Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

School discipline

School discipline refers to the rules, evidence-based strategies, and practices applied within educational settings to manage student behavior, encourage self-regulation, and create orderly environments that support academic instruction and safety. Historically, school discipline emphasized corporal punishment, such as caning or switching, which was commonplace from colonial times through much of the 19th and early 20th centuries to enforce compliance and deter misconduct. Over time, methods evolved toward exclusionary measures like suspensions and expulsions, particularly with the rise of zero-tolerance policies in the late 20th century, though empirical analyses indicate that moderately strict enforcement—balancing clear rules with consistent consequences—yields better behavioral and academic outcomes than either overly punitive or permissive approaches. Contemporary practices increasingly incorporate positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), focusing on proactive teaching of expectations and reinforcement of appropriate conduct, which studies link to reduced disruptions when implemented with fidelity. However, evidence on effectiveness remains mixed: while strict discipline in high-performing charter schools correlates with improved achievement by minimizing chaos, broad reforms reducing suspensions have sometimes failed to curb misbehavior and may amplify offending trajectories for at-risk students. A defining controversy involves racial disparities in discipline rates, with Black students facing higher suspensions for similar infractions like disobedience; yet, longitudinal data reveal that elevated teacher-reported behavioral problems among Black and Hispanic students—often rooted in socioeconomic factors and self-regulation deficits—account for much of the gap, rather than solely adult bias. This underscores causal realities: unchecked disruptions impair learning for all, necessitating discipline that prioritizes empirical outcomes over equity mandates that overlook behavioral antecedents.

Definitions and Purposes

Core Concepts and Definitions

School discipline encompasses the structured approaches used in educational settings to guide student conduct, enforce behavioral standards, and cultivate habits of self-control essential for learning and social integration. It involves establishing clear rules, monitoring compliance, and applying consistent consequences to address deviations, thereby minimizing disruptions and fostering an orderly environment where academic instruction can proceed effectively. This framework draws from the inherent need for authority in collective settings, where unchecked impulses would otherwise undermine group functioning, as evidenced by correlations between firm rule enforcement and higher student achievement rates in longitudinal studies. Key distinctions within school discipline include external versus internal regulation: external discipline relies on teacher-directed interventions, such as verbal corrections or sanctions, to shape immediate behavior, while internal or self-discipline emerges as students internalize norms through repeated exposure and reasoning, enabling autonomous adherence without constant oversight. Preventive strategies, like proactive rule-setting and positive reinforcement, aim to avert misbehavior by building positive habits, contrasting with reactive punitive measures that respond to infractions with penalties proportional to the offense's severity. Empirical analyses highlight that effective discipline balances these elements, prioritizing consistency over severity to promote long-term behavioral adaptation rather than mere suppression. Authority in school discipline derives from the institutional mandate to prepare individuals for societal roles, grounded in the causal link between enforced boundaries and cognitive development; without it, environments devolve into chaos, as observed in comparative data from structured versus lenient systems showing elevated absenteeism and lower test scores in the latter. Concepts like proportionality ensure responses match infractions—minor disruptions warrant mild rebukes, while serious violations, such as violence, justify exclusionary actions like suspension to protect the collective—to avoid escalating conflicts or eroding deterrence. Overall, school discipline functions as a microcosm of broader social order, emphasizing causal accountability where actions predict foreseeable outcomes, thereby training responsibility over time.

Rationales Grounded in First Principles

Discipline in schools addresses the fundamental reality that human learning, particularly in group settings, requires sustained attention and minimal interference, which young children—whose prefrontal cortices are immature and prone to impulsivity—cannot reliably self-impose without external guidance. From causal mechanisms rooted in behavioral conditioning, consistent enforcement of rules establishes clear boundaries, enabling students to internalize expectations through repeated exposure to consequences, thereby fostering habits of focus and compliance essential for knowledge acquisition. Without such structure, disruptions proliferate, as evidenced by studies showing that unmanaged classrooms lose significant instructional time—up to 20-30% in high-disruption environments—directly correlating with reduced academic gains across subjects. A core principle lies in the developmental imperative to cultivate self-regulation, as children's natural tendencies toward immediate gratification undermine long-term skill-building unless counteracted by deliberate practice under supervision. Psychological research indicates that guided discipline promotes neural pathways for impulse control, leading to improved executive function by adolescence, whereas permissive environments exacerbate behavioral deficits, increasing risks of poor socialization and future maladjustment. This aligns with observable causal chains: enforced norms in schools mirror societal demands, training individuals for cooperative adulthood, where undisciplined cohorts exhibit higher rates of absenteeism, lower graduation (e.g., disciplined cohorts show 10-15% higher completion rates in longitudinal data), and diminished economic productivity. Empirically, disciplined settings yield measurable advantages in cognitive and social outcomes, as meta-analyses confirm that structured management reduces off-task behavior by 40-50%, enhancing engagement and retention without relying on punitive excess. These rationales stem not from ideological preference but from the invariant need for order in hierarchical learning systems, where unchecked liberty devolves into entropy, thwarting the primary telos of education: ordered transmission of capability.

Historical Evolution

Pre-Modern and Traditional Practices

In ancient Sparta, the agogē educational system, initiated around the 7th century BCE, mandated rigorous training for males starting at age seven, incorporating corporal punishment such as beatings with whips or sticks to instill obedience, endurance, and martial virtues amid communal living and scarcity-induced hardships. This approach extended to other Greek poleis like Athens, where formal schooling involved physical corrections by pedagogues to enforce decorum and learning, reflecting broader Hellenistic acceptance of flogging for youthful indiscipline. In Rome, from the Republic through the Empire, ludus teachers routinely applied corporal measures—including strikes with the ferula (a flat leather strap) or rods—to deter laziness or disruption, as evidenced in literary complaints like those from the comedian Menander, who noted the inescapability of such penalties in grammarian oversight. Medieval European education, spanning cathedral schools, monastic institutions, and early universities from roughly the 9th to 15th centuries, systematized corporal punishment as a pedagogical necessity, drawing from classical precedents like Quintilian's moderated use of the rod and Christian exegesis of Proverbs 13:24 ("He who spares the rod hates his son"). Flogging, whipping, and caning were regimented tools, applied judiciously to habitual offenders rather than impulsively, aiming to excise vices, foster humility, and align the body with rational discipline—pedagogues theorized that unchecked impulses in children necessitated physical intervention to cultivate virtuous adulthood. Texts such as Alexander Nequam's Ars Lectoria (c. 1200) prescribed graduated severities, from light taps for minor lapses to severe birchings for defiance, underscoring a causal view that pain imprinted moral lessons enduringly. These practices persisted into early modern traditional settings, such as Tudor grammar schools (16th-17th centuries), where statutes like those at St. Paul's School in London (1512) authorized masters to "beat liberally" for infractions, prioritizing hierarchical authority and rote mastery over individualized leniency. Empirical accounts from period diaries and conduct manuals reveal low tolerance for disorder, with shaming adjuncts like dunce caps or public birching reinforcing communal norms, though excesses prompted occasional critiques from humanists like Erasmus, who advocated restraint to avoid stifling intellect—yet without displacing the rod's primacy. This framework grounded discipline in first-principles assumptions of human nature's recalcitrance, positing physical correction as causally efficacious for habituating self-control absent modern psychological alternatives.

Industrial Era to Mid-20th Century Reforms

In the 19th century, as public schooling expanded amid industrialization, discipline in Western schools, particularly in the United States and United Kingdom, relied heavily on corporal punishment to enforce obedience, punctuality, and moral character deemed essential for an emerging industrial workforce. Educators employed methods such as caning, birching, and striking with a ferule or ruler on the hands or buttocks, often for infractions like tardiness or inattention. In the U.S., Horace Mann, secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education from 1837 to 1848, promoted common schools emphasizing moral formation but viewed excessive corporal punishment skeptically, arguing in an 1840 lecture that it fostered fear rather than genuine self-control, though he did not advocate its outright abolition. Similarly, British schools under Victorian regulations permitted "moderate" corporal punishment with hand, cane, or strap solely for grave transgressions, excluding academic failures, to maintain order in crowded classrooms. Criticisms emerged in the mid-19th century, reflecting growing concerns over excessive severity. In 1846, Walt Whitman decried the routine use of corporal punishment in Brooklyn public schools as barbaric and counterproductive, urging alternatives like moral suasion. Despite such voices, the practice persisted into the early 20th century, with teachers in U.S. schools using switches, cowhides, or rulers, and supplementary measures like kneeling on sharp objects or wearing dunce caps to deter misbehavior. Reformatory and industrial schools established in Britain via acts from 1854 to 1857 incorporated corporal punishment as a core tool for juvenile offenders, underscoring its perceived necessity for behavioral correction. The progressive education movement, gaining traction from the late 19th century through figures like John Dewey, introduced reforms challenging rote authoritarianism. Dewey, in works spanning 1899 to 1938, advocated discipline through experiential learning, democratic classroom participation, and intrinsic motivation, positing that punishment often stifled natural growth and self-regulation rather than fostering it. This child-centered approach aimed to replace physical coercion with guided activities promoting cooperation and problem-solving, influencing teacher training and curricula in the U.S. by the 1920s. However, implementation was uneven; corporal punishment remained legally and culturally entrenched, with high school enrollment surges between 1890 and 1918 amplifying calls for stricter order amid larger, more diverse student bodies. By the mid-20th century, up to the 1950s, school discipline retained much of its punitive character, with physical measures still common in many U.S. and U.K. institutions to ensure compliance, though alternatives like after-school detention and loss of recess gained modest acceptance as adjuncts. Psychological insights from behaviorism, including B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning principles emerging in the 1930s, began informing some educators toward reward-based incentives over sole reliance on pain, yet empirical data on widespread reform remained limited, and strict regimens persisted to counteract perceived post-war laxity in youth behavior.

