Impact of disciplinary and alternative practices on educational access

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Request accessible transcript

Transcript (if available)

Content DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES
Impact of Disciplinary and Alternative Practices
on Educational Access
by
Ulises Abel Garcia
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
(Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)
December 2019
Copyright 2019 Ulises Abel Garcia
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 1
Table of Contents
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 3
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction to the Problem of Practice .......................................................................................... 5
Organizational Context and Mission ........................................................................................ 6
Importance of Addressing the Problem .................................................................................... 7
Purpose of the Project and Questions ....................................................................................... 7
Organizational Performance Goal............................................................................................. 8
Stakeholder Group of Focus ..................................................................................................... 9
Review of the Literature ............................................................................................................... 11
Zero Tolerance in Education ................................................................................................... 12
The Impact of School Suspensions ......................................................................................... 13
Building the Foundation of Effective Disciplinary Practices. ................................................ 13
Characteristics of Effective Disciplinary Practices................................................................. 14
Section A: Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................... 17
Section B: Motivation ............................................................................................................. 20
Section C: Organizational Influences ..................................................................................... 24
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of School Administrators’ Knowledge
Motivation and the Organizational Context ............................................................................ 28
Qualitative Data Collection........................................................................................................... 31
Interviews ................................................................................................................................ 31
Results and Findings ..................................................................................................................... 34
Results and Findings for Research Questions No. 1 ............................................................... 36
Results and Findings for Research Question No. 2 ................................................................ 39
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 2
Results and Findings for Research Question No. 3 ................................................................ 44
Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 48
Knowledge Recommendations ............................................................................................... 48
Motivational Influences .......................................................................................................... 52
Organizational Recommendations .......................................................................................... 55
Level 4: Results....................................................................................................................... 58
Level 3: Behavior .................................................................................................................... 60
Level 2: Learning .................................................................................................................... 64
Level 1: Reaction .................................................................................................................... 68
Evaluation Tools ..................................................................................................................... 69
Data Analysis and Reporting .................................................................................................. 70
References ..................................................................................................................................... 73
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................... 81
Appendix B: Credibility and Trustworthiness .............................................................................. 84
Appendix C: Ethics ....................................................................................................................... 86
Appendix D: Limitations and Delimitations ................................................................................. 88
Appendix E: Immediate Feedback Survey ................................................................................... 89
Appendix F: Blended Evaluation Tool ......................................................................................... 90

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 3
List of Tables
Table 1. Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals ................. 10
Table 2. Summary Table of Assumed Influences on Performance .............................................. 27
Table 3. Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations .......................................... 49
Table 4. Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations........................................... 53
Table 5. Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations ....................................... 56
Table 6. Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes.......................... 59
Table 7. Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation ................................ 61
Table 8. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ............................................................. 63
Table 9. Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program.......................................... 67
Table 10. Components to Measure Reactions to the Program ...................................................... 68
Table 11. Evaluation of Organizational Change and Readiness for the Reduction of
Exclusionary Discipline Practices................................................................................................. 71

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 4
List of Figures
Figure 1. Conceptual framework — The relationship between KMOs, school
administrators, and SCSD. ............................................................................................................ 29

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 5
Introduction to the Problem of Practice
This paper addresses the problem of disproportionately high rates of exclusionary
disciplinary practices for students of color. Exclusionary discipline refers to school disciplinary
actions that remove a student from an academic setting, such as an administrative referral,
suspension, or expulsion (Brown & Steele, 2015). Students of color, primarily African–
American students, in K–12 public schools, are suspended or expelled at greater rates than the
general public (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2014). The strong
correlation that exists between disproportionate discipline implementation, and future
involvement in the criminal justice system; low academic achievement; and lack of school
connectedness demonstrates that this is a problem (Rocque & Paternoster, 2011). Moreover,
secondary data from the Denver Public Schools School Satisfaction Survey for student-level
reports of school connectedness found that racial disparities in exclusionary discipline are
negatively linked to the way students perceive respect from teachers and administrators and the
way they perceive the school’s motivation to meet their needs (Anyon, Zhang, & Hazel, 2016).
In addition, students of color feel more disconnected at school than their White student
counterparts. This may be a reason why Black students participate in behaviors that result in
exclusionary discipline at higher rates than White students (Anyon et al., 2016, p. 342). The
evidence highlights that U.S. schools, K–12, have not been able to address disciplinary behaviors
and the disproportionality of the implementation of those behaviors on students of color
compared to other student populations. This problem is important to address because doing so
would increase equitable access to learning time, which would lead to higher academic
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 6
achievement, graduation rates, college readiness, and decrease the probability of future
incarceration.
Organizational Context and Mission
The Southern California School District (SCSD, a pseudonym) is an urban district in
Southern California that serves 28,000 students 41 different educational sites—from preschool,
Transitional Kindergarten, K–6, middle schools, a K–8 magnet school, and alternative and
comprehensive high schools, graduating 96 percent of its high school seniors. Furthermore,
SCSD serves a diverse population represented by 56% Hispanic, 28% White, 10% Asian, 4%
Other, 2% Filipino, and 1% African–American. 24% of the students are English Language
Learners, 49% are eligible for free and reduced lunch, and 11% are students with disabilities.
Unduplicated students represent 53% of the student population. The District also offers dual-
language programs in Mandarin/English and Spanish/English.1 The District aims to prepare all of
its students to become impactful, positive global citizens, engaging in an academic, career or life
path that they desire. SCSD plans for its students by engaging in a process of continuous
improvement that establishes high expectations and creates a learning environment that considers
the competitive global economy. The District prides itself on its emphasis on career technical
education courses and college and career readiness pathways, enrolling 7,000 students in said
courses. There is a recognition, however, that suspension rates must be addressed due to a recent
increase, in addition to addressing the challenges of English Learners and students with
disabilities. The primary role of every SCSD staff and faculty member centers on the realization
of the district’s mission and to increase the academic achievement of all students.

