学校纪律改革:学区领导对修订后的国家学生行为准则的回应

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
F. Curran, Maida A. Finch
{"title":"学校纪律改革:学区领导对修订后的国家学生行为准则的回应","authors":"F. Curran, Maida A. Finch","doi":"10.1177/0013161X20925893","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Over the past decade, increasing attention to the negative impacts of exclusionary discipline and disparities therein has led many state educational leaders to enact school discipline reforms. This study examined the response by school district leadership to a state’s revision of guidelines for student codes of conduct. Data: This study leveraged longitudinal data on school district codes of conduct from the 2013–2014 to 2015–2016 school years across the state of Maryland. Codes of conduct were coded in an iterative fashion according to a common set of infraction–response combinations. Research Design: Using a pre–post analytic design, this study examined changes in districts’ codified infractions, responses to infractions, and the overall tier of response. Furthermore, the study compared alignment between state guidelines and district codes of conduct while exploring variation in codified discipline across districts. Findings: Findings suggest that leaders in districts increased the number of response options available for most types of infractions, with the largest increases occurring for more serious infractions. While these increases tended to be driven by increases in the codification of less exclusionary responses, there were nevertheless sizeable increases in the availability of in-school suspension and removal/intervention. In almost all cases, school districts reported distributions of response options that were at a higher tier level than that recommended by the state. Conclusions: Findings are discussed in the context of current efforts to reform school discipline and the implications of such reform for implementation by district and school leadership.","PeriodicalId":48091,"journal":{"name":"Educational Administration Quarterly","volume":"57 1","pages":"179 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0013161X20925893","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reforming School Discipline: Responses by School District Leadership to Revised State Guidelines for Student Codes of Conduct\",\"authors\":\"F. Curran, Maida A. Finch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0013161X20925893\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: Over the past decade, increasing attention to the negative impacts of exclusionary discipline and disparities therein has led many state educational leaders to enact school discipline reforms. This study examined the response by school district leadership to a state’s revision of guidelines for student codes of conduct. Data: This study leveraged longitudinal data on school district codes of conduct from the 2013–2014 to 2015–2016 school years across the state of Maryland. Codes of conduct were coded in an iterative fashion according to a common set of infraction–response combinations. Research Design: Using a pre–post analytic design, this study examined changes in districts’ codified infractions, responses to infractions, and the overall tier of response. Furthermore, the study compared alignment between state guidelines and district codes of conduct while exploring variation in codified discipline across districts. Findings: Findings suggest that leaders in districts increased the number of response options available for most types of infractions, with the largest increases occurring for more serious infractions. While these increases tended to be driven by increases in the codification of less exclusionary responses, there were nevertheless sizeable increases in the availability of in-school suspension and removal/intervention. In almost all cases, school districts reported distributions of response options that were at a higher tier level than that recommended by the state. Conclusions: Findings are discussed in the context of current efforts to reform school discipline and the implications of such reform for implementation by district and school leadership.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48091,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Administration Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"179 - 220\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0013161X20925893\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Administration Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20925893\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Administration Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X20925893","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

目的:在过去的十年里,人们越来越关注排斥性学科及其差异的负面影响,导致许多国家教育领导人制定了学校学科改革。这项研究考察了学区领导层对一个州修订学生行为准则的反应。数据:本研究利用了马里兰州2013-2014至2015-2016学年学区行为准则的纵向数据。根据一组常见的违规-反应组合,以迭代的方式对行为准则进行了编码。研究设计:使用前后分析设计,本研究考察了地区法规化违规行为、对违规行为的反应以及整体反应级别的变化。此外,该研究比较了州指导方针和地区行为准则之间的一致性,同时探索了不同地区成文纪律的差异。调查结果:调查结果表明,地区领导人增加了大多数类型违规行为的应对选项数量,其中增幅最大的是更严重的违规行为。虽然这些增长往往是由编纂排斥性较低的回应的增加推动的,但校内停课和搬迁/干预的可用性却有相当大的增加。在几乎所有情况下,学区都报告了比州建议的更高级别的应对方案的分布情况。结论:研究结果是在当前学校纪律改革的背景下讨论的,以及这种改革对地区和学校领导层实施的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reforming School Discipline: Responses by School District Leadership to Revised State Guidelines for Student Codes of Conduct
Purpose: Over the past decade, increasing attention to the negative impacts of exclusionary discipline and disparities therein has led many state educational leaders to enact school discipline reforms. This study examined the response by school district leadership to a state’s revision of guidelines for student codes of conduct. Data: This study leveraged longitudinal data on school district codes of conduct from the 2013–2014 to 2015–2016 school years across the state of Maryland. Codes of conduct were coded in an iterative fashion according to a common set of infraction–response combinations. Research Design: Using a pre–post analytic design, this study examined changes in districts’ codified infractions, responses to infractions, and the overall tier of response. Furthermore, the study compared alignment between state guidelines and district codes of conduct while exploring variation in codified discipline across districts. Findings: Findings suggest that leaders in districts increased the number of response options available for most types of infractions, with the largest increases occurring for more serious infractions. While these increases tended to be driven by increases in the codification of less exclusionary responses, there were nevertheless sizeable increases in the availability of in-school suspension and removal/intervention. In almost all cases, school districts reported distributions of response options that were at a higher tier level than that recommended by the state. Conclusions: Findings are discussed in the context of current efforts to reform school discipline and the implications of such reform for implementation by district and school leadership.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Administration Quarterly
Educational Administration Quarterly EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Educational Administration Quarterly presents prominent empirical and conceptual articles focused on timely and critical leadership and policy issues of educational organizations. As an editorial team, we embrace traditional and emergent research paradigms, methods, and issues. We particularly promote the publication of rigorous and relevant scholarly work that enhances linkages among and utility for educational policy, practice, and research arenas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信