Late 20th Century Shifts Toward Permissiveness

In the United States, school discipline practices began shifting toward greater permissiveness in the 1970s, marked by a marked decline in the use of corporal punishment and the introduction of procedural safeguards that complicated swift enforcement of rules. By 1978, approximately 4% of public school students experienced corporal punishment annually, but this figure steadily decreased thereafter due to growing state-level prohibitions and evolving professional views on child development. Between 1974 and 1994, 25 states enacted bans on corporal punishment in public schools, reflecting broader societal skepticism toward physical interventions as effective or appropriate for maintaining order. This permissiveness was reinforced by key U.S. Supreme Court decisions that prioritized student rights over administrative efficiency. In Goss v. Lopez (1975), the Court ruled that students facing suspension must receive oral or written notice of charges and an opportunity for explanation, establishing due process requirements that slowed disciplinary responses to disruptions. Although Ingraham v. Wright (1977) upheld the constitutionality of corporal punishment under the Eighth Amendment, it did not stem the momentum for alternatives, as educators increasingly turned to counseling and behavioral interventions amid concerns over potential abuse. These legal changes, combined with advocacy from organizations like the National Education Association, shifted focus from immediate correction to understanding misbehavior as symptomatic of underlying issues rather than willful defiance. Intellectual influences from developmental psychology and progressive education philosophies further propelled this trend, portraying strict discipline as potentially harmful to children's emotional growth. Late-20th-century research in child psychology emphasized nurturing environments over punitive measures, influencing educators to adopt views that linked misbehavior to developmental stages or external factors rather than requiring firm behavioral conditioning. For instance, evolving perspectives from the child study movement, building on earlier work by figures like John Dewey, promoted child-centered classrooms where rules were negotiated rather than imposed, reducing reliance on exclusionary tactics. In Europe, a parallel "permissive revolution" emerged post-World War II, with countries like Sweden banning school corporal punishment as early as 1958 and others following suit by the 1980s, driven by similar humanitarian concerns and psychological critiques of authoritarian control. By the 1990s, these shifts manifested in policies favoring restorative practices over traditional sanctions, though empirical support for improved outcomes remained limited, with some studies highlighting increased disorder in lenient settings. Public disapproval of harsh methods, fueled by media portrayals and professional guidelines, accelerated the move, yet regional disparities persisted, particularly in the U.S. South where corporal punishment endured longer. This era's emphasis on leniency prioritized equity and psychological well-being but often at the expense of consistent authority, setting the stage for later debates over school safety.

Theoretical Foundations

Behavioral and Conditioning Models

Behavioral models of school discipline derive from experimental psychology, emphasizing observable behaviors shaped through environmental contingencies rather than internal mental states. These approaches, rooted in the work of psychologists like Ivan Pavlov and B.F. Skinner, posit that student conduct can be modified via systematic application of stimuli and consequences, treating misbehavior as learned responses amenable to unlearning or replacement. In educational settings, such models prioritize immediate, measurable outcomes over abstract moral development, aligning with causal mechanisms where repeated associations alter behavioral probabilities. Operant conditioning, central to these models, involves voluntary actions influenced by their outcomes: positive reinforcement strengthens behaviors by adding desirable stimuli (e.g., verbal praise or tokens exchangeable for privileges following task completion), while negative reinforcement removes aversives (e.g., ending a demand after compliance). Punishment, conversely, weakens undesired actions through added unpleasant stimuli (e.g., reprimands) or withdrawal of positives (e.g., revoking recess). Skinner advocated programmed instruction in schools, breaking lessons into small, reinforced steps to ensure high success rates and gradual skill acquisition, as demonstrated in his 1950s teaching machines that provided immediate feedback. Classroom token economies, where students earn points for on-task behavior redeemable for rewards, exemplify this, with empirical trials showing reduced disruptions and increased academic engagement in elementary settings. Peer-reviewed evaluations confirm operant techniques' efficacy for short-term behavioral control. A 2023 study found positive reinforcement strategies, such as teacher praise contingent on prosocial acts, boosted student participation and diminished off-task actions by 20-30% in controlled classroom interventions. Differential reinforcement—rewarding alternatives to problem behaviors while extinguishing the originals—has similarly lowered disruptive incidents in group settings, with effect sizes ranging from moderate to large in meta-analyses of school-based applications. However, sustained effects require consistent implementation; intermittent reinforcement schedules, as Skinner described, prevent satiation but risk resurgence of maladaptive patterns if contingencies lapse. Classical conditioning complements operant methods by forging involuntary associations, such as pairing a teacher's calm tone with compliance cues to evoke relaxation amid potential conflicts, though its role in discipline is subsidiary to consequence-based shaping. Overall, these models underscore discipline as a probabilistic process: behaviors persist or fade based on reinforcement density, with empirical data from behavior analysis indicating superior control over permissive approaches for populations exhibiting high impulsivity, albeit with caveats on generalizability beyond structured environments.

Developmental Psychology and Moral Formation

Developmental psychology posits that moral formation in children and adolescents progresses through stages involving the internalization of societal norms, empathy, and principled reasoning, with school discipline serving as a key environmental factor influencing this trajectory. Jean Piaget's distinction between heteronomous morality, driven by external authority and immediate consequences, and autonomous morality, based on mutual respect and reciprocity, underscores how consistent disciplinary practices can shift children from rule-following out of fear to understanding intentions and fairness. Similarly, Lawrence Kohlberg's theory outlines six stages across preconventional, conventional, and postconventional levels, where progression depends on cognitive challenges, including exposure to dilemmas and justified rule enforcement in educational settings. Empirical evidence from longitudinal studies supports that disciplinary environments providing clear boundaries alongside explanations foster higher-stage moral reasoning, as children learn to weigh consequences against broader ethical principles rather than solely avoiding punishment. In school contexts, authoritative disciplinary approaches—combining firm structure with responsiveness and rationale—have been linked to enhanced moral development outcomes, such as reduced moral disengagement and improved prosocial behaviors. A 2024 study of schoolchildren found that classroom-level authoritative teaching negatively predicted increases in collective moral disengagement over time, with student-teacher relationship quality mediating this effect; authoritative practices encourage perspective-taking and accountability, countering justifications for unethical conduct. This aligns with broader findings that balanced discipline promotes self-regulation and empathy, core to moral formation, whereas overly punitive or inconsistent methods correlate with stalled development at lower stages, characterized by egocentric or instrumental orientations. For instance, research on adolescents shows authoritative management reduces bullying perpetration, reflecting advanced moral judgment through empathy and norm adherence. Conversely, harsh physical discipline in childhood has been associated with diminished moral reasoning in later years, potentially via impaired attachment and heightened external locus of control. Moral formation is further advanced when discipline integrates opportunities for reflection and restitution, enabling causal links between actions and ethical outcomes. Studies indicate that practices like guided discussions following infractions enhance self-control and moral self-adjustment in students, with self-control mediating the path to ethical decision-making. In secondary education, aligning disciplinary policies with developmental readiness—such as involving students in rule formulation at higher cognitive stages—facilitates transitions to principled morality, though empirical gaps persist in quantifying long-term societal impacts. These mechanisms emphasize discipline's role not merely in behavioral compliance but in cultivating an internal moral compass through repeated, reasoned enforcement of consequences.

Sociological and Cultural Influences

Sociological analyses of school discipline emphasize the role of social class in shaping behavioral expectations and outcomes. Students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds often enter schools with family socialization patterns that diverge from institutional norms, such as greater emphasis on immediate compliance over delayed gratification, leading to higher rates of perceived misbehavior and disciplinary referrals. This divergence stems from causal mechanisms in family environments, where economic pressures foster survival-oriented behaviors less aligned with middle-class school cultures prioritizing self-regulation and academic deference. Empirical data indicate that perceived legitimacy of disciplinary authority—rooted in familial respect for hierarchy—mediates these effects, with students viewing rules as fairer when congruent with home values, thereby reducing defiance. Cultural influences further modulate discipline through norms around authority and child-rearing. In societies endorsing hierarchical respect, such as those influenced by Confucian traditions, stricter enforcement correlates with fewer behavioral problems, as physical or verbal corrections align with familial practices and reinforce collective order. Conversely, in individualistic Western contexts, cultural shifts toward child autonomy since the mid-20th century—driven by progressive ideologies challenging institutional power—have eroded tolerance for firm discipline, associating it with authoritarianism rather than socialization. Cross-cultural studies reveal that mismatches between teacher expectations and student cultural backgrounds exacerbate disruptions; for instance, students from collectivist immigrant families may interpret direct confrontation as disrespectful, prompting escalated responses, while host-culture educators misattribute it to defiance rather than normative expression. In diverse settings, these influences manifest in disparities where behavioral differences, not solely bias, drive outcomes, though academic narratives often underemphasize the former due to ideological priors favoring equity frames over causal behavioral data. Peer-reviewed analyses show that cultural historical awareness in classrooms—accounting for varied norms without relativism—predicts better management, as unaddressed overlays lead to misinterpretations of routine actions as infractions. Ultimately, effective discipline requires bridging these gaps via explicit norm alignment, rather than diluting standards, to foster adaptive self-control across groups.

Common Disciplinary Methods

Corporal Punishment Practices

Corporal punishment in schools consists of intentionally inflicting bodily pain on students by authorized school personnel as a means of enforcing discipline, most commonly through striking the buttocks, hands, or other body parts with an open hand, leather strap, wooden paddle, rattan cane, or similar implement. This practice is typically reserved for infractions such as disruption, defiance, or fighting, and is administered swiftly following the offense to associate the pain with the misbehavior. In regions where permitted, procedures often mandate that the punishment be delivered by a school administrator rather than a classroom teacher, in a controlled setting to minimize injury, such as over clothing and without excessive force. In the United States, where corporal punishment remains legal in public schools across 18 states as of 2023, the predominant method is paddling, involving multiple swats from a wooden paddle measuring approximately 2 feet long and 6 inches wide, applied to the student's buttocks while bent over a desk or standing. During the 2017-2018 school year, approximately 69,000 students in U.S. public schools received such punishment nearly 97,000 times, with highest usage in southern states like Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, and Texas, where rates can exceed 5% of enrolled students annually. Administrators often document the incident in school records, and some districts require parental notification or consent, though enforcement varies. Globally, practices differ by region; in parts of Africa and Asia where legal, caning with a flexible rattan rod is common, targeting the palms or posterior for offenses like tardiness or cheating, with strokes numbered based on severity—typically 1 to 6. As of 2018, school corporal punishment was lawful in 69 countries, comprising about 35% of nations, though prevalence remains high in low-resource settings, with lifetime exposure exceeding 70% in regions like sub-Saharan Africa and Central America. Less frequent methods, such as birching with bundled twigs or strapping, persist in isolated areas but have declined with legal reforms. Prohibitions have expanded, with 136 states banning it in schools by 2023, up from 125 in 2015, driven by international advocacy.