1 All numbers are approximated, so as not to identify the school in question.

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 7
Importance of Addressing the Problem
Addressing the problem of disproportionate disciplinary practices in U.S. school systems
is important to solve for various reasons. It is linked to the disproportionate rate of people of
color who are incarcerated, which is linked with a student’s future success. Johanna Wald and
Daniel F. Losen (2003, p. 10–11) argue that the disparities within the school system parallel
disparities that exist in the youth criminal justice system, which is known as “prison track and
school-to-prison pipeline.” The disparity is highlighted by the fact that in “1998, black youths
with no prior criminal records were 6 times, and Latino youths 3 times, more likely to be
incarcerated than whites for the same offenses (Po-Yamagata & Jones, 2000, as cited in Wald &
Losen, 2003). Moreover, results on state standard-based assessments have been negatively
impacted by exclusionary disciplinary practices (Tobin, Hawken, & Frank, 2012). If schools do
not evaluate their existing discipline models and continue to practice and antiquated and
disproportionate brand of discipline, thousands of young students will have limited academic
instruction, fewer employment opportunities, and potentially a lower quality of life in the long
term. Furthermore, when discipline models are not evaluated, schools decrease their ability to
provide students with equitable access to learning time, which could lead to lower academic
performance; lower graduation rates; lower levels of college readiness; and increase the
probability of future incarceration (Rocque & Paternoster, 2011, p. 633).
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to explore how the knowledge, motivation, and the
organizational systems of secondary school administrators influence the implementation of
student disciplinary practices that lead to exclusionary consequences in relation to achieving its
organizational goal. While a complete study would focus on all of the district’s middle school
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 8
stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder of focus for this analysis is administrators.
The following questions guided this inquiry:
1. What are secondary administrators’ knowledge and motivation in relation to creating
and implementing discipline policies that reduce the district’s suspension rates?
2. To what extent do middle school administrators’ attitudes about different student
demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary disciplinary practices?
3. How do administrators’ knowledge and motivation interact with the district to shape
administrators’ ability to creating and implementing discipline policies that reduce the
district’s suspension rates?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice for secondary school
administrators in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization that relate to
achieving SCSD’s goal of decreasing and maintaining the suspension rate to 2.5%
with an emphasis on addressing the disproportionate rates of suspension for students
of color by the end of the 2020–2021 school year.
Organizational Performance Goal
Consistent with its vision that it will strive to prepare all students for future success and
to create a positive impact as global citizens, the Southern California School District’s goal is
that it maintain or decrease suspension rates to 2.5% (approximate 6% suspension rate in
secondary schools) of its overall student population by the conclusion of the 2020–2021 school
year. The SCSD’s administrative leadership, in conjunction with its SCSD School Board of
Education, established this goal during the development of the 2017 Local Control
Accountability Plan. Germane to this study is the suspension rate of secondary African–
American (approximate 6% rate) and Hispanic/Latino students (approximate 8% rate). The
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 9
achievement of said goal will be measured by school administrators and School and Community
Services Directors from the SCSD. It is important to accomplish the performance goal of
reducing and maintaining the suspension rates to 2.5%, while focusing on the disproportionate
rates of subgroups. If the school does not meet its stated objectives, it fails to address the culture
and climate of its schools and the needs of students who traditionally have been underserved,
primarily students of color. Furthermore, as a Local Educational Agency that is accountable to
the 27,000 students it serves and their guardians and families, it is imperative that it demonstrates
with significant gains and results that the equity gap that exists for students of underserved areas
and demographics is being addressed through its efforts to implement initiatives intended to
suppress the use of exclusionary discipline. Assessing the district’s efforts and performance will
enable community members, parents, faculty and students to assess how SCSD disciplinary
school policies and programs may impact student achievement.
Stakeholder Group of Focus
The collective efforts of all invested stakeholders contribute to the achievement and
success of the overall organizational goal of reducing and maintaining suspension rates to 2.5%
with an emphasis on reducing the suspension rates at the secondary level and of students of
color. While other administrators focus on the educational program for students with disabilities
and curriculums, this study centers on the secondary school administrators who currently manage
or have managed the development and implementation of school discipline policies or policies
that address the culture and climate of the school at the secondary level. The stakeholders’
reduction of exclusionary discipline goal is supported by the district’s LCAP (Local Control
Accountability Plan). Administrators at school sites with suspension rates that are identified as
“orange” on the California School Dashboard Report will need to develop action plans and
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 10
procedures in order to accomplish the said goal. Action plans and procedures may include, but
are not limited to, developing and/or modifying policies that dissuade suspendable behavior,
monitoring suspension rates, implementing additional behavior interventions, and executing
Positive Behavior Intervention Supports (PBIS) systems. Failure to execute said initiatives may
give way to high and disproportionate suspension rates.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
Southern California School District is committed to plan for continual improvement, offering a learning
environment of excellence and high expectations, to ensure each student will have the opportunity and ability to
compete in the global economy.
Organizational Performance Goal
By the end of the 2020–2021 school year, the Southern California School District will decrease and maintain the
suspension rate to 2.5% with an emphasis on addressing the disproportionate rates of suspension for students of
color.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 11
Review of the Literature
It has consistently been documented that African–American students are subject to
exclusionary discipline at disproportionate rates as compared to all other student groups,
African–American students representing approximately 3 times more suspensions and expulsions
than their percentage in the overall population (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil
Rights, 1993). For over 40 years, the data have concluded that Black students overall have been
suspended at up to twice the rate as compared to White students, and in secondary schools, up to
3 times more (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975, p. 12). Moreover, the theory by some that the
disproportionality of the data is a consequence of disproportionate behavior from Black students
that warrants exclusionary consequences has been shown to be unfounded (p. 13). More recently,
African–American students represent 32–42% of students who are suspended or expelled, which
is slightly higher than White students, at 31–40%; however, White students represent 51% of the
student population, while African–American students only represent 16% of the student
population (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2014). Looking at data from
urban schools, there is no consistent or significant correlation between an increase in school
suspensions and a decline in behavior that would result in exclusionary discipline (Skiba, 2005).
Nevertheless, there is a correlation between single parent homes with multiple children, more
than three, and the number of suspensions assigned (Hinojosa, 2008, p. 187). Conversely, the
percentage of White students who reside with both their parents is significantly higher than that
of African–American students (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001). Moreover, at highest risk of
disciplinary exclusion was highest among students who had Emotional Disturbance or Other
Health Impairment, were Black, older, male, had low Special Education Services, or attended
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 12
urban schools. Children who experienced multiple school changes or had parents who expressed
low satisfaction with their schools also had higher risk of suspension or expulsion (Sullivan, Van
Norman, & Klingbeil, 2014, p. 200). Ultimately, the common variable for students who receive
the highest rate of exclusionary discipline is being African–American.
Zero Tolerance in Education
A zero-tolerance approach to discipline implies that students receive disciplinary
consequences objectively; however, the assignment of exclusionary discipline is usually made by
an administrator who makes the disciplinary decision subjectively. The concept of zero tolerance
was introduced as a response to federal drug and gun policies (Hanson, 2005, as in Triplett et al.,
2014). Therefore, a gradual approach to discipline would be more appropriate, where students
receive a consequence in relation to their actions (Hoffman, 2014; Skiba, Chung et al., 2014).
More specifically, in a study of a diverse, urban school district with approximately 24,000
students, Hoffman (2014) utilized a negative binomial regression discontinuity analysis to
observe a zero-tolerance disciplinary model, where the district would implement an ‘aggravating
factors analysis’ in their secondary school for serious violation of school rules. These were
violations that previously were addressed on-site, by school administrators and would merit
student suspensions or expulsions if approved by the superintendent of schools (p. 75). It was
found that the number of Black students recommended for expulsion more than doubled from
2.2% to 4.5%, while recommendations for suspensions of White students remained
approximately the same (p. 88). In addition, District School Board of Education for the urban
school district received sentiments from its stakeholders that alternatives to a zero-tolerance
disciplinary model should be implemented, such as positive behavior support and restorative
justice practices, due to the adverse impact expulsions have on students and their families (p. 91).
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 13
The implication is that attempts by school districts to minimize severe disciplinary infractions
and create objective discipline action plans have only perpetuated the disparities that exist
between Black students and White students, which highlights the impact of school suspensions.
The Impact of School Suspensions
Even though suspensions are widely used as a deterrent of behavior violations on school
campuses, they are not effective in yielding the desired results. Looking at data from urban
schools, there is no consistent or significant correlation between an increase in school
suspensions and a decline in behavioral that would result in exclusionary discipline (Skiba,
2005). In a sample of more than 3,500 African–American male students residing in the Midwest,
researchers focused on 4 objectives, 2 of which were related to discipline and academic
achievement. The results demonstrated that the instructional time that students lose when
suspended translates to reduced opportunities to learn and decreased academic achievement
(Carver, 2010). In a sampling of 289 Virginia public schools, Lee, Cornell, Gregory, & Fan,
(2011) focused on dropout rates and suspensions. They found a correlation between suspensions
and dropout rates for minority students (p. 186). This is of dyer concern because it is clear that
any disciplinary practice that prevents or increases the disruption of a student’s education is
troublesome.
Building the Foundation of Effective Disciplinary Practices.
Developing and executing an effective discipline plan requires systematic planning and
the participation of stakeholders, including students. Current research suggests that anti-
exclusionary discipline, which is focused on providing students with behavioral support, should
be targeted toward the educators and not the students (Rivkin, 2007, p. 280). In a qualitative
research design, where groups of students and school leaders were interviewed with an open-
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 14
ended questionnaire, Van Wyk and Pelser (2014) found that the formulation of disciplinary
policies need to be developed in a collaborative effort, where the school leadership plays an
instrumental role (p. 837). Furthermore, the learner must be encouraged to freely participate in
the development and implementation of disciplinary practices since he or she is the person who
is directly impacted by them (pp. 837–838). The learner’s involvement in the process must not
be underestimated and should be reinforced by legislation (p. 838). Similarly, Project ACHIEVE,
which has demonstrated its effectiveness in reducing office referrals, suspensions, and
expulsions in field studies, positions school psychologists at the forefront of the development of
a strategic discipline plans, focusing on discipline, safety and crisis prevention (Knoff, 2000, p.
31). The overall plan is constructed and monitored by a “task force.” This task force’s objective
is to create a needs assessment for the school site in order to establish clear objectives (p. 19).
Nevertheless, prior to the adoption of a discipline plan, the school district, in conjunction with
schools, must evaluate the school’s readiness to implement its discipline to assure that the plan
will be executed effectively and with fidelity (p. 21). An effective school plan that addresses the
disproportionate number of students of who receive exclusionary consequences begins by
diagnosing the school’s disciplinary needs and developing a plan that evaluates its capacity to
meet those needs.
Characteristics of Effective Disciplinary Practices
Effective disciplinary practices rely less on exclusionary discipline and more on
preventive approaches that address the needs of the school and at-risk students. Typical
responses to school violations are referrals, corporal punishment and exclusionary in nature,
which disproportionately affect students of color and students with disabilities (Osher, Bear,
Sprague, & Doyle, 2010, p. 48). These approaches focus on what the student is doing whereas
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 15
the ecological approach, which has been studied through typically descriptive and qualitative
research, focuses on the setting where learning is taking place. This allows the teacher to divide
the class session into 10- to 20-minute segments, which allows him or her to set the parameters
for a concentrated period of time where the teacher can focus on what vectors—minor offences
that may be addressed with subtle gesture (p. 49). In contrast, School Wide positive behavioral
supports (SWPBS) focuses on explicitly stating guidelines and expectations for students and
providing reward systems to provide positive reinforcement (p. 50). Taking on an approach that
sets clear expectations and does not focus on punitive discipline, helps in preventing the
disproportionate discipline (p. 53). Moreover, evidence suggests that SWPBS can deter many of
the issues that arise in school settings, reducing antisocial behavior, vandalism, and aggression
(Grossman as in Osher, 2010, p. 51). Another lens that is supported by research, primarily in a
hybrid model, through which to view discipline is Social–Emotional Learning (SEL). This
approach requires schools to consider the developmental changes of children as they progress
through their academic trajectory. The purpose is to teach students according to their
neurodevelopmental stages in conjunction with the stimulus that they will face during each stage
of their academics (Denham & Brown, 2010). An overwhelming amount of data underscores the
importance of moving away from exclusionary discipline and toward models that support
students’ success, while at the same time evaluating the short- and long-term effects of specific
disciplinary practices.
The Effects of Exclusionary Discipline
Even though suspensions and expulsions are widely used as a deterrent of behavior
violations on school campuses, they are not effective in yielding the desired results. Looking at
data from urban schools, there is no consistent or significant correlation between an increase in
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 16
school suspensions and a decline in behavior that would result in exclusionary discipline (Skiba,
2005). In a sample of more than 3,500 African–American male students residing in the Midwest,
researchers focused on 4 objectives, 2 of which were related to discipline and academic
achievement. The results demonstrated that the instructional time that students lose when
suspended translates to reduced opportunities to learn and decreased academic achievement
(Carver, 2010). Sampling 289 Virginia public schools Lee, T., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan,
X. (2011) focused on dropout rates and suspensions. They found a correlation between
suspensions and dropout rates for minority students (p. 186). Furthermore, in a study where
student (ages 13–17) data were observed in a diverse, urban setting, Cuellar and Markowitz
(2015) found that students who are suspended have a significantly higher probability of engaging
in criminal behavior, which increases the probability of incarceration as adults. The clear link
between students who receive exclusionary discipline and the probability that those same
students will perform poorly academically and will have and increased probability of having
involvement with the criminal justice system is of dire concern.
The literature reviewed in this chapter attempts to address the root causes that may
contribute to the discrepancies that exists in the implementation of exclusionary discipline in
middle school settings for students of color in contrast to White students due to the negative
long-term consequences associated with this problem. Moreover, the aforementioned literature
presented in this chapter is informed by Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis as it relates to
performance influence in the categories of knowledge, motivation, and the systems and resources
of an organization.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 17
Ultimately, the literature shows that administrators benefit from a thorough
understanding of the factors that contribute to inequitable disciplinary policies and procedures as
well as alternatives to exclusionary practices that are regularly assessed through the acquisition
and desegregation of disciplinary data. In addition, it appears that when school administrators
believe in their stakeholders’ potential to develop alternative disciplinary policies and
procedures, creating an environment that is conducive to collaboration and trust, the gaps that
contribute to the problem of practices may be positively influenced. In the subsequent chapter,
the researcher section attempts to validate the level of impact the stated influences have on
problem of practice for this study. This is explained in detail in the methodology section, which
describes the processes for conducting the research for this study.
Section A: Knowledge and Skills
SCSD’s mission centers on providing an educational experience that addresses the
learning development of all its students. Therefore, the District’s goal of reducing suspension
rates is aimed at reducing the discrepancy that exist between the number of suspensions
Latino/Hispanic and African–American students receive by reviewing the school’s current
disciplinary systems and exploring non-exclusionary practices that have been found to be
successful with a diverse student population.
In order for SCSD stakeholders to address the aforementioned problem, they would need
to have fundamental, ongoing knowledge and skills. Richard E. Mayer (2011) states that a
crucial piece of information that an educator would want to have about his/her students before
teaching a particular subject is their prior knowledge. He further argues that, “knowledge is at
