NCJ Number
240394
Journal
Journal of School Violence Volume: 11 Issue: 2 Dated: April - June 2012 Pages: 174-186
Date Published
April 2012
Length
13 pages
Annotation
In this commentary on the special series, the author argues that whereas a zero-tolerance approach to school discipline is "something stupid" (Kauffman & Brigham, 2000) the use of suspension might not be.
Abstract
In this commentary on the special series, the author argues that whereas a zero-tolerance approach to school discipline is "something stupid" (Kauffman & Brigham, 2000) the use of suspension might not be. Despite its limitations, suspension and other forms of punishment serve as effective deterrents of behavior problems for most children, especially when they are combined with positive and proactive alternatives to suspension. Too often, advocates of those alternatives fail to recognize why suspension is valued by educators, while also making the mistake of advocating for alternatives that have their own limitations and share the same aim of suspensionobedience and compliance to adults and rules. Typically, those alternatives are less effective and efficient than suspension in achieving that aim. Thus, educators reject them. Instead of advocating for the elimination of the use of suspension, it might be wiser for researchers to advocate for a combination of evidence-based techniques (both positive and punitive) that not only prevent and reduce behavior problems but also foster self-discipline and a positive school climate. Abstract published by arrangement with Taylor and Francis.