Exclusionary Measures

Exclusionary measures in school discipline refer to disciplinary actions that remove students from their regular educational environment, including out-of-school suspensions (OSS), in-school suspensions (ISS), and expulsions. OSS typically involve removal from school premises for a specified period, often 1 to 10 days for short-term cases or longer for serious infractions, while ISS confines students to supervised areas within the school without instructional access. Expulsions entail permanent removal, sometimes with conditions for readmission or transfer. These practices are justified as necessary for immediate threat mitigation and deterrence, allowing educators to refocus on uninhibited learning for the majority. In the United States, exclusionary measures remain prevalent despite reform efforts. During the 2023-2024 school year, New York City public schools issued 27,724 suspensions, a 2.4% decline from the prior year but still reflecting widespread application post-pandemic recovery. North Carolina reported 264,510 half-day or longer ISS instances affecting 131,704 students, yielding a rate of 175.38 per 1,000 students. Nationally, the U.S. Department of Education's Civil Rights Data Collection indicates persistent use, with OSS rates varying by district but often exceeding 5% of students annually in high-need areas prior to recent bans in early grades. Expulsions, though rarer, numbered in the thousands yearly, primarily for violent or weapons-related offenses. Empirical studies reveal limited effectiveness of exclusionary measures for long-term behavioral improvement. A meta-analysis of 53 cases from 34 studies found a significant inverse correlation between suspensions and academic achievement (r = -0.09), with no evidence of positive effects on future conduct or school climate. Suspended students face heightened risks of dropout (odds ratio up to 1.5 times higher) and criminal involvement, as exclusion often lacks structured intervention, exacerbating disengagement rather than addressing root causes like skill deficits or home factors. Short-term deterrence occurs—disruptions decrease during removal—but recidivism rates remain high, with one analysis showing suspended students 2-3 times more likely to reoffend within the year. Statewide bans on OSS for minor offenses in early grades, such as California's 2014-2015 policy extension, correlated with rising disorder in untreated upper elementary settings, suggesting displacement of problems without substitution by proven alternatives. Racial disparities in application persist, with Black students receiving OSS at rates 2-3 times higher than White peers for similar infraction categories, even after partial controls for behavior severity. However, aggregate misbehavior rates, including self-reported incidents and objective metrics like office referrals, align with higher discipline contacts for minority students, challenging narratives of systemic bias as the sole driver; differences in infraction frequency for objective offenses (e.g., fighting, disruption) explain 60-80% of gaps in some datasets. Studies emphasizing "soft" subjectivities (e.g., defiance) show residual disparities, potentially reflecting cultural mismatches in behavioral norms or implicit perceptions, but causal evidence for bias-induced over-punishment remains correlational, not experimental. Exclusionary measures thus mirror broader societal patterns in antisocial conduct, where unaddressed escalation leads to entrenched cycles.

Restorative and Positive Behavioral Interventions

Restorative practices in schools seek to address misbehavior by facilitating dialogue among affected parties, such as offenders, victims, and community members, to repair harm and restore relationships rather than imposing exclusionary punishments. These methods, adapted from indigenous and criminal justice traditions, include restorative circles for community-building and conferences for conflict resolution, with implementation surging in the U.S. after the 2014 Every Student Succeeds Act encouraged alternatives to suspension. A 2021 randomized trial in Pittsburgh public schools found that restorative practices reduced student suspensions by 13% and suspension days by 16% relative to controls, attributing effects to improved socio-emotional skills. However, causal mechanisms remain debated, as reductions may stem from deferred discipline rather than behavioral change, with some implementations correlating to increased classroom disruptions due to prolonged discussions. Critics argue that restorative approaches often fail to deter repeat offenses or provide sufficient structure, as evidenced by mixed outcomes in urban districts where violence rose after adoption; for instance, a 2019 evaluation in New York City schools reported no overall decline in serious incidents despite fewer suspensions, suggesting permissive elements undermine deterrence. Empirical reviews highlight implementation challenges, including teacher burnout from time-intensive sessions—averaging 20-30 minutes per incident—and inadequate training, leading to inconsistent application and potential revictimization of harmed parties. While eight studies across diverse settings noted decreased aggression and bullying perceptions post-adoption, long-term data is sparse, with no robust evidence linking practices to academic gains or reduced recidivism beyond initial referral drops. Academic sources promoting efficacy often originate from equity-focused institutions, potentially overlooking null or adverse effects in high-disruption environments. Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a multi-tiered framework launched in the 1990s under U.S. Department of Education auspices, emphasizes defining, teaching, and reinforcing prosocial behaviors through data-driven systems rather than reactive punishment. Tier 1 involves school-wide expectations and rewards, such as token economies for compliance, while Tiers 2 and 3 target at-risk students with individualized plans; by 2023, over 27,000 U.S. schools implemented it. A 2012 randomized study of 18 elementary schools reported PBIS reduced office discipline referrals by 20-30% and aggressive behaviors via improved emotion regulation, effects sustained over three years. Recent meta-analyses of 32 studies confirm modest reductions in exclusions (effect size ~0.2) and problem behaviors, particularly in early grades, by fostering consistent routines that cue self-control. Notwithstanding these findings, PBIS outcomes vary by fidelity; a 2023 review of secondary schools found no significant academic improvements and inconsistent referral drops when implementation lapsed below 80% adherence, as measured by self-assessments. Critics note overreliance on extrinsic rewards may erode intrinsic motivation, with some districts experiencing referral inflation from lowered thresholds for "positive" interventions, potentially masking persistent disruptions. For students with disabilities, a systematic review indicated limited efficacy in curbing exclusions without integrated consequences, as pure reinforcement fails to address willful defiance rooted in habit or environment. Overall, while PBIS demonstrates short-term behavioral compliance gains—supported by NIH-funded trials—causal evidence for lasting moral development or school safety is weaker, with benefits most pronounced in structured, low-poverty settings rather than chaotic ones where punitive backups are absent.

Empirical Evidence of Effectiveness

Studies on Immediate Behavioral Control

Studies examining immediate behavioral control in school settings primarily draw from operant conditioning frameworks, where consistent, contingent consequences—either reinforcers or punishers—rapidly alter observable student actions such as disruptions, non-compliance, or aggression. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs, often in classroom or controlled environments, demonstrate that techniques like time-out and positive reinforcement yield measurable short-term reductions in target behaviors, typically within sessions or days, by interrupting reinforcement contingencies. These effects are attributed to the immediacy of delivery, which strengthens association between behavior and outcome, outperforming delayed or inconsistent applications. Time-out procedures, involving brief removal from positive reinforcement sources, have shown robust immediate efficacy in suppressing attention-maintained disruptive behaviors among elementary and preschool students. A review of intervention studies found time-out decreased target behavior frequency by 70-90% in initial applications, with effects observable within minutes of implementation when exclusionary (e.g., isolation from peers) rather than contingent observation variants were used. Similarly, a 2019 replication study with preschool children confirmed that immediate time-out reduced problem behaviors like tantrums during sessions, contrasting with delayed versions that showed rebound effects, underscoring the causal role of temporal proximity in suppression. In therapeutic day schools, isolation time-outs correlated with 50-80% drops in severe emotional outbursts post-implementation, though generalization to non-time-out settings required paired positive strategies. Positive reinforcement strategies, such as verbal praise or token systems delivered immediately following compliant behavior, similarly produce rapid increases in on-task actions and decreases in disruptions. Classroom experiments reported 40-60% gains in student engagement within single lessons when teachers provided contingent feedback, with effects strongest for behaviors reinforced by social attention. A 2023 study on reinforcement in higher education contexts, adaptable to K-12, found immediate rewards elevated participation rates by 25-35% over baseline, attributing this to heightened motivation via dopamine-linked pathways, though sustained effects demanded variable scheduling to prevent satiation. Corporal punishment's immediate effects on behavior remain understudied in controlled settings, with available data suggesting transient compliance driven by fear rather than learning. Surveys in secondary schools indicated 68% of paddled students exhibited short-term avoidance of rule-breaking due to heightened anxiety, but without corresponding skill-building, leading to inconsistent suppression across contexts. Comparative analyses in U.S. districts found no significant immediate behavioral disparities between corporal and non-corporal schools, implying equivalence in short-term control but highlighting potential for escalation in aggressive responses. Peer-reviewed caution prevails, as immediate deterrence often masks underlying resentment, per behavioral models favoring non-aversive alternatives for replicable control. Moderating factors include implementation fidelity and student characteristics; for instance, time-out efficacy drops below 50% if not paired with clear antecedents, while positive methods show diminished returns in high-disruption environments without baseline rule teaching. Overall, evidence converges on immediate control as achievable through prompt, consistent contingencies, with positive approaches demonstrating fewer unintended side effects in empirical trials.

Long-Term Outcomes for Students and Schools

Longitudinal studies indicate that students attending schools with consistent enforcement of clear behavioral expectations, such as "No Excuses" charter schools, exhibit improved long-term academic outcomes, including higher standardized test scores (0.25 standard deviations in math and 0.17 in literacy) and increased college enrollment rates compared to peers in traditional public schools. These effects persist into adulthood, particularly benefiting disadvantaged students, English learners, and those with special needs, suggesting that structured discipline fosters habits conducive to sustained achievement rather than merely short-term compliance. However, exclusionary practices like out-of-school suspensions for minor infractions show associations with diminished academic trajectories, including reduced high school graduation rates (e.g., a 2.5% drop linked to increased police presence and suspensions) and lower grade progression, though causal attribution remains debated due to preexisting behavioral differences among suspended students. International data from PISA assessments reinforce that stronger disciplinary climates—measured by lower truancy, tardiness, and disruption—correlate positively with reading, math, and science performance across countries, with objective discipline metrics explaining up to 0.24 standard deviations in scores. On behavioral and criminal outcomes, evidence from quasi-experimental designs shows that schools increasing suspensions specifically for violent incidents reduce subsequent school crime rates without elevating overall student offending, implying targeted enforcement deters escalation rather than amplifying recidivism. Conversely, broad reductions in discipline post-policy reforms (e.g., after 2014 U.S. federal guidelines limiting suspensions) have coincided with rising classroom disorder and violence reports, as documented in national surveys, potentially undermining long-term behavioral self-regulation. While some analyses link suspension history to higher adult arrest risks, these often fail to isolate selection effects, where initial misconduct predicts outcomes independently of disciplinary response. For mental health, suspended students report elevated depressive symptoms into early adulthood (e.g., significantly higher rates than non-suspended peers), yet this pattern may reflect underlying issues prompting discipline rather than its imposition, as structured environments in high-discipline schools correlate with fewer reported psychosocial deficits over time. At the school level, rigorous discipline policies enhance institutional safety and academic performance, with meta-analyses of charter models showing sustained gains in graduation and postsecondary access, alongside reduced chronic absenteeism and disruption that otherwise erode collective outcomes. Such approaches, when applied uniformly, appear to yield net positive effects by prioritizing causal mechanisms like orderly learning conditions over individualized exclusion.