the heart of learning, instruction, and assessment” (p. 60). Moreover, beyond having knowledge
and meeting a learning objective, there must be a change in knowledge—that is, there has to be a
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 18
progression through the different kinds of knowledge: factual, conceptual, procedural, and
metacognitive (Mayer, 2011). Analogously, an analysis of the knowledge and skills members of
an organization or stakeholders have is critical in the process of addressing performance issues
and to work toward accomplishing global or specific stakeholder goals (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Understanding systemic racism, prejudice, and discrimination. In K–12 public
schools, students of color, primarily African–American students are punished with exclusionary
discipline, consequences that remove a student from an academic setting, at a greater rate than
the general student population (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2014).
This holds true even when non-African–American students engage in the same or similar
behavior violations that warrant an administrator referral, suspension, or expulsion (Brown &
Steele, 2015). Moreover, nondominant youths—represented by Latino and African–American
students—have been historically racialized, “silenced,” and marginalized in schools through
systems that penalize them (Pane, 2009). This is fundamental conceptual knowledge. Conceptual
knowledge is a representation of a person’s prior knowledge and the complex interrelationship
between various elements that compose a larger concept or structure that facilitates them to work
together. School administrators must have or acquire conceptual knowledge in order for them to
establish and support an equitable educational system for a diversely populated student body
(Krathwohl, 2002). Being able to connect the many variables that impact the behavior of students
of color and the way that behavior is perceived and addressed, administrators will be better
equipped to begin the process of creating and developing systems that address the problematic
discrepancies in the implementation of exclusionary discipline in the K–12 school system.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 19
Accessing and understanding discipline data for various demographics. Discipline
data in the U.S. K–12 school system consistently demonstrates that African–American students
are disciplined with administrative referrals that remove them from the classroom setting up to 3
times more than White students (Bradshaw, Mitchell, O’Brennan, & Leaf, 2010; Hoffman, 2014;
Skiba, Chung et al., 2014). This type of factual knowledge or basic knowledge—that is,
knowledge that is required to understand and work within a particular discipline (Krathwohl,
2002), is a prerequisite for SCSD administrators to have in order to address inequitable
disciplinary practices. Marsh, Pane, and Hamilton (2006) underscore the value and effectiveness
of a Data-Driven Decision-Making (DDDM) process in education, stating that the developmental
improvement of organizations is dependent on its reaction to data.
During the 2014–2015 school year, SCSD reported data showing that Latino students and
African–American students combined made up 56% of the school district’s population, yet they
represent 75% of all suspensions; in contrast, White and Asian students make up 38% of the
district’s overall population and only 22% of all suspensions (Suspension Indicator). It is
apparent that the former is negatively overrepresented in the suspension data by approximately
19%, while the latter is positively underrepresented by 16%. This is factual data that must be
consistently accessible and attained by school administrators and disintegrated among
stakeholders. Subsequently, administrators and other stakeholders will be able to consistently
underscore and address a problem that is linked to a higher likelihood of student involvement
with law enforcement, also known as the school-to-prison pipeline (Wald & Losen, 2003).
Acquiring and receiving alternatives to punitive discipline. Disparities in the
implementation of disciplinary practices impacts school connectedness or its level of
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 20
inclusiveness, creating a poor ‘racial climate’ for ‘less dominant’ or minority groups on campus
(Anyon et al., 2016). Arguably, these disparities are in part linked to zero-tolerance policies that
were intended to address criminal gun violence, creating a system where behavioral violations
that would traditionally not be suspendable can now be deemed a suspension or expulsion
(Hoffman, 2014). Most germane to SCSD may be that exclusionary discipline removes the
students from the learning environment, depriving him/her from instructional time, which often
leads to the student falling further behind (Townsend, 2000). In addition, exclusionary discipline
potentially placing a student in an unsupervised setting where he/she will have a higher
likelihood of engaging in unlawful behavior, perpetuating the problem (Townsend, 2000). As a
result, it is imperative that SCSD administration acquire procedural knowledge of alternative
disciplinary methods or school climate approaches that move away from exclusionary practices.
Procedural knowledge refers to how an individual or a group of people develop and implement a
strategy or system (Krathwohl, 2002). Therefore, moving away from traditional methods of
addressing undesired student behavior will require administrators to have knowledge of and
implement a new system for enhancing the overall school culture and climate, demonstrating
fidelity to the system and yet being able to make adjustments as needed as informed by data and
measurable changes in schoolwide culture and climate.
Section B: Motivation
This section discusses the potential motivational influences SCSD’s administration would
need to have in order to address the problems of practice relating to disciplinary discrepancies.
Moreover, besides the types of knowledge and access to resources a stakeholder must have in
order to fill the gaps that exist in accomplishing a specific outcome, each stakeholder must have
a certain level of motivation (Clark & Estes, 2008). Nevertheless, motivation can be
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 21
multifaceted. For instance, SCSD administrators must be able to first and foremost have a
positive belief about the abilities or self-efficacy to create a positive change in their disciplinary
practices (Schunk & Pajares, 2009). Furthermore, this belief that the desired outcome is
attainable can be influenced by a variety of factors that are discussed further in this paper.
Attribution theory also plays a pivotal role in the success of students because it looks at
the beliefs people have about why events occur or why a specific outcome manifested, as well as
the link that exist between those beliefs and motivation (Meece, Anderman, & Anderman, 2006).
SCSD administrators, for example, could attribute that current suspension rates for Latino or
African–American students is due to causes, such as: a) their upbringing; b) their culture; or c)
their lack of ability. If SCSD stakeholders attribute the disparities that exist in the
implementation of exclusionary discipline to the aforementioned attributions instead of their own
actions, then it is likely that the problem of practice will be perpetuated. On the other hand, if the
stakeholders, based on research and best practices, begin to attribute the current discipline data
on their own schoolwide policies and implementation of punishment, then organizational change
may occur that will lead to a more sensible, and ultimately, more equitable approach to
discipline.
Administrator efficacy about altering school culture. The process of transitioning
from a disciplinary system that focuses or utilizes exclusionary discipline to an anti-exclusionary
discipline model will require a focus on the educators and not the students (Rivkin, 2007). In
other words, administrators must first adopt the belief and feel capable of implementing or
creating a school culture that provides alternatives to removing students from the classroom
setting and is more effective and equitable. The foundation to project ACHIEVE’s School Safety
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 22
and Effective Behavior Management Model is a systems approach focusing on the organizational
requirements and processes that result in effective schoolwide prosocial behavior management
and positive, skills-oriented student discipline systems that have been found to be effective in
traditionally underserved areas (Knoff, 2000). Ultimately, in order for administrators to support
behaviors and accomplish desired outcomes, which includes systemic changes, they must have
self-efficacy—the belief that a particular task or goal can be attained and is also the driving force
behind motivation (Bandura, 2000).
Another possible influence on SCSD administrators’ motivation to accomplish desired
outcomes is their self-efficacy to create organizational change and to reframe their perspective
about the population of students they serve (Noguera, 2003). In other words, if administrators
agree that students who engage in behavior or actions that lead to higher levels of exclusionary
discipline have the greatest personal needs, then administrators would be motivated to consider
the students’ personal needs first, which potentially could address undesired behaviors (Noguera,
2003). Analogously, SCSD could disrupt the pattern of suspensions by implementing ecological
approaches to classroom management; school wide positive behavioral supports (SWPBS); and
positive youth development (PYD)—systems that are data-driven best practices in creating a
school environment that focuses, broadly speaking, on atonement and positive intervention
practices (Denham & Brown, 2010; Osher et al., 2010).
Attribution theory to pursue comprehensive disciplinary school systems. As
mentioned in previous sections, the implementation of school discipline is often subjective, and
it tends to have a negative impact on students of color. Therefore, attribution theory is germane
in an analysis of the biases, unconscious or conscious, that administrators may have and
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 23
subsequently influence their distribution of administrative consequences that may remove a
student from the learning environment (Meece et al., 2006). Attribution theory examines the
various factors that impact motivation and more specifically, analyzing the internal and external
factors that influence people’s motivation and their beliefs about the consequences of their
actions, based on the aforementioned factors (Fowler, 2003). Moreover, when a certain outcome
occurs, the perceived cause of the result impacts the individual’s future motivation and actions in
relation to the previous outcome (Meece et al., 2006). As a result, it is imperative for SCSD
stakeholders to reflect on the attributions they place on Latino and African–American students as
it pertains to their ability to modify behavior by utilizing positive intervention methods. For
instance, a Developmental Approach to Discipline, one that is centered on Social Emotional
Learning (SEL), which provides students with strategies to develop self-awareness—the ability
to accurately assess personal feelings, interests, values and strengths, responsible decision
making, and relationship skills (Denham & Brown, 2010). In addition, specific programs, such as
Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) curriculum (Esbensen, Peterson, Taylor,
& Osgood, 2012); and Restorative Justice, have been shown to prevent delinquency among
juveniles and providing a community and culturally responsive approach toward challenging
behavior (Payne & Welch, 2013, 2015; Wearmouth, Mckinney, & Glynn, 2007).
Subsequently, if SCSD administrators begin to witness positive outcomes to alternative
discipline policies, such as a decrease in administrative referrals; decrease in absences and
tardies; and an increase in overall student achievement, then administrators would be compelled
to attribute the latter outcomes to new disciplinary initiatives that could transform the schoolwide
culture from one that is punitive to one that is restorative and inclusive to all students. This
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 24
could, at the end, assist SCSD in accomplishing its goal of reducing exclusionary discipline by
25% for African–American and Latino students by the end of June 2018.
Section C: Organizational Influences
General Theory
This section discusses the potential organizational influences that could support SCSD in
addressing its problems of practice relating to disciplinary discrepancies between different
student demographics. Besides stakeholder knowledge, skills, and motivation necessary to
accomplish an organization’s goals, an effective and efficient organization must have adequate
materials and processes in place to meet outcomes; nevertheless, an organization’s culture
permeates all attempts to improve performance—an overarching element that must be taken into
consideration (Clark & Estes, 2008). Moreover, an organization’s culture encompasses people’s
“conscious and unconscious understanding of who [they] are, what [they] value, and how [they]
do what [they] do as an organization” (Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 107).
Cultural Model Influence 1. Since faculties often resist any resolute approach to reflect
or analyze their work and their established ways of teaching and learning (Tagg, 2012), strong
leadership is foundational in establishing a culture of change in which members of the
organization learn and grow, while establishing new beliefs, assumptions, and values that match
those of the leadership (Schein, 2004). This promotes the organization’s general recognition and
motivation among instructional staff, such as, modifying SCSD existing culture (i.e., classroom
management plans, school disciplinary practices). Analogously, this cultural model propositions
that successful organizational change requires vision, strategy, the fostering of a culture of
maintainable common values that support a vision that is conducive to change, and
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 25
empowerment, motivation and inspiration to those who are involved or affected by the work of
the organization (Gill, 2002; Simons, 1999).
Cultural Model Influence 2. Along with creating and nurturing an environment that is
conducive to change, leaders or administrators must avoid ambiguity when expressing their
positions, demonstrating predictable or consistent behavior, even during moments of uncertainty
(Northouse, 2013). In other words, the organization needs to establish a culture of trust and
collaboration between administrators and instructional staff in order to systematically implement
school policies that provide alternatives to exclusionary discipline. SCSD attempts to create
change though approving initiatives and leadership that is committed to constant improvement,
as in its adoption of PBIS programs, such as HERO; however, in its implementation there
appears to be little change in outcomes associated with disciplinary practices. Conversely,
organizations that are successful in fostering a culture of trust have leaders who demonstrate
behavioral integrity or model high moral standards that are congruent with those held by
members of the organization (Moorman & Grover, 2009; Simons, 1999). Moreover, fostering
trust underscores the organization’s commitment to the overarching goals; and it creates an
environment for members of the organization that trusting the leadership will ultimately benefit
their own interest (Moorman & Grover, 2009; Simons, 1999).
Moreover, organizations that establish trust delegate authority, taking a holistic approach,
which provides autonomy for members of the organization to utilize their strengths and work in
collaboration with leadership (Perrow, 1972). Therefore, the challenges is to alter mindsets and
systems that have historically implemented disciplinary policies disproportionately implemented
on Latino or Hispanic and African–American students at higher rates than the general student
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 26
population, which in many cases negatively impacts the educational trajectory of said students as
well as increase their likelihood of being involved in the criminal law system (Anyon et al.,
2016; Hinojosa, 2008; Hoffman, 2014; Skiba, Chung et al, 2014; Skiba, Horner et al., 2011;
Townsend, 2000). Open communication and an authentic interest in the wellbeing of members of
the organization can lead to behavior that exceeds the basic expectations of an individual’s
performance, going above and beyond the basic expectations of her duties or traditional reward
systems to meet the vision of the organization, a desired consequence, which can be considered
organizational citizenship behavior (Korsgaard, Brodt, & Whitener, 2002).
Clearly, when educational leaders are able to establish trust with their staff members, it
facilitates the organization’s transition from ineffective methods of addressing undesired student
behavior to one that enhances the overall school culture and climate, aligned with the
organization’s vision.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 27
Table 2
Summary Table of Assumed Influences on Performance
Sources of
Assumed Influences Knowledge Motivation Organization
Learning and
Motivation and
Organizational Theory
Administrators will need to
know that systematic
prejudice, racism, and
discrimination consciously
and unconsciously have
influenced the academic
trajectory of students of
color, primarily Black and
Latino students.
Administrators know the
school’s discipline and
academic performance data
by student subgroups,
specific teacher data, and
similar data at the macro
level (i.e., state and national
data)
Administrators need to know
how to develop and
implement Restorative
Justice or Positive Behavior
Intervention approaches to
address disciplinary incidents
with an underserved.
Self-efficacy –
Administrators need to be
efficacious about their
abilities to develop and
implement a disciplinary
system that is founded on
positive intervention
principles and that will
establish a schoolwide
culture and climate that is
equitable for all students.
Attribution –
Administrators should feel
that the school’s rates of
exclusionary discipline
are the result of their
discipline system and
implementation rather
than the innate behavior
or background of students.
The organization needs to
promote general
recognition and
motivation among
instructional staff to
change existing school
culture (i.e., classroom
management plans, school
disciplinary practices)
The organization needs to
establish a culture of trust
and collaboration between
administrators and
instructional staff in order
to systematically
implement school policies
that provide alternatives to
exclusionary discipline.
Related General
Literature
Administrators need to know
racial disparities in
exclusionary discipline are
negatively associated with all
students’ perceptions of care,
concern, encouragement, and
respect from teachers and
administrators
Administrators need to know
the predictors of exclusionary
discipline.
Administrators need to know
alternatives to exclusionary
practices.
Administrators need to see
the value of modifying
their school disciplinary
policies to include
alternatives to
exclusionary practices.
Administrators need to
believe they can rely on
other staff members to
collaborate in the
development of new
disciplinary policies.
The organization needs to
establish a committee
composed of engaged
stakeholders to participate
in a needs assessment that
monitors the progress of
The organization needs to
have systems in place that
tracks exclusionary
discipline and its
correlation with negative
academic and behavioral
outcomes.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 28
Conceptual Framework: The Interaction of School Administrators’
Knowledge Motivation and the Organizational Context
A key element of a research design is its conceptual framework, which informs and
illustrates the components of the overall study—influential concepts, researcher assumptions and
expectations, and beliefs, as well as ideas and theories representative of the germane literature
surrounding the topic of study (Maxwell, 2013). The conceptual framework emphasizes the
relevance of important theories that are described and analyzed within the study (Creswell,
2014). Moreover, a conceptual framework bridges the initial research questions with the theory
that is founded in the researcher’s disciplinary orientation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016),
underscoring relationships between concepts and theories that are constructed by the researcher,
not readily available on their own (Maxwell, 2013). Ultimately, the framework provides a
comprehensive visual of the genesis and trajectory of the study as a whole.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 29

