18, 2004 01:10 PMFirst of all, that situation was handled very well by that teacher. Bravo! And, fortunately, the administration at that school seems to stand behind its teachers. Bravo for them too!
A point to be made:
"At first glance this may seem a bit cruel, expelling a kid for a bit of yelling and putting his hand in his teacher's face."
Of course, this is the same argument that opponents of three-strikes laws try to use. What the argument misses is: The kid wasn't expelled for a bit of yelling. He was expelled for habitual misbehavior. It's a punishment for a pattern of behavior, as opposed to a single incident. I think some people in the criminal justice profession are finally beginning to admit that criminal acts can't be handled as completely isolated incidents; at some point you have to evaluate the person's pattern of behavior and take action appropriate to that. Otherwise, smart criminals learn to game the system and play off of people's sympathies.
It's the same in schools. Although we can quibble over the specific steps, I think the concept is sound. As in law enforcement, the majority of behavior problems in a school are (usually) caused by a fairly small number of students, but if the situation is left unchecked those students will create trouble far out of proportion to their numbers. The ladder system addresses that. Notice how the student, once finally faced with the consequences of his habitual misbehavior, tried to play off of the sympathies of the teacher. For once, it didn't work. Good show.
Cousin Dave April 19, 2004 05:47 PMOne other comment: From the description, at this school the word "expelled" really means what it says: "you are never setting foot in this school again." At too many schools these days, "expelled" simply means "Take the rest of the year off, you've earned it!"
Cousin Dave April 19, 2004 05:50 PMFirst of all, great website! You have some thought provoking, practical insights to improve schools.
I like the ladder theory, though I agree with Michael that there needs to be some lower level consequences before suspension. Also clear criteria must be established for referral writing since not all referrals are made equal. I noticed that your guidelines take that into account at several levels.
I like the ability to slide up and down the ladder. It leaves the door open to improvement and yet creates a clear path for those who refuse to get with the program.
I know that I used to hope to save every student but I have found that eliminating a few from the environment (who earn the right to leave!) means we create a better chance for some marginal students to hang on.
Perhaps there should be a three strikes rule in public schools?
One thing I've often thought the schools should do is issue a fine to the parents of the kid whenever the child misbehaves. Once the amount of money gets to a certain point, the kid gets out of school (or in school) suspension until the parent pays the bill and meets with the teacher and principal.
linden April 22, 2004 11:09 AMIsn't that what alternative school is for, a place for kids whose behavior is disruptive to the school? Usually staffed by large ex-Marines, if done properly, these kids can experience the kind of externally-applied discipline that leads to self-discipline and a life-altering experience.
What most educational 'progressives' don't want to admit is that there are a few kids who are totally incorrigible and irredeemable. Some can be still saved, but the cost is incredibly high, and if the child makes the choice to rebel and misbehavior chronically, then they should pay the price. You can't save someone against their will, and children over the age of about 10, the 'age of reason', are perfectly capable of making choices and accepting responsibility for those choices. Sure, it's sad when a kid fails and ends up in prison or worse. But the kid himself bears much of the responsibility for the outcome, and if he wilfully chooses to place himself outside of society's norms, then so be it.
Claire April 29, 2004 01:52 PMFor those who are mentioning lower order actions, like detention, I believe that those would come under the "in the classroom" actions before the first rung of the ladder which were mentioned in the article. From my read of it, the ladder seems to be an administrave device, which means that any good teacher would try "in-house" (that's what my physics teacher called them) punishments before resorting to this. Just my two cents. By the way, I love the site.
Adrian June 15, 2004 02:51 AM