Moderating Factors and Causal Mechanisms

The effectiveness of school disciplinary practices operates through several causal pathways, primarily rooted in operant conditioning principles where immediate consequences suppress undesired behaviors via negative reinforcement or punishment, though long-term internalization requires consistent pairing with positive alternatives to foster self-regulation. Punitive measures like suspensions temporarily deter misconduct by removing students from the reinforcing environment of peers or attention-seeking, but this mechanism often fails to address root causes, leading to escalated externalizing behaviors upon return due to missed instructional time and weakened school attachment. Corporal punishment, in particular, exerts a direct causal influence on increased aggression through reflexive pain-avoidance responses and social learning of coercive control, with longitudinal data indicating it models hierarchical dominance rather than moral reasoning, thereby perpetuating cycles of defiance rather than compliance. Restorative interventions, by contrast, promote behavioral change via mediated accountability and relationship repair, activating prosocial norms and empathy, though their causal impact remains mediated by implementation fidelity rather than inherent superiority. Moderating factors significantly condition these pathways, with student perceptions of procedural justice—such as fairness in application—amplifying deterrence effects under traditional frameworks, as perceived legitimacy enhances voluntary compliance beyond mere fear. Teacher-student relational quality moderates outcomes across practices, buffering negative effects of exclusionary tactics by sustaining trust and support structures that facilitate behavioral redirection, particularly in high-structure environments. Demographic variables, including age and socioeconomic background, interact with discipline type; younger students exhibit stronger immediate suppression from authoritative measures due to developmental reliance on external controls, while family-level factors like parental endorsement of school rules reinforce consistency, mitigating rebound effects. School-level moderators, such as policy uniformity and resource allocation for alternatives, explain variance in long-term efficacy, with inconsistent enforcement undermining causal chains by fostering cynicism and selective adherence among students. Meta-analytic evidence further reveals that suspension length inversely moderates academic trajectories, with prolonged exclusions exacerbating achievement gaps through cumulative instructional loss, independent of baseline behavior severity. These interactions underscore that no universal mechanism prevails, as contextual alignments determine whether discipline yields adaptive habit formation or entrenched resistance.

Key Controversies

Efficacy and Ethics of Physical Discipline

Physical discipline in schools, encompassing practices such as paddling, strapping, or caning, aims to enforce compliance through immediate physical discomfort. Laboratory experiments on immediate compliance indicate that such methods can effectively suppress defiant behavior in the short term, comparable to or superior to time-out alternatives when used conditionally after verbal correction. A 2000 review of 38 studies found that nonabusive, customary physical punishment by parents—analogous to school applications—yielded beneficial outcomes like reduced noncompliance and fighting in six clinical samples and three sequential-analysis studies, with no evidence of harm when limited to mild swats on extremities for ages 2-6 or 8-13. Long-term efficacy remains contested, with correlational meta-analyses often linking school corporal punishment to increased aggression, antisocial behavior, and poorer cognitive outcomes, but these associations are typically small (explaining less than 1% of variance after controlling for confounders like family socioeconomic status and baseline behavior). A 2024 analysis of longitudinal data reconciled prior contradictory reviews, concluding that customary physical discipline does not predict detrimental child outcomes beyond initial controls, challenging claims of widespread harm. Critics of anti-corporal punishment research highlight methodological flaws, including reliance on cross-sectional designs, failure to distinguish mild from harsh applications, and "intervention selection bias" where severe cases inflate negative associations; peer-reviewed defenses emphasize that alternatives like reasoning alone yield similar or worse defiance rates in defiant youth. In school contexts, evidence is sparser, but states retaining corporal punishment (e.g., Texas, Mississippi as of 2023) report no spikes in disorder post-ban reversals elsewhere, suggesting deterrence persists without long-term escalation. Ethically, physical discipline raises debates over child autonomy versus societal order. Proponents, drawing from behavioral principles, argue it mirrors natural consequences (e.g., pain from unchecked aggression), fostering self-control and respect for authority without eroding moral development when administered judiciously by trained adults—evidenced by lower recidivism in conditional use versus permissive approaches. Opponents invoke rights-based frameworks, asserting it violates dignity and risks escalation to abuse, as per UN conventions ratified by over 60 countries banning it by 2023; however, empirical reviews find no causal link to abuse in regulated school settings, and bans correlate with unchanged or rising youth violence in some jurisdictions. Academic consensus against it, reflected in bodies like the APA and WHO, often overlooks counter-evidence from rigorous designs, potentially influenced by ideological priors favoring non-punitive models despite their failures in high-disruption environments. Ultimately, ethical justification hinges on context: mild, rule-bound applications may align with causal realism—teaching proportionality—over unsubstantiated fears of universal harm, provided alternatives prove inferior for persistent defiance.

Disparities in Application: Behavior vs. Bias Narratives

Racial disparities in school discipline, particularly higher rates of suspensions and expulsions for Black students compared to White students, have been documented extensively in U.S. public schools. Data from the U.S. Department of Education's Civil Rights Data Collection indicate that Black students are suspended at rates approximately 3.8 times higher than White students overall, with similar patterns persisting across elementary, middle, and high school levels as of the 2017-2018 school year. These gaps persist even after controlling for socioeconomic status, though they are more pronounced in schools with lower poverty concentrations. One prevailing narrative attributes these disparities primarily to educator bias, including implicit racial prejudices that lead to harsher interpretations of identical behaviors exhibited by minority students. Proponents of this view, often drawing from social psychology research, argue that teachers perceive disruptions by Black students as more severe or intentional, resulting in disproportionate referrals and penalties for subjective offenses like "defiance" rather than objective ones like fighting. For instance, experimental studies have shown teachers recommending stricter discipline for vignettes describing misbehavior by Black students versus White students with matching details. This perspective has influenced policy, such as the Obama administration's 2014 guidance urging schools to reduce disparities through bias training and limits on exclusionary practices, framing inequities as systemic discrimination independent of student conduct. Empirical analyses using longitudinal data, however, provide stronger evidence that differences in student behavior—rather than bias alone—account for the majority of observed gaps. In a study utilizing the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Kindergarten (ECLS-K) cohort, researchers found that racial differences in teacher- and parent-reported problem behaviors in kindergarten fully explained the Black-White gap in suspensions by third grade; once prior conduct issues like aggression and inattention were controlled, no independent racial effect remained. Similarly, analysis of the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study decomposed the suspension gap among boys, attributing 23-48% to behavioral differences measured via multiple informants, with early (age 5) problem behaviors alone explaining about 9-10% to avoid endogeneity from contemporaneous reports potentially influenced by discipline itself. These findings align with broader patterns in national surveys, where Black students consistently report and are observed engaging in higher rates of disruptive acts, such as fighting or non-compliance, correlating with factors like family instability and exposure to community violence rather than inherent racial traits. Critiques of the bias-dominant narrative highlight methodological limitations in perception-based studies, such as reliance on hypothetical scenarios or self-reported attitudes that may not translate to real-world decisions, and note a tendency in academic literature—often produced by institutions with documented ideological skews—to prioritize discrimination explanations over behavioral causation. While some residual disparities may stem from differential treatment for ambiguous infractions, aggregate data from objective behavioral metrics indicate that policy responses emphasizing anti-bias reforms, like restorative justice mandates, have sometimes increased overall disorder by under-disciplining misconduct, exacerbating safety issues without closing gaps. Causal realism suggests addressing root drivers of behavioral differences, such as early intervention in family and community environments, would more effectively mitigate disparities than assuming equivalence in conduct across groups.

Failures of Reformist Approaches

Reformist approaches to school discipline, such as restorative justice practices and positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), have frequently failed to achieve their goals of reducing misbehavior while maintaining safe learning environments, often resulting in elevated levels of disruption and violence. In New York City, implementation of restorative justice under Mayor Bill de Blasio's administration from 2014 onward, which emphasized alternatives to suspensions for non-violent offenses, yielded no statistically significant improvements in school climate or reductions in suspensions, while undermining teacher authority and classroom order. Similarly, PBIS frameworks, intended to promote positive behaviors through rewards and systemic supports, have been critiqued for inadequately addressing persistent negative behaviors, leading to resource strain without commensurate reductions in office referrals or aggression in many implementations. Empirical analyses indicate these methods often substitute dialogue for accountability, failing to instill self-control or deter repeat offenses, as students perceive minimal consequences for disruptions. District-level data further substantiates these shortcomings, with leniency correlating to spikes in violent incidents. In Chicago Public Schools, following discipline reforms that curtailed arrests and emphasized restorative measures, violent crime surged 26% in 2023 amid record-low arrests, exacerbating peer disrespect and teacher-reported disruptions. Broward County's PROMISE program, launched in 2013 to divert non-violent juvenile offenders from arrests into school-based interventions, exemplified systemic failure when it overlooked repeated threats and expulsions of shooter Nikolas Cruz, contributing to the 2018 Parkland massacre that killed 17; the program was later scrutinized for prioritizing reduced arrest statistics over threat assessment. Such outcomes align with broader patterns where reduced exclusionary discipline has not curbed underlying behavioral issues, instead fostering environments where unchecked aggression persists, as evidenced by teacher surveys reporting heightened threats and unsafe conditions in reformed districts. These failures have prompted policy reversals, underscoring the causal link between diminished deterrence and rising disorder. Post-2020, states like Arizona and others enacted legislation to restore suspensions and expulsions for violent acts, citing post-pandemic surges in incidents—such as a 7.7% national drop in reported violence only after partial rollbacks, but with persistent concerns over underreporting under prior leniency. Lawmakers in multiple jurisdictions argued that 2010s-era reforms, influenced by federal guidance on racial disparities, deterred necessary interventions against unruly students, eroding safety without evidence of equitable behavioral gains. While some academic studies claim neutral or positive effects from reforms, district-specific empirical data from independent analyses reveal implementation gaps and unintended escalations in victimization, highlighting how reformist models often prioritize procedural equity over causal enforcement of norms.

Legal and Institutional Frameworks

Global Bans and Cultural Variations

As of 2024, corporal punishment in schools is prohibited by law in more than 130 countries worldwide, encompassing nearly all of Europe, most of Latin America, and an increasing number of states in Asia and the Pacific. These prohibitions typically stem from international commitments, such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, with Sweden pioneering a school-specific ban in 1958, later extended to all settings in 1979. Despite this progress, enforcement varies, and in regions with recent adoptions—like Tajikistan's full ban in August 2024 or Thailand's in March 2025—implementation challenges persist due to entrenched norms and limited resources for alternative disciplinary training. In contrast, corporal punishment remains lawful in educational settings in roughly 62 countries as of April 2025, predominantly in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East, where it is often justified under cultural or religious frameworks emphasizing hierarchical authority. For instance, countries like Nigeria, Pakistan, and Indonesia permit physical discipline such as caning or paddling, with reported usage rates exceeding 50% in some surveys of teachers. Pledges to reform have emerged, as in November 2024 when Panama, Kyrgyzstan, Uganda, Burundi, Sri Lanka, and the Czech Republic committed to total prohibitions, though legal enactment lags behind announcements. Data from organizations tracking these trends indicate that while bans correlate with reduced formal reports of physical discipline, underground practices continue in banned jurisdictions, particularly in under-resourced rural schools. Cultural variations in school discipline extend beyond physical methods to encompass broader approaches shaped by societal values, economic conditions, and collectivism-individualism divides. A 2010 cross-national analysis of 41 countries revealed stricter classroom discipline—measured by teacher reports of rule enforcement and student compliance—in poorer economies, more gender-traditional societies, and those with greater economic equality, suggesting causal links between resource scarcity and reliance on immediate, authoritative control to maintain order. In East Asian contexts, such as Singapore and South Korea, Confucian-influenced practices prioritize rote obedience and collective harmony, often employing verbal shaming or detention over physical means where banned, yielding higher reported student conformity rates compared to Western peers. Conversely, individualistic cultures in North America and Western Europe favor dialogic and restorative techniques, though empirical reviews question their universality, noting higher disruption in permissive settings without structured alternatives. These differences persist despite globalization, as local norms resist one-size-fits-all reforms promoted by international bodies.