The interplay between organizational processes and leadership are foundational to the
conceptual framework for this study. This interplay underscores the potential influencers that
could lead to the district meeting its goal of establishing a more equitable disciplinary system for
schools in the district, which subsequently would reduce exclusionary sanctions for students,
primarily students of color. In Figure 1, the purpose of the upside-down triangle is twofold. First,
it represents the desired outcome of reducing exclusionary disciplinary practices by placing it at
the bottom tip of the triangle. Second, it displays the hierarchical structure of an organization
with its representation at the top, while placing the impact of school leadership in the middle,
Figure 1. Conceptual framework — The relationship between KMOs, school administrators,
and SCSD.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 30
demonstrating the leadership’s relationship with the functions of the organization and its
intersection with the various knowledge and motivation influences on the problem of practice.
Furthermore, derived from a review of the literature, links exists between a school’s
ability and willingness to foster change. In order for an organization to experience, and therefore
foster change, knowledge and skill deficiencies must be identified, which will lead to a change in
knowledge, leading to desired outcomes (Clark & Estes, 2008; Mayer, 2011). More specifically,
administrators’ knowledge must include a contextual awareness of the lack of inclusiveness
“nondominant” youths have experienced in school (Pane, 2009). In other words, students of
color have experienced a history of system racism and discrimination that administrators should
consider when creating and implementing school policies that impact disciplinary actions (Pane,
2009). Analogously, this knowledge must intersect with organizational systems that identify
disciplinary data, categorized by behavioral violation and demographic, and disaggregated to
increase stakeholder awareness and to evaluate existing disciplinary policies and their
implementation (Krathwohl, 2002; Marsh et al., 2006). This knowledge will inform the school
policy decisions that administrators make, which will influence teachers’ classroom management
plans.
In addition, administrators’ knowledge of alternatives to exclusionary disciplinary
practices; their belief in their ability to alter traditionally held ideas about student behavior; and
their willingness to reframe the accountability of the problem of practice, from one of the
individual student to the organization and leadership, will lead to a reduction in exclusionary
discipline practices.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 31
Qualitative Data Collection
This qualitative study is intended to provide an in-depth analysis of the knowledge,
motivation, and organization influences that impact the creation of disciplinary policies and
procedures and their implementation by school administrators who serve at comprehensive
secondary schools within the Southern California School District (SCSD); and are in charge of
creating and implementing discipline policies at their respective school.
This study utilized a semistructured interview procedure. This allowed the interviewer to
combine a series of structured and less structured interview questions, which allows for the
acquisition of specific data (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Moreover, said interview structure allows
for flexibility to delve deeper into certain topics based on the participants’ responses without
necessarily having a predetermined order to wording or questions from the part of the
interviewer (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interviews
Since the researcher is familiar with the daily functions and setting of the participants, the
interview process lends itself for the flexibility that a semistructured interview procedure
permits, allowing “the researcher to respond to the situation at hand, to the worldview of the
respondent, and to new ideas on the topic” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 111). Moreover, the
purpose of interviews is to access participants’ personal thoughts, perceptions, emotions, and
expectations regarding the culture they operate in (Weiss, 1994). This study adopts the
standardized open-ended interview question model, where each participant is asked the same
highly focused questions to ensure less variation in the way questions are asked (Patton, 2002).
The school administrators participating in the study have various levels of experience and
personal backgrounds. Therefore, capturing their personal, nuanced responses regarding their
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 32
approach toward discipline policies and procedures through the standardized open-ended
approach ensured a degree of valuable reliability to their responses.
In addition, since interviews is the primary mode of data gathering for this study, various
types of questions were adopted in order to ascertain the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences represented in this study’s Conceptual Framework, which underscores
the interactions the aforementioned influences have on the creation and implementation of
disciplinary policies and procedures by secondary school administrators. Analogously,
interviews are appropriate and beneficial for the context of this study because acquiring access to
observe school administrators perform duties related to discipline would jeopardize the
confidentiality rights of students. As a result, interviews allow researchers to access experiences
that cannot be directly observed (Patton, 2002). More specifically, the study employed a
combination of Patton’s (2002) six types of Question Options:
1. Experience and Behavior Questions
2. Opinion and Values Questions
3. Feeling Questions
4. Knowledge Questions
5. Sensory Questions
6. Background/demographic Questions
Considering that this study’s essential questions revolve around stakeholder attitudes,
knowledge, motivation, and SCSD’s systems that impact the implementation of disciplinary
policies, it is imperative that there is variation in the types of questions asked and that the
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 33
questions are well-structures and well-thought-out to yield thorough responses about different
topics (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interview Procedures
Five secondary school administrators involved in implementing discipline policies and
procedures were interviewed separately for a maximum of 60 minutes with the possibility of a
follow-up 30-minute interview. There are some participants who were interviewed face-to-face
at their school-site office, whereas other candidates were interviewed via video-streamed
interviews. The interview portion of the meeting should not exceed 90 minutes since most people
are only able to physically endure a 2-hour interview protocol (Krueger & Casey, 2009). In total,
the interview process for all participants combined was an estimated 22 hours.
Due to the various administrative responsibilities each of the participants have at the
beginning of the school year (mid-August) at their respective school sites, interviews were
conducted at the beginning of September 2018. Interviewing participants concluded at the end of
September 2018. Some interviews were performed during November due to unforeseen
scheduling conflicts.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 34
Results and Findings
The following provides a review of qualitative findings based on semistructured
interviews with Secondary School Administrators at the Southern California School District and
analyzed documents utilized in response to the research questions that inform the study. It is
important to underscore the overall purpose of the interviews, which are centered on discovering
ways to reduce the District’s suspensions rate to decrease and maintain its suspension rate to
2.5% with an emphasis on addressing the disproportionate rates of suspension for students of
color. The study explored KMO factors that influence secondary school administrators to
achieve the District’s objective. The following questions guided the study and informed the
recommendations and final section of this study:
1. What are secondary administrators’ knowledge and motivation in relation to creating
and implementing discipline policies that reduce the district’s suspension rates?
2. To what extent do the district’s and the middle school’s discipline policies influence
the implementation of exclusionary disciplinary consequences?
3. To what extent do middle school administrators’ attitudes about different student
demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary disciplinary practices?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice for secondary school
administrators in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization that relate to
achieving SCSD’s goal of decreasing and maintaining the suspension rate to 2.5%
with an emphasis on addressing the disproportionate rates of suspension for students
of color by the end of the 2020–2021 school year.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 35
In an attempt to address the aforementioned research questions, qualitative data in the
form of interviews were collected. Five secondary administrators from different backgrounds,
years of experience, and school sites from SCSD participated in the study.
● Two participants were interviewed face-to-face.
● Two participants were interviewed via phone call.
● One interview was conducted over conferencing medium, Zoom.
The interviews were digitally recorded. From the transcripts, the most prevalent themes
were identified and analyzed, and are discussed within this section. In the first stage of the
analysis, open coding was used in tandem with empirical, priori codes from the conceptual
framework were synthesized. Stage 2 involved establishing the relationship between empirical,
priori codes and analytic/axial codes. In the final stage, pattern codes were identified, revealing
the themes associated with the study’s framework and research questions.
This section discusses each research question derived from the data within the Clark and
Estes (2008) KMO conceptual framework and the influences that surfaced through the interview
data analysis process. The first research question aimed to reveal administrators’ knowledge and
motivation in relation to creating and implementing discipline policies that reduce the district’s
suspension rates. The second addressed the extent in which middle school administrators’
attitudes about different student demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary
disciplinary practices. The third question focused on the degree to which administrators’
attitudes about different student demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary
disciplinary practices. The final question centered around administrators’ beliefs or motivations
as it pertains to exclusionary discipline. A summary and implications of the study finalize this
section.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 36
Results and Findings for Research Questions No. 1
What are secondary administrators’ knowledge and motivation in relation to creating and
implementing discipline policies that reduce the district’s suspension rates?
This section presents data collected that express the knowledge, skills, and experiences
reported by secondary school administrators regarding the creation and implementation of
disciplinary policies. To answer the aforementioned research question, all participants were
asked the following interview questions (only germane and significant questions and responses
are noted):
1. Tell me a little bit about how you became involved in education.
2. Describe your current role at your school site.
3. What is your involvement in creating or developing disciplinary policies and
procedures at your school?
4. Please describe what specific schooling, training, or professional development that
you have received regarding discipline practices.
In response to interview question No. 1, all administrators had professional background
or experience working with at-risk youth. Participant 3 worked with struggling youth through his
ministry, as well as Participant 4, who stated he worked with “Motel Kids” or kids who do not
have a stable or consistent residence. Participant 1 previously worked within alternative
education, which often enrolls students who struggle in a traditional academic setting and
demonstrate undesired behaviors as a result.
Regarding interview question No. 2, there were mixed responses regarding the
prominence the development of discipline policies or their implementation plays in their current
role as secondary school administrators. Participant 1 stated that “no two days look alike” due to
the various programs that his school site supports. Participant 2 solely mentioned curriculum,
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 37
assessments, and the development of the master schedule as his primary roles. A 60% of
administrators, however, stated that discipline or discipline policies are under their current role.
However, discipline was one of many responsibilities held by these administrators. Besides being
responsible for implementing discipline policies, participants outlined a diverse list of
responsibilities that fall under their current role.
[Participant 3:] My daily tasks require me to facilitate and hold multiple meetings
that have to do with special education, final floor plans. I do a lot of re-entry
meetings. I do sit meetings, that are intervention meetings for students that are not
identified for specific services. So I do a lot of meetings.
[Participant 4:] I’m a little all over the place. I’m in charge of discipline. I’m in
charge of activities, with like ASB. Also, 504s, all of the USAF facilities, and all
the drills, evacuation drills, lockdown drills, shelter drills, but all the earthquake
drills as well.
With respect to question No. 3, Participants 2, 3, and 5 shared similar responses that
expressed little to no involvement in the creation or modification of discipline policies at their
school site, except for one of the participants. Participant 2 stated, that he follows the discipline
policies regarding “discipline structure” and “discipline and things.” Similarly, Participant 5
stated, “I really haven’t created too much. It was already kind of set here.” Furthermore,
Participant 3 mirrored the latter statement, “I don’t really think that developing the policies . . .
the policies were there. I didn’t really change any policies.” In contrast, Participant 4 has
implemented what is called a Restorative Panel. More specifically,
So including staff members from the school, sometimes it helps us in whatever
decision we make to support the student, even on a different level. Now we have
advocated, we have more staff members advocating for the student.
Participant 4 continued,
Before we used to be a very cut and dry. This happen you know, very black and
white. This happen, you know and already have some all done. Let’s go to
placement hearing. We didn’t really solve the issue. We didn’t really address it
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 38
completely. We just transferred the issue to some place, to some other
geographical place.
Regarding interview question No. 4, none of the participants shared that they had
received relevant training to create or implement discipline policy. Participant 1 did, however,
state that he had received PBIS or Positive Behavior Intervention Support training; however,
Participant 1 emphasized that “The best training, if you’re going to be an administrator, the best
training you can get is on the job training, and just actually doing it." Furthermore, Participant 2
stated that “being mentored by the principal” and “learning pretty much on the job type training”
was the totality of his training as it pertains to school discipline. In addition, Participant 4
implied that he had certain skill sets that differentiated him from his administrator colleagues
because of his counseling background:
I work with other colleagues in the administrative, who handle discipline, and
they did not have that training that I had as a counselor.
Summary
As it pertains to the first research question, according to the current data from the
California Department of Education Dashboard, SCSD’s overall suspension rate is 2.7%.
However, this rate includes elementary schools, which tend to have low suspension rates. In
addition, the current suspension rate for African–American students is 8.5% and 3.5% for
Hispanic students. The data collected during the interview process with secondary school
administrators offer some insights regarding their influence on the overall goal of reducing
suspension rates. The responses from the four previously stated questions suggested that
although they may have the intent of implementing discipline policy that discourages or modifies
undesired student behavior through equitable and appropriate discipline policy, there are
knowledge gaps that impact the potential achievement of said goal. More specifically, the
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 39
participants’ responses suggest that they have a lack of procedural and conceptual knowledge;
that there is a lack of collaboration; and a lack of prior knowledge.
Only Participant 4 has made modifications to the school’s discipline policy from what he
called a “very black and white” approach, one that lacked nuanced, to one that now involves
teacher, and as Participant 4 stated, that is “able to better support the student for those things that
come up.” The other participants approached the responsibility and continue to approach the
implementation of disciplinary policy, which is a spontaneous, high-risk, and demanding
responsibility, with minimal, structured training. In addition, Clark and Estes (2008) argue that
evaluation of existing systems must constantly be evaluated to prevent resorting to older
practices that may be not be consistent with desired outcomes. Analogously, 80% of the
participants have not created or modified their respective pre-existing discipline policy, which
may indicate a lack of training. Moreover, their lack of training may have also contributed to
their underutilized data systems to analyze and desegregate discipline data, preventing secondary
school administrators from making modifications to discipline policy in order to increase their
effectiveness and to better serve the needs of the students.
Results and Findings for Research Question No. 2
This section presents data collected and reported by secondary school administrators
regarding their knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to their ability to
address school suspensions. The following questions highlight secondary school administrator
beliefs and/or motivations associated with exclusionary discipline or suspensions:
5. What are your thoughts regarding the implementation of exclusionary discipline or
discipline that removes students from the learning environment?
6. What criteria do you use in choosing to implement exclusionary discipline?
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 40
7. At your school, are there differences in who receives exclusionary discipline?
8. How effective do you feel exclusionary discipline is in addressing undesired
behaviors?
Regarding interview question No. 5, all participants did not see suspensions as a
favorable disciplinary tool; however, they did describe exceptions when it is appropriate to
utilize suspensions. Participant 1 stated that his school site is implementing a new system where
students receive a home suspension if they are a “safety concern.” He continues by saying that he
is “not removing them and letting them just sit at home and waste their time for the next two
days." Participant 2 adds, “The consequences isn’t really hitting home with them if it’s a straight
suspension.” Moreover, Participant 3 underscores the participants’ consensus regarding
suspensions:
Is it, traditional discipline would be like, suspend kids and things like that. The
idea is, does that change behavior? I think probably not, a lot of the time.
Participant 4 underscores the above statement:
I share with them what I know, and we try to come up with a plan, the best is
should be consistent, it has to be in the classroom. It serves no purpose for me to
put them in the library or here in the office.
The implication of the participants’ overall responses regarding their general thoughts of
the implementation of suspensions is that they do not alter undesired behavior. Participants are
consistent, however, in their belief that suspensions are beneficially to address physical
altercations or safety concerns; and 80% of participants are consistent in utilizing suspensions to
address drug possession or drug use.
Responses to question No. 6 mirror responses to question No. 5 as far the specificity of
only using suspension when it curbs violence or maintains the safety of the campus. Participant 1
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 41
simply states, “That it’s a safety thing.” Participant 4 synthesizes the general response to
question No. 6:
I think if there is a clear indication of the student, either has some premeditated
idea about hurting him/herself or hurting another student, might bring in some
type of object that would jeopardize the security, of not only of the student but
other students, I think it is a good point to remove the student from the school and
find the best place where that student can really overcome those issues. And be
able to be restored completely into the general setting.
Moreover, Participants 1 and 4 emphasize the importance of collaborating with teachers
and other staff members to make choices that prevent the implementation of suspensions. A 40%
of participants stated that drug use is a suspendable offence at their school site.
Regarding question No. 7, there is no general consensus or potential knowledge from
secondary school administrators about the possibility of demographic differences in terms of
having a clear understanding or knowledge of the students or type of students who are suspended
at higher rates. The following are participants’ responses to the question at hand:
[Participant 1:] I wouldn’t point to one group of people, and say that these kids
are predominantly the ones getting suspended.
[Participant 2:] Our subgroups have a higher number of suspensions based,
compared to our majority group.
[Participant 3:] We don’t bail when they’re on the football team . . . I would say
that you will see that, unfortunately, I believe just on the top of my head, a higher
number of let’s say special-ed kids tend to be getting. . . . Tend to get into more
trouble than any other subgroup.
[Participant 4:] Where there is no accountability, or no support from the home to
the school, there’s a disconnect. The student tends to become chronic, regardless
of interventions and talks that we have.
[Participant 5:] Not really, no.
This inconsistency may point to a common theme that new and existing administrators
are not trained during the hiring process or throughout the length of their career at SCSD to track
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 42
the existing disciplinary differences between various student groups. Although Participant 2 did
not specify the subgroups who are suspended at greater rates, he was the only one that clearly
stated that his school’s subgroups are overrepresented in the use of suspensions. The California
Department of Education identifies the term subgroup as falling under student categories, such as
English learners, foster youth, homeless youth, migrant students, students with disabilities, and
socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Question No. 8 was intended to elicit participants’ specific and candid beliefs regarding
the degree in which exclusionary discipline or suspensions are effective in deterring undesired
student behavior. Participant 1 explicitly stated, “I think they’re completely ineffective. Yeah. I
mean, a lot of our kids. . . . When I have had to suspend kids, it’s almost a relief that they don’t
have to come to school.” Participant 4 echoes the latter response: “Well I know suspensions
don’t really work in changing the behavior. All it does, is it gives everyone a breathing pause.
Eventually the student returns, along with their behavior.” Participant 5 qualified the response by
stating, “If it’s a kid who’s out smoking all the time, it’s not going to change much for that kid.
But if a kid who got caught that normally has never been in trouble, then the effect will happen
here.” The implication of Participant 5’s response is that if the student tends to get in trouble
often, then the behavior will likely continue after the suspension; however, if a student who
generally does not get in trouble engages in behavior that leads to a suspension, the impact
would be greater, and therefore, behavioral changes are likely. Participants 2 and 3 stated that,
yes, suspensions are effective; however, more specifically, Participant 2 said, “I believe it does
work. You do have a percentage of students that for them it’s more of a reward of not being at
school.” Moreover, Participant 3 was specific about when he thought suspensions are effective:
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 43
I would say when a student brings a weapon to school. It’s absolutely appropriate.
If a student threatens somebody with a weapon, absolutely, expulsion for sure. If a
student threatens verbally, or physically a staff member in front of other students,
or even privately. I think that’s appropriate. I mean, selling drugs on campus
would be an appropriate response to suspension or expulsion.
Summary
Laurie Lewis (2019) argues that organizational members seek others who are closest in
proximity to access knowledge or to create knowledge because those are members who share
similar organizational experiences and information that may be useful. Therefore, it can be
inferred that collaboration amongst organizational members in similar roles and responsibilities,
not only would be desired by the said members, but also would be beneficial in addressing or
achieving organizational goals. The lack of consensus among SCSD participant responses
highlights gaps in factual and procedural knowledge related to the implementation of
suspensions as well as inconsistencies in secondary school administrators’ beliefs about the
effectiveness or general application of exclusionary discipline. Moreover, as previously
mentioned, the omission of discipline policy and implementation training at the District level,
shows that there may not be a unified or consistent mission or vision that informs secondary
school administrators’ work (a topic that is addressed in the next section). Only Participant 1 and
4 shared that they have “talks” with teachers and include them as part of the conversation for
addressing student behavior. Nevertheless, they did not share the use of a specific or detailed
protocol for addressing the undesired behavior. Furthermore, none of the participants stated that
they have a system for identifying, analyzing, or desegregating data to make modifications to
discipline policy or to make decisions about whether a particular student or specific action
should lead to a suspension. None of the participants expressed the use of reflection strategy to
analyze the effectiveness of the implementation for exclusionary discipline. In the end, there are
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 44
knowledge, motivational, and organizational gaps that have been identified, according to the
collected data, which have been assessed for the final section; and is representative of
recommendations that are intended to achieve stakeholder and SCSD objectives. Lastly, all
participants omitted mentioning or expressing any knowledge of the potential long-term impacts
on student achievement or future involvement with law enforcement, underscoring their lack of
contextual knowledge that could inform the development and implementation of discipline
policies.
Results and Findings for Research Question No. 3
To what extent do middle school administrators’ attitudes about different student
demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary disciplinary practices?
This section describes data that outline the interaction between organizational culture and
secondary school administrator’s knowledge and motivation. To answer the research question at
hand, all participants were asked the following questions:
9. Why do you believe some students behave in ways that get them suspended or
expelled?
11. What characteristics or traits do you attribute to student who receive exclusionary
discipline?
12. Do you believe there are effective alternatives to exclusionary discipline in your
school district?
Regarding question No. 9, Participant 1 stated that students who behave in ways that get
them suspended “have something working against them.” For example, he continued:
I did have a kid a couple years ago who spoke very limited English, and would
constantly get in trouble because he didn’t want to be here, because he did not feel
like he was a part of the group, and he didn’t feel like he knew what was going on
in the classes. So he felt like he was just kind of wasting his time. So he would
kind of sabotage himself to get sent home.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 45
Similarly, Participant 3 opinionated that the said students may be dealing with drugs; may
be in a “fatherless home”; and may be in the “system somehow.” The implication of these two
participants’ responses is that students who tend to be suspended are products of their
circumstance, and that it is that circumstance that influences behavior that leads to suspensions.
In contrast, Participant 2 mirrors the belief that students may be negatively impacted by their
environment outside of school, but also adds that they experience a lack of support at home in
terms of consequences and accountability. Participant 4 reiterates this idea by stating the
following: “It happens a lot and with this particular group, is the lack of understanding and
respect for authority. Which again, it correlates to the way the relationship, the fractured
relationship, that the student has with his parents.” With a different perspective, Participant 5
states, “A lot of them have the same outlook on life, just kind of, “Let’s hang out, get high. We’ll
be okay.” Participant 5 elaborated by stating that students who get suspended tend to have
similar grades, mannerisms, and outlook on life.
In regard to question No. 11, Participant 1 stated that because he is an administrator at an
alternative program school, and the majority of his students are categorized as “at-risk,” he does
not think, “There’s one characteristic that defines that group of kids that would fall into that
category.” Participant 3 also stated that he does not see differences in the characteristics of
students who get suspended by stating, “No. I don’t think so. I think it’s all based, it’s all based
on . . . we try to be as consistent as possible no matter what.” On the other hand, Participant 2
and 4 stated that the lack of accountability at home contributes to suspensions. Participant 5
stated, “Gosh, I never really thought about that. I mean, not necessarily. I mean, a lot of it is peer
pressure, a lot of it is friends. Someone saying, ‘Hey, bring this. I’ll meet you here.’”
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 46
The participant response that closest identified a student characteristic was Participant 1
by stating that his school has high percentages of “at-risk” students. However, all other
participants did not identify any consistent trait held by students who receive exclusionary
discipline. The absence of traits or characteristics from participants’ responses may show that
student demographics are not analyzed when implementing discipline policies. For example, as
in the case of Participant 5, where there may be a lack of conscious reflection or data analysis
pertaining to the students who are receiving suspension or other forms of exclusionary discipline;
and in lieu of the demographic discrepancies that exist in the data.
Responses for question No. 12 aimed to evaluate knowledge, motivational, and
organizational aspects of SCSD and its stakeholders that impact student exclusionary discipline.
When asked, Participant 1 immediately responded by saying, “Absolutely. Absolutely.”
However, he continued by stating the following:
I think as administrators, it’s our job to get creative on alternatives to suspension,
and doing things to correct behavior, number one. But number two, to build
relationships with kids, to hopefully combat future behaviors. And then number
three, to make sure that they’re academically proficient
Although Participant 1 answered in the affirmative, his response described what he sees
as his responsibility as an administrator to find alternatives to suspension. Similarly, Participant
4 started responding by saying, “I know that district does. I know for us, it’s a very progressive
method.” Again, Participant 4 affirms that the district has effective alternatives to suspensions,
yet, Participant 4 elaborates on a successful and progressive discipline program that only his
school site utilizes in which students with suspensions engage in a program facilitated by a
psychologist. In specific circumstances, continued enrollment at his school site is contingent on
enrollment in said program. Participant 3 analogously stated that the district has “worked on it,”
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 47
referring to alternatives to suspensions. Participant 3 continued by describing a program at his
school site called Phoenix House Program intended for “first offense for having like vapes, or
weed, or whatever on campus, we do assign students to a 6-week drug intervention class that’s
on held campus, called the Phoenix House Program.” In contrast, Participants 2 and 5 clearly
stated that the District does not have effective alternatives for suspensions.
Summary
SCSD secondary school administrators described minimal, detailed, or consistent
information amongst their responses that explained why they believed that certain students
behave in ways that lead to suspensions or if they see any particular traits that are evidenced in
students who receive suspensions. Participant responses varied and generalized that students
express undesired behavior because they are experiencing personal circumstances or have a
learning deficiency that disengages them from the learning experience, which is then manifested
in poor behavior. It is noteworthy to mention that participants did not mention race, ethnicity, or
gender as reasons or attributes that are consistent with suspendable behavior. In addition, three
participants stated that the district has or provides alternatives for suspension; however, the only
program that participants cited that the district supports is the Phoenix House Program, which is
only offered at one school in the District. As a result, even though secondary school
administrators did not express a lack of support from the District in terms of training or
organizational support, they nevertheless implied in their responses that the District does not
currently offer alternatives for exclusionary discipline. The lack of emphasis could hinder the
District’s objective of reducing suspension rates and reducing the discrepancy in the
implementation of exclusionary discipline that exist among the various demographic groups.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 48
Recommendations
The purpose of this project is to explore how the knowledge, motivation, and
implementation of organizational systems of secondary school administrators’ influence the
implementation of student disciplinary practices that lead to exclusionary consequences in
relation to achieving its organizational goal. While a complete study would focus on all of the
district’s middle school stakeholders, for practical purposes the stakeholder of focus for this
analysis is administrators. The following questions guided this inquiry:
1. What are secondary administrators’ knowledge and motivation in relation to creating
and implementing discipline policies that reduce the district’s suspension rates?
2. To what extent do the district’s and the middle school’s discipline policies influence
the implementation of exclusionary disciplinary consequences?
3. To what extent do middle school administrators’ attitudes about different student
demographics influence their implementation of exclusionary disciplinary practices?
4. What are the recommendations for organizational practice for secondary school
administrators in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and organization that relate to
achieving SCSD’s goal of decreasing and maintaining the suspension rate to 2.5%
with an emphasis on addressing the disproportionate rates of suspension for students
of color by the end of the 2020–2021 school year?
Knowledge Recommendations
A description of the data results is shown in Table 3, which highlights the knowledge
influences that are associated with the realization of the stakeholder goal. Moreover, Table 3
outlines the theoretical principles that inform the context-specific recommendations.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 49
Table 3
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Validated as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority

Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle
and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Secondary school
administrators do not
know how to access and
desegregate discipline
data. (D)
HP Y Information learned
meaningfully and
connected with prior
knowledge is stored
more quickly and
remembered more
accurately because it
is elaborated with
prior learning
(Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).
Provide new
secondary school
administrators
information at the
district and on-site
during the
onboarding process
that includes clear
guidelines for how to
access and
desegregate
discipline data.
Secondary school
administrators do not
know how to develop
and implement
alternatives to
exclusionary discipline
schoolwide (P)
HP Y Conceptual
knowledge is a
representation of a
person’s prior
knowledge and the
complex
interrelationship
between various
elements that
compose a larger
concept or structure
that facilitates them
to work together
(Krathwohl, 2002)
Provide secondary
school administrators
a job aid that
integrates the steps of
effective existing
practices with data-
driven alternatives to
minimizing the use of
exclusionary
discipline.
Secondary school
administrators do not
plan or reflect on the
extent of the link
between exclusionary
discipline and systemic
racism, and
discrimination
consciously and
unconsciously and its
influence on the
academic trajectory of
students of color (M).
HP Y Social interaction,
cooperative learning,
and cognitive
apprenticeships (such
as reciprocal
teaching) facilitate
construction of new
knowledge (Rogoff,
1990; Vygotsky,
1997).
Provide secondary
school administrators
training opportunities
that encourage self-
reflection related to
the extent of the link
between exclusionary
discipline and
discriminatory
practices toward
students of color.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 50
Increase new secondary school administrators’ knowledge about how to access and
desegregate discipline data. The findings of this study indicate that all of new secondary school
administrator require comprehensive declarative knowledge about accessing and desegregating
discipline data. A recommendation from information processing theory was utilized to close this
declarative knowledge gap. It has been found that information learned meaningfully and
connected with prior knowledge is stored more quickly and remembered more accurately
because it is elaborated with prior learning (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). As a result, the
recommendation is to provide new secondary school administrators information at the district
and on-site during the hiring, onboarding process that includes clear guidelines for how to access
and desegregate discipline data. Clark and Estes (2008) argue that a significant understanding of
assumed influences enables stakeholders to increase performance. They continue by stating that
continuously acquiring critical information is essential in the acquisition of organizational goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore, secondary school administrators receive ongoing information
regarding research opportunities, data acquisition, and desegregation of that data.
According to Marsh, Pane, and Hamilton (2006), providing organizational members with
systems to identify disciplinary data that are categorized according to behavioral violations and
student demographics, as well as desegregating the data, is beneficial for stakeholders to evaluate
disciplinary policies and their implementation. Analogously, contextualizing the aforementioned
knowledge to the functions of the organization facilitate desired change (Clark & Estes, 2008;
Mayer, 2011), which could allow secondary administrators to synergize retention of data analysis
and the modification of disciplinary policies and procedures in order to reduce the discrepancy of
exclusionary practices that exist among students of color.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 51
Increasing secondary school administrators’ procedural knowledge of how to
develop and implement alternatives to exclusionary discipline schoolwide. The data show
that SCSD secondary school administrators have an understanding of implementing traditional
disciplinary practices that rely on a progressive implementation of punishment that leads to
suspension or exclusionary discipline; however, all stakeholders, according to their interview
responses, demonstrate a lack the procedural knowledge to develop and implement alternatives
to exclusionary discipline schoolwide. To close the procedural knowledge gap, a
recommendation from information processing theory was utilized. Krathwohl (2002) argues that
conceptual knowledge is a representation of a person’s prior knowledge and the complex
interrelationship between various elements that compose a larger concept or structure that
facilitates them to work together. This would suggest that providing stakeholders with a flow
map or a similar process map would support their learning. Therefore, a recommendation is to
provide secondary school administrators a job aid that integrates the steps of effective existing
practices with data-driven alternatives to minimizing the use of exclusionary discipline.
In order for learners to increase their procedural knowledge, worked examples must be
provided and available (Kirschner, Paas, & Kirschner, (2009); Mayer, 2011; Van Gerven, Paas,
Van Merriënboer, & Schmidt, 2002). Providing clear and accessible guides for addressing
behavioral violations may help close the gap in administrators understanding of exclusionary
discipline. In addition, providing organizational members with clear and accurate procedures,
with practice and appropriate feedback establishes a capacity for automated (Clark & Estes,
2008) procedural knowledge, increasing automated knowledge, which helps to “handle novelty”
(Clark & Estes, 2008, p. 74).
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 52
Increasing planning and reflective practices to reduce the use of exclusionary
practices. The study’s findings demonstrate that secondary administrators require organizational
structures with scheduled time to reflect on the implications of their disciplinary practices. As
shown in Table 3 above, social interaction, cooperative learning, and cognitive apprenticeships
(such as reciprocal teaching) facilitate construction of new knowledge (Rogoff, 1990; Vygotsky,
1997)), suggesting that providing administrators with training in planning and reflecting would
support their metacognitive knowledge. The recommendation then is to provide secondary
school administrators with training opportunities that encourage self-reflection related to the
extent of the link between exclusionary discipline and discriminatory practices toward students
of color.
According to Mayer (2011), knowledge must change and develop progressively from
declarative, procedural, and metacognitive. Mayer (2011) claims that learns must access prior
knowledge and reflecting on it before being exposed to new information. Moreover, learners
benefit from having opportunities to participate in guided, self-monitoring and self-assessing of
learning (Baker, 2006). Once students engage in the process of reflection, it is beneficial for
learners to have time to debrief on their thought process during their learning after completing
the learning task.
Motivational Influences
Table 4 underscores the motivational influences, the principles, and context-specific
recommendations derived from the qualitative research and literature review.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 53
Table 4
Summary of Motivation Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Motivation
Influence
Validated as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority

Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle
and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
Secondary school
administrators lack the
confidence in
developing and
implementing
alternatives to
exclusionary
discipline. (SE)
HP Y Effective
observational
learning is achieved
by first organizing
and rehearsing
modeled behaviors,
then enacting it
overtly (Ambrose,
2010).
High self-efficacy
can positively
influence motivation
(Pajares & Urdan,
2006).
Provide training in
which an
administrator
successfully
develops and
implements policy
with rehearsed
modeled behaviors
and targeted
feedback that is an
alternative to
exclusionary
discipline.
Secondary school
administrators believe
students or their
circumstance are
primarily responsible
for receiving
exclusionary discipline
(AE).
HP Y Adaptive
attributions and
control beliefs
motivate
[individuals]
(Pintrich, 2003).
Provide
opportunities for
staff members to
collaboratively
reflect about their
beliefs regarding the
implementation of
disciplinary
practices and the
influence on
students.

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 54
Rehearsed modeled behaviors and targeted feedback. The study’s results and findings
indicate that secondary school administrators lack confidence motivation in the implementation
of alternatives to exclusionary discipline. A recommendation founded in self-efficacy theory has
been selected to close the self-efficacy gap. Ambrose (2010) argues that affective observational
learning is achieved by first organizing and rehearsing model behaviors, then enacting it overly.
Moreover, high self-efficacy can positively influence motivation. This would suggest the
providing secondary administrators with rehearsed model behaviors throughout the organization
would support their confidence. The recommendation, therefore, it is to provide training in which
administrator successfully developed and implemented policy with rehearsed modeled behaviors
and targeted feedback that is an alternative to exclusionary discipline.
Bandura (2000) states that in order for support desired behaviors and accomplish desired
outcomes, which includes systemic changes, individuals must have self-efficacy—the belief that
a particular task or goal can be attained and is also the driving force behind motivation (Bandura,
2000). Furthermore, Rivkin (2007) asserts that in order to redesign a disciplinary system that
transitions from an exclusionary discipline model to a non-exclusionary discipline system, it
must be less focused on the students’ belief that they can change, and more on the educators’
belief that there can be change in behavior. Noguera (2003) further notes that motivation to
achieve specific goals is individuals’ self-efficacy to generate organizational change. Therefore,
from a theoretical perspective, it appears that increasing self-efficacy through modeling and
targeted feedback would increase secondary school administrator’s self-efficacy, and as a result,
address the discrepancies in the implementation of disciplinary practices.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 55
Opportunities for staff members to collaboratively reflect about their beliefs. The
research in this study indicates that secondary school administrators believe students or their
circumstance are responsible for engaging in behavior that leads to exclusionary discipline.
Attribution theory has been selected to address the attribution gap. Moreover, Pintrich (2003)
contends that adaptive attributions and control beliefs motivate [individuals]. Therefore, the
recommendation is to provide secondary school administrators with opportunities for them to
collaboratively reflect about their beliefs regarding the implementation of disciplinary practices
and the influence on students.
Attribution theory is useful in an analysis of the unconscious or conscious biases that
individuals may have, which may potentially influence their distribution of administrative
consequences that may remove a student from the learning environment (Meece et al., 2006).
The authors go on to say that outcomes and the perceived causes of those outcomes shapes an
individual’s future action in relation to that previous perceived cause. In other words, people’s
beliefs and motivations are reinforced by the potentially biased perception of cause and effect.
Organizational Recommendations
Table 5 shows a comprehensive list of organizational influences that were substantiated
during the data collection process. The said influences were the most prominently stated during
the interview analysis process as it pertains to the SCSD’s overarching goal.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 56
Table 5
Summary of Organization Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence
Validated as a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority

Yes, No
(Y, N)
Principle
and Citation
Context-Specific
Recommendation
The organization needs
to establish a culture of
trust and collaboration
between administrators
and instructional staff in
order to systematically
implement school
policies that provide
alternatives to
exclusionary discipline.
HP Y Leaders or
administrators must
avoid ambiguity
when expressing
their positions,
demonstrating
predictable or
consistent behavior,
even during moments
of uncertainty
(Northouse, 2013).
Secondary school
administrators
increase transparency
by scheduling
consistent time to
meet and share
relevant disciplinary
information with
instructional staff.
The organization needs
to establish a committee
composed of engaged
stakeholders to
participate in a needs
assessment that
monitors the progress of
students who have
received exclusionary
discipline.
HP Y Successful
organizational
change requires
vision, strategy, the
fostering of a culture
of maintainable
common values that
support a vision that
is conducive to
change, and
empowerment,
motivation and
inspiration to those
who are involved or
affected by the work
of the organization
(Gill, 2002; Simons,
1999).
Secondary school
administrators
collaborate with
teachers and other
school staff to
develop and
implement
disciplinary school
practices.

Increasing secondary school administrators’ trust and collaboration with
instructional staff. The results of this study found that stakeholders were ambiguous about the
District’s expectations and expressed a lack collaboration as it pertains to disciplinary practices.
A principle anchored in organizational change theory has been selected to close this resource
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 57
gap. Leaders or administrators must avoid ambiguity when expressing their positions,
demonstrating predictable or consistent behavior, even during moments of uncertainty
(Northouse, 2013). This would suggest that facilitating collaboration and increasing transparency
improves trust between administrators and instructional staff. The recommendation then is for
Secondary school administrators to increase transparency by scheduling consistent time to meet
and share relevant disciplinary information with instructional staff.
According to Northouse (2013), an organization needs to promote a culture of trust and
collaboration between leadership and organizational members in order to systematically
implement school policies and procedures that provide alternatives to exclusionary discipline.
Similarly, organizations that are successful in nurturing a culture of trust have leaders who
demonstrate behavioral integrity or model high moral standards that are congruent with those
held by members of the organization (Moorman & Grover, 2009; Simons, 1999). Clark and Estes
(2008) also suggest that effective change efforts insure that the perspectives of all key
stakeholders inform the approach and decision-making process leading to the change. As such, it
appears that providing opportunities for secondary supervisors to collaborate and communicate
with instructional staff would support in narrowing the “trust gap” and therefore improve the
creation implementation of disciplinary policies.
Promoting a culture of change through strong leadership. Findings from the study
demonstrate that secondary administrators failed to describe experiences where they receive
training, guidance, or procedures through leadership and collaboration that is important in
reducing exclusionary practices. A principal rooted in organizational change theory has been
utilized to increase the culture of change in the organization. Successful organizational change
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 58
requires vision, strategy, the fostering of a culture of maintainable common values that support a
vision that is conducive to change, and empowerment, motivation and inspiration to those who
are involved or affected by the work of the organization (Gill, 2002; Simons, 1999). Therefore,
the recommendation is that secondary school administrators collaborate with teachers and other
school staff to develop and implement disciplinary school practices.
An organization that is forward thinking and innovative is anchored on collaborative
leadership, organizational motivation and a collaborative culture to facilitate new workplace
practices to emerge organically and personnel to move forward in tandem with them (Pan &
Howard, 2010). Furthermore, decisions cannot be made solely by management, but instead,
through shared leadership that empowers individuals to engage in inquiry, where alternative
ideas and insights can be heard and create knowledge (Pan & Howard, 2010).
Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The implementation and evaluation plan is founded on the New World Kirkpatrick
Model. This model initiates with the objectives of the organization and engages in evaluation
throughout the entire to continuously assess effectiveness. Leading indicators assist
organizations in strategically targeting their ultimate results by monitoring targeted outcomes
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). External outcomes should be met if internal outcomes are
accomplished.
Level 4: Results
Table 6 outlines the proposed Level 6 results and leading indicators, which include the
internal and external outcomes. The external outcomes emerge from the perception, beliefs, and
reputation of the District in question. On the other hand, internal outcomes center around a
reduction of suspensions.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 59
Table 6
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric Method
External Outcomes
1. Improve parents’ sense of
school safety.
The percentage of parents who feel
a high sense of school safety.
ELCAP survey
2. State of California recognizes
improved school Culture and
Climate
The percentages and number of
categories where culture and
climate are measures (i.e.,
suspensions).
Analyze ELCAP survey results and
review discipline data.
Internal Outcomes
1. Decrease the number of
suspensions
The number of administrative
referrals assigned weekly on
Aeries.
Conduct weekly Aeries queries to
determine the number and type of
administrative referrals.
2. Increasing the use of
alternative disciplinary
practices or classroom
interventions
The number of teachers who
created a classroom management
plan that includes schoolwide
intervention practices.
Review beginning and end of the
year applications of the schoolwide
intervention practices.
3. Increase the utilization of the
school’s PBIS rewards
systems.
The number of rewards/points
given weekly.
School-site review of reward
system distributions.