United States Federal and State Policies

Federal policies on school discipline have evolved through legislation addressing safety, disabilities, and equity concerns. The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 requires states receiving federal education funds to enact zero-tolerance policies for firearms on school grounds, mandating expulsion for at least one year for students found with guns, unless modified by the principal for specific cases. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), as amended, permits schools to remove students with disabilities for up to 10 cumulative days in a school year without additional procedures, akin to non-disabled students, but requires a manifestation determination review for longer removals to assess if behavior was linked to the disability. In 2014, the Obama administration's Department of Education and Department of Justice issued a Dear Colleague Letter warning schools that racial disparities in discipline rates could signal Title VI violations under disparate impact theory, urging reduced suspensions and alternative interventions to address perceived inequities. This guidance, while voluntary, pressured districts through threat of investigations, correlating with subsequent drops in suspensions and reports of increased classroom disruptions, as discipline decisions shifted toward avoiding statistical imbalances rather than solely behavioral evidence. The Trump administration rescinded this guidance in December 2018, citing undue federal overreach that compromised school safety and local authority, emphasizing discipline based on conduct over racial outcomes. On April 23, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14280, "Reinstating Common Sense School Discipline Policies," directing federal agencies to eliminate equity-based mandates in discipline, prohibiting use of Title VI to enforce racial proportionality, and prioritizing objective behavioral standards to restore order amid rising violence post-2020. State policies vary significantly, particularly on corporal punishment, with 17 states permitting its use in public schools as of 2025, primarily in the South, while 31 states and the District of Columbia ban it outright. In states allowing corporal punishment, such as Texas and Mississippi, it remains practiced in about 14 districts, often for severe misbehavior, though usage has declined; for instance, Florida's 2025 law (HB 1255) requires explicit parental consent annually or per incident. Bans in states like Illinois extended to nonpublic schools via HB 4175 effective 2025, reflecting broader trends toward non-physical alternatives, though enforcement gaps persist in some areas like Ohio. States generally retain autonomy over non-federal discipline frameworks, with many adopting restorative practices post-2014 but facing pushback amid evidence of lax enforcement correlating with safety declines.

Post-2020 Policy Reversals and Trends

In response to heightened student behavioral disruptions following the COVID-19 pandemic, including increased fights, absenteeism, and assaults on staff, several U.S. states enacted legislation to strengthen disciplinary measures starting in 2023. For instance, Kentucky passed a law in 2023 mandating expulsion for students bringing firearms to school and allowing local districts greater flexibility in suspending disruptive students, reversing prior constraints influenced by equity-focused reforms. Similar measures emerged in Florida and Tennessee, where lawmakers proposed expanding suspension authority for willful defiance and chronic disruption amid reports of post-pandemic spikes in violence. At the federal level, the Trump administration's Executive Order on April 23, 2025, titled "Reinstating Common Sense School Discipline Policies," explicitly rescinded Obama-era guidance from 2014 and 2018—later reaffirmed under Biden—that had pressured schools to reduce suspensions and expulsions to mitigate racial disparities under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, often prioritizing statistical equity over behavioral accountability. The order argued that such prior directives fostered disorder by discouraging effective punishment, citing empirical rises in school violence post-2020 as evidence that lenient approaches failed to maintain order. This reversal aligned with data showing national suspension rates dipped during remote learning but rebounded unevenly, with Black and low-income students facing higher relative rates amid broader chaos, challenging narratives that disparities alone warranted blanket reductions. State-level trends reflected this federal pivot, with proposals in places like California to amend restrictions on "willful defiance" suspensions for older students, previously curtailed under SB 419 (2014) to address perceived over-discipline. By mid-2025, at least five states had introduced bills to restore local control over discipline, emphasizing safety over restorative practices that empirical reviews indicated prolonged disruptions without reducing recidivism. These shifts were driven by causal links between reduced pre-2020 enforcement—often tied to disparate impact avoidance—and post-pandemic escalations, where schools reported 20-50% increases in serious incidents like assaults, underscoring the limits of non-punitive models in enforcing behavioral norms.

References

  1. [1]
    Discipline
    School discipline refers to the rules and strategies applied in school to manage student behavior and practices used to encourage self-discipline.
  2. [2]
    R277-609. Standards for LEA Discipline Policy
    "Discipline" means school discipline and refers to the rules and evidence-based strategies applied in school to manage student behavior.
  3. [3]
    How School Disciplinary Policies Have Changed Over the Years
    But corporal punishment has a longer history, dating back to the earliest years of public education in the United States.
  4. [4]
    Two centuries of school discipline | Spare the Rod - APM Reports
    Aug 25, 2016 · Teachers commonly used corporal punishment in the form of a switch, cowhide or ruler, Kafka has written. Students knelt on sharp objects or ...
  5. [5]
    [PDF] An Empirical Examination of the Effects of Suspension and ...
    Aug 24, 2021 · Arum (2003), which found that school discipline is most effective when it is moderately strict, ... School discipline reform and disorder: ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] Discipline Reform, School Culture, and Student Achievement
    Indeed, strict discipline has been suggested as a reason why high-performing “no ex- cuses” charter schools are so effective in raising test scores (Angrist et ...
  7. [7]
    [PDF] Guiding Principles for Creating Safe, Inclusive, Supportive, and Fair ...
    Mar 1, 2023 · This resource references evidence-based policies, practices, and programs that can help create safe, inclusive, supportive, and fair learning ...
  8. [8]
    Ohio School Discipline | Ohio Department of Education and Workforce
    Jun 18, 2025 · What are best practices for discipline? · Set clear expectations. · Support students in completing missed assignments. · Communicate and engage ...What Are Best Practices For... · Proactive Approaches To... · Before Or After An IncidentMissing: key | Show results with:key<|separator|>
  9. [9]
    The Effect of School Discipline on Offending across Time - PMC
    This study examines the extent to which school punishment contributes to within-individual increases in offending across time and/or amplifies offending ...
  10. [10]
    Study Furthers Understanding of Disparities in School Discipline
    Jun 14, 2022 · They found that children in the Black/Hispanic poor and the Black nonpoor groups had significantly more teacher-identified behavioral problems ...
  11. [11]
    Racial disparities in school-based disciplinary actions are ... - PNAS
    Apr 2, 2019 · Overall, there is consistent evidence that black students' behaviors are both perceived as more problematic and are punished more harshly ...
  12. [12]
    Disobedience and racial disparity in school discipline
    Apr 1, 2024 · Black students are suspended more than their white peers for offenses like disobedience, disrespect and defiance.
  13. [13]
    I Combed Through 81 Studies on School Discipline. Here's What ...
    Oct 6, 2023 · I synthesized the research evidence (81 studies published between 2010 and 2022) on policies and programs that have successfully reduced discipline disparities.
  14. [14]
    School Discipline - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    School discipline is defined as a means of social control in educational settings, aimed at ensuring compliance and conformity while often imposing sanctions ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] The Dimensions of School Discipline - ERIC
    The findings illustrate the nuances of the disciplinary process in schools and inform the consideration of a range of available analytic tools that educational ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Modern Concepts of School Discipline - Eastern Illinois University
    Modern Concepts of School Discipline. Lawrence E. Camfield. Eastern Illinois State ... Camfield, Lawrence E., "Modern Concepts of School Discipline" (1957).
  17. [17]
    Disciplinary behaviour management strategies in schools and their ...
    Mar 25, 2024 · We found a recurring pattern in the evidence of disciplinary strategies associated with poor mental wellbeing and behaviour in pupils.
  18. [18]
    The Dimensions of School Discipline: Toward a Comprehensive ...
    The majority of peer-reviewed articles and policy reports on school discipline typically employ only one measure to examine racial disparities in discipline ...
  19. [19]
    SCHOOL DISCIPLINE: ITS IMPACT AS PERCEIVED BY THE BASIC ...
    Nov 24, 2023 · School discipline aims to help create a safe, orderly, and positive learning environment that usually uses discipline to correct the misbehavior ...
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Effective School Discipline Policy and Practice: Supporting Student ...
    Nov 19, 2016 · School discipline should be equitable and effective (Bangs. & Davis, 2014). Schools should remove students from the classroom as a last resort, ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Models of schooling and theories of discipline
    school. Discipline is a function of the democratic process and is basically the group's own self-regulation. The rules of good order enable the school ...
  22. [22]
    Effective discipline for children - PMC - NIH
    The word discipline means to impart knowledge and skill – to teach. However, it is often equated with punishment and control.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  23. [23]
    [PDF] The role of teachers' classroom discipline in their teaching ... - ERIC
    Jan 1, 2015 · Effective teaching research also shows that a sufficient degree of classroom discipline is needed to create an atmosphere conducive to student ...
  24. [24]
    Classroom Management and Facilitation Approaches That Promote ...
    Classrooms that are effectively managed facilitate learning by maximizing student participation, promoting positive behavior, preventing disruptions, and ...
  25. [25]
    Finding the Most Effective Skills to Increase Student Engagement ...
    Jan 24, 2019 · A growing empirical research base supports the direct relationship between classroom management and reduction of disruptive behavior.
  26. [26]
    Why Parenting With Discipline Raises More Resilient Children
    Apr 2, 2020 · Children who receive this kind of discipline tend to become more assertive, socially responsible, self-regulated, and cooperative.
  27. [27]
    Discipline in the higher education classroom: A study of its intrinsic ...
    School discipline and disruptive classroom behaviour: The moderating effects of student perceptions. The Sociological Quarterly, 52(3), 346–375. https://doi ...
  28. [28]
    [PDF] Evidence-based Practices in Classroom Management
    Evidence base. Empirical evidence supports the use of multiple classroom management strategies implemented either individually or in conjunction with one ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] Schoolwide and Classroom Discipline - Education Northwest
    Reviews the work of the Phi Delta Kappa Commission on Discipline and other sources to identify the elements which correlate with good school discipline.<|control11|><|separator|>
  30. [30]
    How Ancient Sparta's Harsh Military System Trained Boys Into ...
    Sep 8, 2020 · “The agoge aimed to instill soldierly virtues: strength, endurance, solidarity,” as the late Canadian historian Mark Golden wrote. But it ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] Everything in Moderation: Why Corporal Punishment Can Still Be an ...
    The earliest recorded forms of corporal punishment were used in many ancient Greek states such as Sparta, Troy, and Athens.
  32. [32]
    Corporal Punishment in the Ancient School - ResearchGate
    It is widely recognized that physical corporal punishment was experienced by many Greco-Roman children and youths when they attended schools.
  33. [33]
    Punishment and Medieval Education
    1 - 'Beginning with Anger': The Classical and Early Medieval Background. pp 19-50 · 2 - The Rules of the Rod: Discipline in Practice. pp 51-128 · 3 - 'Lore and ...
  34. [34]
    How much did medieval teachers beat their students?
    Nov 20, 2013 · Medieval writing suggests classroom punishments such as beating, flogging and whipping were carefully regimented – and were only meant to be ...
  35. [35]
    Medieval origins of debate on classroom beatings - ScienceDaily
    Nov 20, 2013 · Instead, medieval writing suggests classroom punishments such as beating, flogging and whipping were carefully regimented -- and were only meant ...
  36. [36]
    The Way of the Rod: The Functions of Beating in Late Medieval ...
    As classical and early medieval sources make clear, punishment in the ser- vice of education already had a long history in practice and speculation by the later ...
  37. [37]
    The Experience of Corporal Punishment in Schools, 1890–1940
    Corporal punishment was an important part of the educational experience of many children educated during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
  38. [38]
    The Fight against Corporal Punishment in American Schools - jstor
    classroom management. As Horace Mann himself pointed out, the arguments for and against corporal punishment often assumed an extreme and dogmatic shape,.
  39. [39]
    [PDF] HORACE MANN, JOHN DEWEY AND “THE STATE AS MORAL ...
    35 Mann's own writings embody this transition. In a lecture entitled “On School Punishments,” he states that physical punishment fosters fear in the child ...
  40. [40]
    What the schools were required to do - Industrial Memories
    Schools were required to follow rules, use moderate corporal punishment (hand, cane, strap) for grave transgressions, not for failures, and only on the open ...
  41. [41]
    School Discipline and Punishment in Antebellum America - jstor
    an 1846 article by Walt Whitman criticizing the frequent use of corporal punishment in Brooklyn's public schools. Convinced that corporal punishment was a ...
  42. [42]
    Reformatory Schools & the use of Corporal Punishment (Part 1/3)
    Between 1854 and 1857 a series of Reformatory and Industrial Schools Acts provided an alternative institution for juvenile offenders. The Youthful Offenders Act ...
  43. [43]
    Dewey's educational philosophy - THE EDUCATION HUB
    Jan 18, 2021 · Dewey suggested that individuals learn and grow as a result of experiences and interactions with the world.
  44. [44]
    [PDF] John Dewey in the 21st Century - ERIC
    Dewey (1938) described progressive education as “a product of discontent with traditional education” which imposes adult standards, subject matter, and ...
  45. [45]
    John Dewey: Portrait of a Progressive Thinker
    John Dewey would be moderately pleased with a pragmatic nation that combines traditional education with the insights of progressives.
  46. [46]
    larrycuban | Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice
    Nov 12, 2021 · Alternative in-school penalties became more acceptable than physical punishment such as staying after school, losing recess in elementary ...
  47. [47]
    Corporal Punishment in U.S. Public Schools: Prevalence, Disparities ...
    The prevalence of school corporal punishment has been on a steady decline since the late 1970s, decreasing from 4% of all schoolchildren in 1978 to less than 0 ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Changes in society's perception of corporal punishment
    Dec 16, 2022 · The education system may have borrowed the concept of corporal punishment from the Bible, but it was the latter that popularized the practice ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] The evolution of trends in child discipline advice in Europe and the ...
    Jul 8, 2024 · This shift was termed the “Permissive. Revolution” (Cross, 2004). The historical roots of permissive morality can be traced to the late.
  50. [50]
    [PDF] The American School Discipline Debate and the Persistence of ...
    Most nineteenth-century Americans accepted corporal punishment in their schools but some educators, parents, and jurists doubted its effectiveness. In his ...Missing: UK | Show results with:UK
  51. [51]
    Operant Conditioning - PMC - NIH
    Operant conditioning studies behavior controlled by consequences, specifically reversible behavior maintained by reinforcement schedules.<|separator|>
  52. [52]
    Operant Conditioning In Psychology: B.F. Skinner Theory
    Oct 17, 2025 · 2. Educational Applications. In the conventional learning situation, operant conditioning applies largely to issues of class and student ...How It Works · Examples · Schedules of Reinforcement
  53. [53]
    [PDF] Evidence-based Classroom Behaviour Management Strategies - ERIC
    This paper reviews a range of evidence-based strategies for application by teachers to reduce disruptive and challenging behaviours in their classrooms. These ...
  54. [54]
    [PDF] Using Positive Reinforcement to Increase Student Engagement in ...
    Apr 28, 2023 · Positive reinforcement is an effective way to manage students' behavior, promote their engagement in the learning process, and teach classroom ...
  55. [55]
    Using differential reinforcement for all to manage disruptive behaviors
    Disruptive behaviors produce harmful effects, which reduce students' well-being and learning opportunities. This paper presents a new strategy named ...
  56. [56]
    Classical Conditioning in the Classroom: 4 Examples
    Oct 15, 2021 · Classical conditioning in the classroom uses associations to influence behavior, like pairing music class with hunger, or good grades with a ...Missing: discipline | Show results with:discipline
  57. [57]
    Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development - Simply Psychology
    Oct 16, 2025 · Kohlberg's theory of moral development outlines how individuals progress through six stages of moral reasoning, grouped into three levels.Summary · Postconventional Morality · Heinz Dilemma · Problems with Kohlberg's...
  58. [58]
    Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development - Verywell Mind
    Jan 29, 2025 · This theory suggests that moral development occurs in six stages and that moral logic primarily focuses on seeking and maintaining justice.
  59. [59]
    the role of collective moral disengagement, authoritative teaching ...
    May 1, 2024 · The aim of this study was to examine whether collective moral disengagement and authoritative teaching at the classroom level, and student-teacher relationship ...
  60. [60]
    Classroom-Level Authoritative Teaching and Its Associations with ...
    Feb 20, 2023 · The aim of the present study was to investigate and clarify the association between authoritative teaching at the classroom level and bullying perpetration and ...
  61. [61]
    The Impact of Harsh Parental Discipline and Emotional Warmth on ...