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 60
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. Level 3 of the Kirkpatrick New World model requires the
organization to continually monitor performance toward targeted outcomes, while connecting
critical behaviors that are analogous to accomplishing desired outcomes (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). To achieve the organizational goal of decreasing the suspension rate, the
organization must provide clear expectations and accountability (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). The first critical behavior that secondary school administrators must achieve is
minimizing their use of administrative referrals to address minor classroom infractions. The
second critical behavior that must be displayed is the creation and implementation of a classroom
management that is informed by strategic behavior interventions. Lastly, the third critical
behavior is to increase the utilization of the school’s PBIS rewards systems. Critical behaviors,
metrics, methods, and the timing for the evaluation are outlined in Table 7.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 61
Table 7
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
1. Secondary school
administrators will
support/guide teachers
in developing and
implementing
classroom
management plans
with strategic behavior
interventions.
100% submission of
teacher classroom
management plans with
guided classroom
management plans.
The classroom
management plan will be
documented in the training
tracking document.
At the beginning of
the school year and
ongoing throughout
the school year.
2. Secondary school
administrators will
support teachers in
utilizing alternatives to
administrative referrals
that remove students
from the learning
environment.
The number of
interventions used before a
student receives an
administrative referral
The administrator will
track interventions.
Monthly
3. Utilization of school
wide reward system
The number of points
distributed school wide
Points will be tracked by
designated staff member
during Focus Time or
PLCs
Monthly

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 62
Required drivers
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) describe required drivers as essential in
accomplishing practical implementations of organizational functions by establishing systems and
processes that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward performance of critical behaviors on the
job. New secondary school administrators’ information at the district and on-site during the
onboarding process that includes clear guidelines for how to access and desegregate discipline
data. Secondary school administrators will be provided with job aids that integrate the steps of
effective practices with data-driven alternatives to minimize the use of exclusionary discipline.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 63
Table 8
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Secondary “discipline” administrator meetings to
collaborate
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Job aid illustrating alternatives to exclusionary
discipline
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Feedback and coaching during secondary
administrator meetings
Bimonthly 1, 2, 3
Encouraging
Provide training that models alternative disciplinary
practices.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Feedback during direct supervisor meetings Weekly 1, 2, 3
Rewarding
Acknowledgement during secondary administrator
meetings
Bimonthly 1, 2, 3
Provide incentives for secondary administrators to
collaborate in the development of alternative
disciplinary practices.
Monthly 1, 2, 3
Monitoring
Supervisors will monitor secondary administrators’
progress by monitoring discipline data.
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Supervisors will review secondary administrators’
progress in collaborating with teachers during
meetings.
Weekly 1, 2

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 64
Organizational support. The organization will support the stakeholders’ critical
behaviors by scheduling consistent time to meet and share relevant disciplinary information with
instructional staff. In addition, the organization will facilitate collaboration between secondary
administrators and instructional staff to develop school policies and their implementation.
Level 2: Learning
Learning Goals
Following the completion of the recommended solutions, especially those pertaining to
professional development on discipline data analysis with rehearsed and modeled behavior-
targeted feedback that is an alternative to exclusionary discipline, secondary school
administrators will be able to:
1. Desegregate disciplinary data (D)
2. Implement a job aid that supports instructional staff’s implementation of disciplinary
interventions. (P)
3. Correctly describe the State’s and the School District’s accountability measures
pertaining to disciplinary practices. (P)
4. Recognize the common characteristics of at-risk students for exclusionary discipline.
(P)
5. Monitor their work to conform with California State Board of Education guidelines.
(P, M)
6. Indicate confidence in their ability to implement alternatives to exclusionary
discipline. (V)
7. Indicate confidence in their ability to support instructional staff in developing
classroom management plans that clearly describe classroom expectations and desired
behavioral outcomes. (V)
Program
The learning outcomes listed for the previous section will be achieved with a training
program that focuses on data-driven practices that support the learning development of all
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 65
students through accountability measures and actions that facilitate the use of alternative
disciplinary practices to reduce the implementation of exclusionary discipline. The program will
consist of bimonthly trainings consisting of prework (readings and reflections) that work
concurrently with face-to-face trainings/workshops. Every other workshop will take the form of
a practitioners’ meeting to discuss the previous workshop and reflect on its practical applications.
For the first meeting, secondary administrators will be given instructions for accessing
their discipline data on Aeries and on the California Dashboard. They will bring their data to the
first meeting to use for desegregating the data and to assess their knowledge of how to access
their discipline data. Analogously, secondary administrators will be assessed on their knowledge
of the California Dashboard accountability indicators and have a discussion regarding its
influence on their practice.
Future meetings will involve providing secondary administrators with exemplar
documents or job aids pertaining to the forthcoming topic/agenda, which will inform the
direction of the training. For example, the majority of secondary administrators require teachers
to provide a classroom management plan to their students at the beginning of the school year. A
desired outcome is for all teachers to include clear guidelines and descriptions for desired
behavior in the classroom, as well as classroom interventions to assist in preventing exclusionary
discipline. Therefore, secondary administrators would be provided with an outline or exemplar of
a job aid that would support teachers in developing a classroom management plan that would
yield desired outcomes. During the workshop, administrators would be able to discuss and reflect
on the effectiveness of their job aid, if they have one.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 66
Evaluation of the Components of Learning
Procedural knowledge is often founded on declarative knowledge. As a result, both
declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge must be assessed and incorporated into the
training program. Furthermore, in order to attain the aforementioned desired outcome,
participants must be engaged in the training process and believe that it is valuable to their
professional growth. Ultimately, participants must attain an appropriate level of self-efficacy that
they will be successful in practicing the knowledge and skills; and therefore committed to
applying them in their professional practice. As such, Table 7 lists the evaluation methods and
timing for these components of learning.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 67
Table 9
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(-ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Constructed response (supply an answer)—Information is presented
in one form, and secondary administrators are asked either to
construct or to select the same information in a different form.
During and after the training.
Knowledge checks through discussions, “pair, think, share” and
other individual/group activities.
Periodically during the in-person
workshop and documented via
observation notes.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Constructed response (supply an answer)—Information is presented
in one form, and secondary administrators are asked either to
construct or to select the same information in a different form.
During and after the training.
Verbal or written description During the training.
Jigzza—where various groups are presented with a scenario and
present to the whole group.
During the training.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Instructor’s observation of participants’ statements and actions
demonstrating that they see the benefit of what they are being asked
to do on the job.
During the workshop.
Discussions of the value of what they are being asked to do on the
job.
During the workshop.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Surveys using scaled items Following various sections of the training
Confidence checks—thumbs up/down During the training
Survey using scaled items Before and after the training
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Discussions following practice and feedback. During the workshop.
Create an individual action plan. During the workshop.
Retrospective pre- and post-test assessment item. After the course.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 68
Level 1: Reaction
Table 10 below outlines a list of elements that assess the participants’ reactions to the
designated training program. The evaluative methods and tools are voluntary and aspire to elicit
participants’ candid and reflective responses.
Table 10
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Attendance During training
Observation by instructor/facilitator During training
Participation in online share-out tools During training
Completion of individual and collaborative activities During training
Relevance
Open-ended questions During and immediately after training
Customer Satisfaction
Training evaluation forms Immediately after training

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 69
Evaluation Tools
Immediately following the program implementation. The facilitators will conduct a
confidence check utilizing face-to-face discussions during the training to assess the elements that
measure reactions to the program, such as, satisfaction, engagement, and relevance, in
association with Level 1. Participation will be monitored to measure the degree to which they
engaged in the training and levels of self-efficacy regarding the transferability of the acquired
information. Attitudes toward Level 1 components (i.e., the use of materials and program
quality) will be observed by training instructors. In conjunction to Level 2, training instructors
will elicit information from the participants that underscore their knowledge acquired from the
trainings as well as the participants’ commitment to apply the levels. Furthermore, participants
will be asked to share their candid training experience in a survey (see Appendix A).
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. Approximately 4 weeks
following the conclusion of the training, the training participants will be asked to complete a
survey (see Appendix B) to assess the degree to which the knowledge and skills from the training
have been implemented in the training participants’ practice. The 4-week timeframe allows
secondary school administrators to have implemented the information received in training, as
well as its potential impact in their organization. The surveys it will be analyzed to determine the
following areas from the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016):
Level 1 – training relevance
Level 2 – understanding of training information
Level 3 – application of information
Level 4 – impact on job performance
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 70
Data Analysis and Reporting
For the purpose of increasing organizational transparency and closing achievement gaps
in relation to the implementation of disciplinary practices, findings will be reported to training
participants, school-site supervisors, the Director of Education and Cabinet-Level members of
the School District. The findings will be reported via electronic documents and presented with
the use of digital visual aids (i.e., Prezi, PowerPoint, or Google Slides). Moreover, findings
documents and presentations will highlight areas of effectiveness and areas for potential growth
for future trainings facilitated by the District. Table 11 outlines elements analogous with Level 1
of the New World Kirkpatrick Model. The District will implement a similar system for
monitoring the latter Levels of the Kirkpatrick Model.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 71
Table 11
Evaluation of Organizational Change and Readiness for the Reduction of Exclusionary
Discipline Practices
Evaluation Components
Participant Factors Training Module Post-Training Evaluation2
Engagement 100% Attendance 90% of participants felt engaged by the training
facilitator.
100% of participants found the training interesting.
Relevance Participant Confidence Check
Embedded in the Training
90% of participants found the training subject and
activities relevant to their responsibilities as
secondary school administrators.
Participant Satisfaction Participant Confidence Check
Embedded in the Training
95% of participants found the training to be a
valuable use of their professional development
time.
100% of participants would recommend the
training to other secondary school administrators.