    Jun 6, 2024 · The present study revealed that (1) Harsh parental discipline negatively predicted both internalized and externalized problems in adolescents.
  62. [62]
    [PDF] Students' Self-Adjustment, Self-Control, and Morality - ERIC
    These interactive group activities and self-reflection increase students' understanding of morality as something positive. They also help understand how various.
  63. [63]
    Discipline, Moral Development, and Levels of Schooling
    There are other processes which, while tangential to class- room discipline, are potentially important to moral development at the high school level.
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Social-Class Influences on Discipline at School - ASCD
    Influences of Family Background. Social-class influences upon discipline in schools arise out of the fact that each boy or girl entering a classroom comes.
  65. [65]
    [PDF] School Discipline, Student Achievement, and Social Inequality
    Richard Arum (2003) highlights how students' perception of the fairness (or legitimacy) of school discipline has a greater impact on student outcomes than ...
  66. [66]
    Physical Discipline and Children's Adjustment: Cultural ... - NIH
    Countries with the lowest use of physical discipline showed the strongest association between mothers' use and children's behavior problems, but in all ...
  67. [67]
    School Discipline - Sociology of Education - iResearchNet
    Changing perceptions of children, challenges to institutional authority, and fear of violence and crime are three of the most important influences.
  68. [68]
    Cultural Differences in the Classroom - Educational Psychology
    Teachers need to understand that diversity—understand how students' habitual attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors differ from each other, and especially how they ...<|separator|>
  69. [69]
    Understanding Cultural Awareness and Classroom Management
    Apr 25, 2022 · Findings show that positive/ negative classroom management indicators significantly predicted cultural-historical awareness. This indicates ...
  70. [70]
    Full article: School Discipline and Disruptive Classroom Behavior
    Dec 1, 2016 · This study examines the relationship between school discipline and student classroom behavior. A traditional deterrence framework predicts that more severe ...Missing: influences | Show results with:influences
  71. [71]
    School Corporal Punishment in Global Perspective - PubMed Central
    Mar 1, 2018 · Corporal punishment is legally prohibited in schools in 128 countries and allowed in 69 (35%) (Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment ...
  72. [72]
    Corporal Punishment in Schools | American Academy of Pediatrics
    Aug 21, 2023 · At present, corporal punishment is legal in public schools in 18 states and legal in private schools in all states except Iowa and New Jersey ( ...Introduction and Background · Recommendations · Council on School Health...
  73. [73]
    Corporal Punishment in Schools Still Legal in Many States | NEA
    May 20, 2024 · During the 2017-18 school year, roughly 69,000 students received corporal punishment, down from 107,000 in 2013. The most recent number ...Missing: birching | Show results with:birching
  74. [74]
    Corporal punishment of children and health
    Aug 20, 2025 · Studies have shown that lifetime prevalence of school corporal punishment was above 70% in Africa and Central America, past-year prevalence was ...
  75. [75]
    [PDF] Ending corporal punishment in schools to transform education for all ...
    136 states have enacted prohibition of corporal punishment in schools - up from 125 in 2015 - and our understanding of how to eliminate it in practice is ...<|separator|>
  76. [76]
    Exclusionary Discipline
    Exclusionary discipline describes any type of school disciplinary action that removes or excludes a student from his or her usual educational setting.
  77. [77]
    Suspension, Long-term Suspension, Expulsion, and Due Process ...
    Jul 26, 2022 · Short-term suspension is an exclusionary discipline practice that can be used for in or out of school suspension for five days or less for a ...
  78. [78]
    School Suspension or Expulsion | VTLawHelp.org
    Mar 11, 2024 · This is called “exclusionary discipline.” There are two main types of exclusionary discipline: suspension and expulsion. Find more information ...
  79. [79]
    NYC school suspensions dip overall, but lengthier punishments tick up
    Nov 26, 2024 · Schools issued 27,724 suspensions during the 2023-24 school year, a 2.4% decline from the year before when the punishments roared back to pre- ...
  80. [80]
    [PDF] 2023-2024 Consolidated Data Report - eBOARDsolutions
    In 2023−2024, North Carolina public schools assigned 264,510 in-school suspensions (ISS) of a half-day or more to 131,704 students, with a rate of 175.38 in- ...Missing: statistics US
  81. [81]
    [PDF] 2020-21 Civil Rights Data Collection Student Discipline and School ...
    The 2020-21 CRDC measures student access to resources and school climate factors like student discipline, harassment, and offenses. It aims to ensure equal ...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] Relationship Between School Suspension and Student Outcomes
    A meta-analysis was conducted on 53 cases from 34 studies. The results revealed a significant inverse relationship between suspensions and achievement, along ...
  83. [83]
    PACE - School Suspensions' Positive Link to Drop-Out and Negative ...
    Sep 8, 2015 · A meta-analysis of 53 cases from 34 publications aimed to understand the impact of school suspensions on student outcomes.<|separator|>
  84. [84]
    Disciplinary referrals, teachers, and the sources of racial disciplinary ...
    Jan 30, 2023 · In the first study of this series, we find that Black students are more than twice as likely to have received at least one disciplinary referral ...
  85. [85]
    [PDF] Sources of Racial and Gender Disproportionality in School ...
    Similar discriminant analyses by race revealed no evidence that racial dis- parities in school punishment could be explained by higher rates of African.
  86. [86]
    The discipline gap in context: The role of school racial and ethnic ...
    We found that Black students were disproportionately suspended more often, for more days, and more likely for soft offenses.
  87. [87]
    Use of Restorative Justice and Restorative Practices at School
    Eight studies highlighted the reduction in the experiences of aggression, violence, and bullying in the schools that had adopted the restorative approach and ...
  88. [88]
    [PDF] THE EFFECTS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF RESTORATIVE ...
    Oct 22, 2021 · 8 The authors find treatment caused student suspensions to fall 13 percent from baseline and the number of days suspended to fall 16 percent ...
  89. [89]
    Why Do They Keep Trying to “Validate” Restorative Practices with ...
    Feb 5, 2022 · The most methodologically-sound research studies report that Restorative (Justice/Practice) Programs have actually produced negative results ...
  90. [90]
    Restorative justice isn't working, but that's not what the media is ...
    Jan 14, 2019 · The results were curiously mixed. Suspensions went down in elementary but not middle schools. Teachers reported improved school safety, professional ...
  91. [91]
    Nine Criticisms of School Restorative Justice - Psychology Today
    Mar 7, 2019 · What are the criticisms of restorative justice in the school context? · 1. It takes too long. · 2. It is too emotionally draining. · 3. Teachers ...
  92. [92]
    [PDF] Restorative Justice in U.S. Schools: An Updated Research Review
    Bullying affects the perpetrator and victim, as well as overall school climate, leading to students feeling unsafe and unsupported, which can negatively impact ...
  93. [93]
    Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports - PBIS.org
    Oct 3, 2023 · This brief presents the findings of a systematic literature review exploring how Tier 1 PBIS implementation affects valued educational outcomes.
  94. [94]
    Effects of School-Wide Positive Behavioral Interventions and ... - NIH
    Results indicate significant impacts on children's aggressive behavior problems, concentration problems, office discipline referrals, emotion regulation, and ...
  95. [95]
    Impact Evaluation of Complementarities Between Positive ... - ICPSR
    Dec 10, 2024 · A recent meta-analysis of 32 experimental and quasi-experimental impact studies of PBIS found that PBIS reduced disciplinary exclusions and problem behavior.
  96. [96]
    Center on PBIS | Interactive Database of PBIS Research
    The purpose of our study was to examine Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) implementation fidelity and student outcomes for secondary schools ...
  97. [97]
    [PDF] An Exploration of the Relationship between PbIS and Discipline ...
    This study highlights the critical need for more accurate data on discipline outcomes and further research on effective intervention. Keywords. PBIS, positive ...
  98. [98]
    Examining the Effectiveness of Positive Behavioral Interventions and ...
    Jul 11, 2025 · Most of the research regarding the efficacy of PBIS has shown positive results (Childs et al., 2016; Gage, Whitford, & Katsiyannis, 2018), but ...
  99. [99]
    Schoolwide positive behavioural interventions and supports ... - NIH
    The purpose of this article is to describe an equity-centred schoolwide PBIS approach that harnesses behavioural theory and the PBIS framework.
  100. [100]
    [PDF] time-out interventions and strategies: a brief review and - ERIC
    Time-out is a behavior change technique used to decrease the frequency of a target behavior, and is most effective for behaviors that are maintained either.
  101. [101]
    [PDF] Effects of Delayed Time-out on Problem Behavior of Preschool ...
    In the present investigation, we first replicated findings that immediate time-out was effective at reducing target prob- lem behavior of preschool children; we ...Missing: detention | Show results with:detention<|separator|>
  102. [102]
    [PDF] The Effectiveness of Isolation Timeouts for Students with Severe ...
    This research project aimed to augment the data on isolation timeouts in therapeutic day schools and to contribute to the study of the effectiveness of ...
  103. [103]
    Examining the Impacts of Corporal Punishment in Secondary Schools
    Apr 28, 2024 · Results: The study revealed significant findings, with 68.3% of participants reporting increased fear, 70% decreased self-confidence, 45% ...
  104. [104]
    [PDF] The Effects of School Corporal Punishment Policies on Student ...
    Apr 11, 2025 · This result indicates that schools using corporal punishment have student behavior comparable to schools not using the practice, implying that.Missing: immediate | Show results with:immediate
  105. [105]
    School Corporal Punishment and Its Associations with Achievement ...
    May 28, 2019 · Having ever experienced school corporal punishment was linked with lower high school GPA, higher current depressive symptoms, and greater likelihood of ...
  106. [106]
    Page 7: Using Classroom Reinforcement Systems - IRIS Center
    In addition to rule reminders and positive feedback, some teachers use a more structured approach to motivate and acknowledge children for following the rules.
  107. [107]
    [PDF] “No Excuses” Charter Schools: A Meta-Analysis of the Experimental ...
    In this article, we conduct a thorough review of this research and use meta-analytic techniques to estimate effects of No Excuses charter schools on student ...
  108. [108]
    [PDF] “No Excuses” Charter Schools and College Enrollment New ...
    What's more, even if the difference is causal, the short-term treatment effect on test scores may not translate into long-term benefits if the effects are ...<|separator|>
  109. [109]
    New Analysis: 'No-Excuses' Charter Schools Produce Huge Gains ...
    Feb 20, 2018 · “The effects are particularly large for disadvantaged students, English learners, special education students, and children who enter charters ...
  110. [110]
    [PDF] The Impact of Funding for School Police on Student Discipline and ...
    I also find that exposure to a three-year federal grant for school police is associated with a 2.5 percent decrease in high school graduation rates and a four ...
  111. [111]
    Has Discipline in School Deteriorated? - OECD
    Results from PISA 2009 show that disciplinary climate is strongly associated with student performance. Students who reported that their reading lessons are ...
  112. [112]
    [PDF] School Discipline across Countries: Theory, Measurement and Effect
    Sep 15, 2020 · At the student level (column 4), objective discipline again exhibits better correlation with the PISA score (0.24 versus 0.15), and while at 12 ...
  113. [113]
    Exclusionary Discipline and School Crime: Do Suspensions Make ...
    ... school crime rates or the number of student offenders in the following school year. However, increasing suspension rates for violent incidents significantly ...
  114. [114]
    [PDF] Crime, Violence, Discipline, and Safety in U.S. Public Schools
    (2024). Crime, Violence, Discipline, and Safety in U.S. Public Schools: Findings From the School Survey on Crime and Safety: 2021–22 (NCES ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  115. [115]
    The Abolition of School Discipline | National Affairs
    Even in progressive strongholds like Madison, Wisconsin, teachers didn't support leniency in response to misbehavior, but their opinions held no sway over a ...
  116. [116]
    Long-term Impacts of School Suspension on Adult Crime
    Sep 24, 2020 · These negative outcomes included lower educational achievement, lower graduation rates, lower college enrollment rates, and higher involvement ...Missing: meta- | Show results with:meta-
  117. [117]
    The long-term consequences of school suspension and expulsion ...
    Jul 27, 2024 · We find suspended and expelled youth exhibit significantly higher depressive symptoms in adolescence when compared to their counterparts with no history of ...
  118. [118]
    Charter schools after three decades: Reviewing the research on ...
    Jan 17, 2023 · Meta-analyses report that “no excuses” charter schools have large, positive, and statistically significant effects on student math and reading ...
  119. [119]
    The Bigger Picture of Charter School Results - Education Next
    Apr 18, 2022 · These “participant effects” are, on average, small and positive for test scores—more positive in urban areas and in schools using a “No Excuses” ...
  120. [120]
    Physical punishment of children: lessons from 20 years of research
    We present an analysis of the research on physical punishment spanning the past two decades to assist physicians in this important role.
  121. [121]
    School Discipline and Disruptive Classroom Behavior - ResearchGate
    Aug 5, 2025 · This study examines the relationship between school discipline and student classroom behavior. A traditional deterrence framework predicts that more severe ...
  122. [122]
    The Association Between School Discipline and Self-Control From ...
    Dec 11, 2020 · The current study considers teacher-student relationship and two other components of school discipline, namely, structure and support, ...
  123. [123]
    Teacher Punishment Intensity and Parental Trust: A Moderated ...
    May 1, 2025 · In short, this study constructed a moderated moderating effect model to comprehensively examine the effects of teacher discipline intensity, ...
  124. [124]
    [PDF] A Comprehensive Review of Disparities and Alternative Approaches
    There is empirical evidence that suggests that low student achievement is pre- dictive of receiving exclusionary discipline.
  125. [125]
    [PDF] Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors ...
    Ten of the 11 meta-analyses indicate parental corporal punish- ment is associated with the following undesirable behaviors and experiences: decreased moral ...<|separator|>
  126. [126]
    Child outcomes of nonabusive and customary physical punishment ...
    All 6 that used clinical samples and all 3 sequential-analysis studies found beneficial outcomes, such as reduced noncompliance and fighting.
  127. [127]
    Resolving the Contradictory Conclusions from Three Reviews of ...
    Oct 4, 2024 · Three literature reviews of controlled longitudinal studies of child outcomes of customary physical punishment have arrived at contradictory conclusions.
  128. [128]
    The Association between School Corporal Punishment and Child ...
    Mar 9, 2022 · A meta-analysis on corporal punishment by parents showed that CP impacts older children more than younger children [14]. Further, SCP turns out ...
  129. [129]
    The Strength of the Causal Evidence Against Physical Punishment ...
    There is no evidence that physical punishment is effective at improving child behavior or at reducing other negative outcomes for children. The research linking ...
  130. [130]
    [PDF] Corporal Punishment in Schools and its Effect on Academic Success
    The prevalence of corporal punishment of children in schools remains high in the United States. In spite of many education and other national groups calling ...
  131. [131]
    Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative ...
    This meta-analysis investigates differences between the effect sizes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics for child outcomes in 26 ...
  132. [132]
    Physical discipline is harmful and ineffective
    May 1, 2019 · A new APA resolution cites evidence that physical punishment such as spanking can cause lasting harm for children.
  133. [133]
    [PDF] An update on the scientific evidence for and against the legal ...
    Jan 19, 2024 · This commentary provides a concise overview of physical discipline research since 2004, emphasizing the methodological rigor of the research ...
  134. [134]
    https://ocrdata.ed.gov/
  135. [135]
    Black students are punished more often | UC Berkeley Public Health
    Nov 25, 2024 · In schools where less than 25% of students received free or reduced price lunches, Black students were 5.3 times more likely to be suspended and ...
  136. [136]
    Teachers See Misbehavior from Black Students as More Blameworthy
    Dec 14, 2023 · “We found racial bias on the part of the teachers in the sample,” Owens reports. “Black boys were perceived as being more blameworthy than their ...
  137. [137]
    Government Watchdog Finds Racial Bias in School Discipline
    Apr 4, 2018 · Critics of the Obama-era guidance have questioned whether students of color suffer from unfair treatment under school discipline policies. The ...Missing: critiques narrative
  138. [138]
    Prior problem behavior accounts for the racial gap in school ...
    Consistent with forty years of social science findings, data from the ECLS-K revealed that black youth are suspended at rates significantly higher than those of ...
  139. [139]
    UNPACKING THE DRIVERS OF RACIAL DISPARITIES IN SCHOOL ...
    An alternative perspective argues that racial differences in suspension are due to differences in students' behaviors, such as rule-breaking and aggression, ...
  140. [140]
    Let's talk about discipline and disparate impact (again)
    May 14, 2025 · The best evidence indicates that differences in student behavior explain most of the racial gap in disciplinary outcomes. Yes, Black ...
  141. [141]
    Behavior versus bias: How to interpret discipline disparities
    May 15, 2025 · Yet the same study shows Black students getting suspended at twice the rate as White students—a huge difference. The reason is that Black ...
  142. [142]
    Soft 'restorative justice' discipline policy a bust in NYC public schools
    Jul 24, 2025 · It found that, despite implementing restorative justice practices, there was no statistically significant difference in climate and suspensions ...
  143. [143]
    The Cost of Restorative Justice in New York City Schools
    Jul 24, 2025 · The changes undermined teacher authority and weakened classroom order rather than improving school climate and advancing equity. They diverted ...
  144. [144]
    6 Reasons Why PBIS is a Terrible Idea - Gifted Guru
    In many schools where PBIS is implemented, there are restrictions on how misbehavior is handled. The idea is that you try to ignore it and reward positive ...
  145. [145]
    The predictable failure of 'restorative justice' in schools - The Hill
    Sep 1, 2023 · In this way, restorative justice fails to inculcate in students the self-control required to behave in pro-social ways. After all, whether I ...
  146. [146]
    Op-ed: Illinois educators see the light on school crime. Will CTU?
    Jun 27, 2024 · The Illinois Policy Institute found that violent crime surged 26% in Chicago Public Schools while arrests hit record lows. In 2023, there were ...
  147. [147]
    When School-Discipline 'Reform' Makes Schools Less Safe
    In Chicago, peer respect deteriorated and teachers reported more disruptive behavior. In St. Paul, the district attorney declared school violence a “public- ...
  148. [148]
    Same Policies That Failed to Stop Florida Shooter Exist in School ...
    May 8, 2018 · Critics of President Donald Trump said his response to the Florida school shooting earlier this year was ill-conceived and a failure.
  149. [149]
    Broward's PROMISE program 'irrelevant' to Nikolas Cruz's massacre ...
    Jul 10, 2018 · “The PROMISE program didn't fail for Cruz,” Pinellas County Sheriff and commission chair Bob Gualtieri told reporters. “It would never in ...
  150. [150]
    Shaken by post-pandemic disruptions, some states take a harder ...
    Sep 25, 2023 · Several states, including Arizona, have cracked down on disruptive student school behavior this legislative session following an increase in incidents.Missing: reversals | Show results with:reversals
  151. [151]
    Lawmakers across U.S. push for harsher school discipline - Chalkbeat
    Mar 28, 2023 · The bills' supporters say the 2019 reforms have deterred schools from disciplining unruly and even violent students, which erodes safety and ...
  152. [152]
    Consolidated Data Report Shows Decrease in School Violence ...
    Feb 5, 2025 · Overall, rates of crime and violence during the 2023-24 school year decreased by 7.7% from 2022-23. While instances of assault on school ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies<|separator|>
  153. [153]
    The case against discipline reform - The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
    Oct 3, 2024 · There's simply no evidence that punitive discipline improves the behavior of a student who is prone to acting out. What's more, suspensions ...
  154. [154]
    Corporal Punishment in K-12 Public Schools: Where Does It Stand ...
    Nov 19, 2024 · During the 2017-18 school year (SY), nearly 70,000 American public school children received corporal punishment from K-12 school officials.1 ...Missing: birching | Show results with:birching
  155. [155]
    Global progress - End Corporal Punishment of Children
    End Corporal Punishment acts as a catalyst for progress towards universal prohibition and elimination of corporal punishment of children.
  156. [156]
    Tajikistan becomes the world's 67th country to ban corporal ... - Unicef
    Aug 30, 2024 · The legislation makes Tajikistan the 67 th country worldwide to ban the corporal punishment of children, as announced earlier this week.<|separator|>
  157. [157]
    Thailand Becomes 68th Country to Ban Corporal Punishment
    Mar 27, 2025 · BANGKOK (March 27, 2025) – Thailand became the 68th country to ban the use of corporal punishment this week, but it will still take 60 years ...
  158. [158]
    Ending corporal punishment in schools: seven key steps for change
    Apr 29, 2025 · In 62 countries, corporal punishment remains lawful in educational settings in 62 states. Schools free of violence are a prerequisite to ...Missing: global | Show results with:global
  159. [159]
    Eight countries pledge to ban corporal punishment in 'fundamental ...
    Nov 7, 2024 · The governments of Panama, Kyrgyzstan, Uganda, Burundi, Sri Lanka and the Czech Republic have said they will totally prohibit corporal ...
  160. [160]
    2024: significant progress to end corporal punishment of children ...
    Dec 18, 2024 · Five more states - Burundi, the Czech Republic, Kyrgyzstan, Sri Lanka, and Uganda – pledged to prohibit all corporal punishment of children ...
  161. [161]
    Classroom Discipline Across Forty-One Countries - Sage Journals
    Countries' economies and cultural values were linked to reported classroom discipline. In countries that were poorer, more equal, or had more rigid gender roles ...Missing: variations worldwide
  162. [162]
    (PDF) Classroom Discipline Across Forty-One Countries: School ...
    Aug 7, 2025 · Countries' economies and cultural values were linked to reported classroom discipline. In countries that were poorer, more equal, or had more ...
  163. [163]
    https://dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/36-4586.pdf
  164. [164]
    20 U.S. Code § 7961 - Gun-free requirements - Law.Cornell.Edu
    A State law requiring local educational agencies to expel from school for a period of not less than 1 year a student who is determined to have brought a ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  165. [165]
    IDEA's Regulations on Discipline
    Here, verbatim, are IDEA's discipline procedures. They are found in the final regulations for Part B of IDEA from §§300.530 through 300.536.§ 300.530 Authority of school... · § 300.532 Appeal. · § 300.533 Placement during...
  166. [166]
    [PDF] [RESCINDED] Dear Colleague Letter on the Nondiscriminatory ...
    The Departments initiate investigations of student discipline policies and practices at particular schools based on complaints the Departments ...
  167. [167]
    Withdraw the Obama Administration's "Dear Colleague" Letter on ...
    The Obama Administration's 2014 letter coerced many school systems into adopting illegal racial quotas in their disciplinary decision-making.
  168. [168]
    [PDF] "Dear Colleague" Letter - U.S. Department of Education
    Dec 21, 2018 · School Discipline Guidance Package FAQs, dated January 8, 2014. The Dear Colleague Letter on Nondiscriminatory Administration of Discipline.
  169. [169]
    Reinstating Common Sense School Discipline Policies
    Apr 23, 2025 · The 2023 guidance thus effectively reinstated the practice of weaponizing Title VI to promote an approach to school discipline based on discriminatory equity ...Missing: reversals | Show results with:reversals
  170. [170]
    Child Discipline Laws by State 2025 - World Population Review
    As it pertains to teachers, 17 states allow teachers to initiate corporal punishment on public school students when necessary to correct their behavior.
  171. [171]
    In the name of parental rights, new law requires sign-off for corporal ...
    Jul 8, 2025 · HB 1255, passed this spring, requires parents to consent to corporal punishment either for the school year or before each instance the ...
  172. [172]
    Here are 5 new laws that will affect Illinois classrooms
    Aug 11, 2025 · House Bill 4175 prohibits nonpublic schools from using corporal punishment in all circumstances. It prohibits school personnel of any school ...<|separator|>
  173. [173]
    Map Shows Which States Allow Corporal Punishment in Schools
    Aug 22, 2025 · In Illinois, Ohio and Wisconsin, while corporal punishment is banned in schools, there are still reported cases of it happening, according to ...
  174. [174]
    Rising Discipline Problems in Schools: Another Sign of Pandemic's ...
    Mar 20, 2024 · Incidents of student misconduct have risen in New York City since pandemic disruptions, though serious crimes in schools have decreased.
  175. [175]
    Weighing the Impact of the New Trump Rules for School Discipline
    Jul 24, 2025 · Most schools recognize that when you suspend fewer kids, your test scores go up, your graduation rates go up and crime goes down. There's a ...<|separator|>
  176. [176]
    Trump School Discipline Executive Order Will Benefit Students
    Apr 30, 2025 · Restoring order in America's classrooms will require undoing years of misguided federal policies that prioritized racial quotas and therapeutic ...Missing: reversals | Show results with:reversals<|separator|>
  177. [177]
    Here's How the Pandemic Changed School Discipline
    Nov 28, 2022 · Students were suspended less frequently but Black, poor, and disabled students were punished at higher rates after the pandemic.
  178. [178]
    Executive Order Regarding Student Discipline and California's SB ...
    Jul 21, 2025 · Under Education Code section 48900(k), as amended by SB 274, students in grades 9 through 12 may no longer be suspended for “willful defiance.” ...
  179. [179]
    Some states reexamine school discipline as Trump order paves go ...
    May 15, 2025 · It would reverse earlier changes that limited suspensions for younger students. It also would mandate that students making terroristic threats ...Missing: reversals | Show results with:reversals
  180. [180]
    States balance supports and discipline to address troubling student ...
    Jun 16, 2025 · Post-COVID, schools have reported a rise in unruly behaviors, including among young students. Some of the behaviors have been violent and have ...