Summary
The New World Kirkpatrick Model was used to reinforce the desired outcomes and to
develop an action plan with embedded systems to continuously evaluate the recommendations
for the Southern California School District in order to increase the likelihood of fulfilling the
organizational goal. The ultimate benefit of the Model is that by keeping the end-goal in focus,
while at the same time engaging in regular and purposeful evaluation of data, the trajectory
toward the organizational goal can be modified to maximize program results (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). The expectations for the Model is that it provides a structure that establishes

2 One month following the conclusion of the initial training module.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 72
a clear and targeted focus toward specific goals. Moreover, the implementation and evaluation
steps of the Model are key to making the necessary and strategic adjustments throughout the
process to ensure that the main thing is the main thing and that the plan is yielding the desired
results. Ultimately, the value of the Model as an intervention is that the process guides SCSD
stakeholders with sequential, yet, overlapping steps that enables the District to use its most
valuable resources—people, time, and money—in a way that is conducive developing and
implementing equitable disciplinary practices.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 73
References
Ambrose, S. E. (2010). Rise to globalism: American foreign policy since 1938. New York, NY:
Penguin.
Anyon, Y., Zhang, D., & Hazel, C. (2016). Race, exclusionary discipline, and connectedness to
adults in secondary schools. American Journal of Community Psychology, 57(3–4), 342–
352.
Baker, L. (2006). Metacognition. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition
Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9(3), 75–78.
Bradshaw, C. P., Mitchell, M. M., O’Brennan, L. M., & Leaf, P. J. (2010). Multilevel
exploration of factors contributing to the overrepresentation of Black students in office
disciplinary referrals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 508–520, 514.
Brown, K. E., & Steele, A. S. (2015). Racial discipline disproportionality in Montessori and
traditional public schools: A comparative study using the relative rate index. Journal of
Montessori Research, 1(1), 14–27.
Carver, P. R., Lewis, L., & Tice, P. (2010). Alternative Schools and Programs for Public School
Students at Risk of Educational Failure: 2007–08. First Look. NCES 2010–026. National
Center for Education Statistics.
Children’s Defense Fund. (1975). School suspensions: Are they helping children? Cambridge,
MA: Washington Research Project.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 74
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cuellar, A. E., & Markowitz, S. (2015). School suspension and the school-to-prison pipeline.
International Review of Law and Economics, 43, 98–106.
Denham, S. A., & Brown, C. (2010). “Plays nice with others”: Social–emotional learning and
academic success. Early Education and Development, 21(5), 652–680.
Esbensen, F. A., Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., & Osgood, D. W. (2012). Results from a multi-site
evaluation of the GREAT program. Justice Quarterly, 29(1), 125–151.
Fowler, T. R. (2003). Achievement motivation in low-income, urban students: An application of
Weiner’s theory of attribution and emotion (Order No. 3085516). Available from
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
(305268724). Retrieved from http://libproxy.usc.edu
Gill, R. (2002). Change management—or change leadership. Journal of Change Management,
3(4), 307–318.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Cranbury, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Hinojosa, M. S. (2008). Black–white differences in school suspension: Effect of student beliefs
about teachers. Sociological Spectrum, 28(2), 175–193.
Hoffman, S. (2014). Zero benefit estimating the effect of zero tolerance discipline policies on
racial disparities in school discipline. Educational Policy, 28(1), 69–95.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 75
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Ki r k pat r i c k ’s four levels of training evaluation.
Alexandria, CA: Association for Talent Development Press.
Kirschner, F., Paas, F., & Kirschner, P. A. (2009). A cognitive load approach to collaborative
learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 31–42.
Knoff, H. M. (2000). Organizational development and strategic planning for the millennium: A
blueprint toward effective school discipline, safety, and crisis prevention. Psychology in
the Schools, 37(1), 17–32.
Korsgaard, M., Brodt, S., & Whitener, E. (2002). Trust in the face of conflict: The role of
managerial trustworthy behavior and organizational context. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 87(2), 312–319.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Lee, T., Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2011). High suspension schools and dropout rates
for black and white students. Education and Treatment of Children, 167–192.
Lewis, L. (2019). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication.
Malden, MA Wiley-Blackwell.
Marsh, J. A., Pane, J. F., & Hamilton, L. S. (2006). Making Sense of Data-Driven Decision
Making in Education: Evidence from Recent RAND Research. RAND Occasional Paper,
1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.7249/OP170.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 76
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Meece, J. L., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2006). Classroom goal structure, student
motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Reviews of Psychology. 57, 487–503.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moorman, R., & Grover, S. (2009). Why does leader integrity matter to followers? An
uncertainty management-based explanation. International Journal of Leadership Studies,
5(2), 102–114.
Noguera, P. A. (2003). Schools, prisons, and social implications of punishment: Rethinking
disciplinary practices. Theory into Practice, 42(4), 341–350.
Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Osher, D., Bear, G. G., Sprague, J. R., & Doyle, W. (2010). How can we improve school
discipline? Educational Researcher, 39(1), 48–58.
Pajares, F. C., & Urdan, T. C. (2006). Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents. Greenwich, CT:
Information Age.
Pan, D., & Howard, Z. (2010). Distributing leadership and cultivating dialogue with
collaborative EBIP. Library Management, 31(7), 494–504.
Pane, D. M. (2009). The Relationship between Classroom Interactions and Exclusionary
Discipline as a Social Practice: A Critical Microethnography (dissertation). Retrieved
from https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/109/
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 77
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Payne, A. A., & Welch, K. (2013, 2015). Restorative justice in schools: The influence of race on
restorative discipline. Youth & Society, 47(4), 539.
Perrow, C. (1972). Complex organizations: A critical essay (pp. 3–15). Glenview, IL: Scott,
Foresman.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in
learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667.
Po‐Yamagata, E., & Jones, M. A. (2007). And justice for some: Differential treatment of youth of
color in the Juvenile Justice System. Building Block for Youth Initiative, National
Council on Crime and Delinquency.
Rivkin, D. H. (2007). Legal advocacy and educational reform litigating school exclusion.
Tennessee Literature Review, 75, 265.
Rocque, M., & Paternoster, R. (2011). Understanding the antecedents of the “school-to-jail” link:
The relationship between race and school discipline. Journal of Criminal Law and
Criminology, 101(2), 633–665.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative interviewing: The
art of hearing data (3rd ed., pp. 85–92). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Schein, E. (2004). How leaders embed and transmit culture. In Organizational Culture and
Leadership (3rd ed., pp. 245–271). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 78
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory. Retrieved from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-efficacy theory: Handbook of motivation at school.
Taylor & Francis e-Library. Hal. 35, 53.
Simons, T. (1999). Behavioral integrity as a critical ingredient for transformational leadership.
Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(2), 89–104.
Skiba, R. J. (2005). Minority disproportionality in special education and school discipline: What
we know, what we need to know [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from
http://www.urbancollaborative.org
Skiba, R. J., Chung, C. G., Trachok, M., Baker, T. L., Sheya, A., & Hughes, R. L. (2014).
Parsing disciplinary disproportionality contributions of infraction, student, and school
characteristics to out-of-school suspension and expulsion. American Educational
Research Journal, 51(4), 640–670.
Skiba, R. J., Horner, R. H., Chung, C., Rausch, M. K., May, S. L., & Tobin, T. (2011). Race is
not neutral: A national investigation of African American and Latino disproportionality
in school discipline. School Psychology Review, 40(1), 85–107.
Sullivan, A. L., Van Norman, E. R., & Klingbeil, D. A. (2014). Exclusionary discipline of
students with disabilities: Student and school characteristics predicting suspension.
Remedial and Special Education, 35(4), 199–210.
Tagg, J. (2012). Why does the faculty resist change? Change, 44(1), 6–15.
Tobin, T. J., Hawken, L. S., & Frank, J. L. (2012). Discipline referrals and access to secondary
level support in elementary and middle schools: Patterns across African–American,
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 79
Hispanic–American, and White students. Education and Treatment of Children, 35(3),
431–458.
Townsend, B. L. (2000). The disproportionate discipline of African American learners: Reducing
school suspensions and expulsions. Exceptional Children, 66(3), 381–391.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). America’s Families and Living Arrangements U.S. Census Bureau
Current Population Report. Washington, DC.
U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (1993). 1990 Elementary and Secondary
School Civil Rights Survey: national summaries, Washington, DC: DBC.
U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights. (2014). Civil rights data collection data
snapshot: School discipline. Issue brief no. 1.
Van Gerven, P. W. M., Paas, F. G., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2002).
Cognitive load theory and aging: Effects of worked examples on training efficiency.
Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 87–105.
Van Wyk, C., & Pelser, A. M. (2014). Leadership’s role in effective implementation of school
discipline policies. International Business & Economics Research Journal (Online),
13(4), 833.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Vol. 4: The history of the
development of higher mental functions (R. W. Rieber, Vol. Ed; M. J. Hall, Trans.). New
York, NY: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1941)
Wald, J., & Losen, D. J. (2003). Defining and redirecting a school ‐to ‐prison pipeline. New
Directions for Youth Development, 2003(99), 9–15.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 80
Wearmouth, J., Mckinney, R., & Glynn, T. (2007). Restorative justice in schools: A New
Zealand example. Educational Research, 49(1), 37–49.
Weiss, R. S. (1995). Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies
(1st ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 81
Appendix A: Interview Protocol
Interview Guide
Introductory Protocol. To facilitate my note-taking, I would like to audio tape our
conversations today. Please sign the release form. For your information, only I will have access
to the tapes which will be destroyed after they are transcribed. In addition, it is important that
you sign a form devised to meet our human participant requirements. Essentially, this document
states the following: (1) all information will be held confidential, (2) your participation is
voluntary, and you may stop at any time if you feel uncomfortable, and (3) we do not intend to
inflict any harm. Thank you for your agreeing to participate.
I have scheduled this interview to last no longer than 1 hour. During this time, we have
several questions that I would like to cover. I may ask you for a follow up 30-minute interview to
ensure I capture your responses fully. However, if time begins to run short, it may be necessary
to interrupt you in order to move forward and complete this line of questioning, as well as
potentially scheduling a second interview to ensure I acquire your full insights.
Introduction
You have been selected to be interviewed today because you have been identified as
someone who has a great deal to share about culture and climate, more specifically, about
discipline policies and their implementation at your school. My research project as a whole focus
on evaluating the creation and implementation of discipline policies and procedures as it pertains
to exclusionary discipline. My study does not aim to evaluate your specific practices or
experiences. Rather, I am trying to learn more about secondary schools’ discipline practices, and
hopefully learn about administrator practices that help improve student learning experiences.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 82
I look forward to hearing your responses and perspectives.
Interview Questions:
Knowledge
1. Tell me a little bit about how you became involved in education.
2. Describe your current role at your school site.
3. Please describe what specific schooling, training, or professional development that
you’ve received regarding discipline practices.
4. Describe your involvement in creating or developing disciplinary policies and
procedures at your school?
5. What are your thoughts regarding the implementation of exclusionary discipline or
discipline that removes students from the learning environment?
a. Probe: Are there times when exclusionary discipline is necessary?
b. Probe: What is your personal experience with its implementation?
6. What criteria do you use in choosing to implement exclusionary discipline?
7. At your school, are there differences in who receives exclusionary discipline?
a. Probe: Do you see any demographic differences?
b. What would you attribute to the demographic differences?
Motivation
8. How effective do you feel exclusionary discipline is in addressing undesired
behaviors?
a. Probe: Please share a specific example.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 83
9. Why do you believe some students behave in ways that get them suspended or
expelled?
10. How effective do you think exclusionary discipline is in changing behavior?
a. Probe: Please provide a specific example.
11. What characteristics or traits do you attribute to student who receive exclusionary
discipline?
12. Do you believe there are alternatives to exclusionary discipline in your school
district?
Organization
13. At your school, what influences if a students’ behavior warrants exclusionary
discipline?
14. Does your district or school utilize a specific philosophy or program for addressing
issues revolving around discipline?
15. What would you attribute to your exclusionary display data for the past three years?
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 84
Appendix B: Credibility and Trustworthiness
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) state that there is debate among scholars regarding the
terminology that should be used in qualitative research to assess the extent that a study’s results
could be trusted and deemed credible. Ultimately, the credibility and trustworthiness of a
qualitative study are measured by how reasonable the study is as a whole to the reader (Maxwell,
2013). One important strategy that the researcher utilized to increase the credibility and
trustworthiness of this study was to thoroughly reflect on research bias or subjectivity, also
known as reflexivity, prior to the study’s design and throughout the data-collection and
interpretation phase. More specifically, reflexivity is the researcher’s ability to engage in critical
self-reflection regarding personal beliefs, feelings, or experiences that may affect the
investigation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Furthermore, the purpose of the reflection is to
counteract where potential biases could infiltrate the study. Being aware that a qualitative
researcher could never shed all biases, as well as employing reflexivity informed the design
portion of the study; the acquisition of participants; the creation of interview questions and
protocols; and the interpretation of data. For example, in the review of the literature or in the
selection of information from a participant’s interview, information that agrees or disagrees with
the researcher’s assumptions or worldview has been made available to the reader.
Analogous to reflexivity, the research utilized an audit trail, which is a descriptive
account of the decision processes that leads to the chosen study design and methodology
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Explicit information was included in the
corresponding sections that describe the research choices made and the rationale for those
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 85
choices, allowing the reader to weigh the credibility and trustworthiness of the results with
greater transparency.
In addition, the use of rich, description added to the trustworthiness and credibility of the
study. Rich description has the potential of providing the reader with an experience of being
present in the setting, allowing him/her to have a fuller experience of the study’s phenomenon
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2002). The fact that all secondary
administrators at SCSD, from all middle schools and high schools are being interviewed using a
standardized open-ended, and semistructured interview protocol, the participants’ thorough and
insightful responses are provided to the reader in a transparent, comprehensive, and rich manner,
adding to the credibility and trustworthiness of the study.
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 86
Appendix C: Ethics
The researcher conducted a qualitative study. School administrators were informed of the
purpose of the study and the methods that were used to collect the data. This is an important first
step because the reliability and validity of a research study depends on the ethics of the
investigator (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, within the constructs and implementation of
the study, there is an imbedded responsibility that the researcher took in order to maintain the
integrity and the safety of the participants. More to the point, a consent form was given at the
onset of the study to all participants. In addition, Glesne (2011) states that the relationship
between researcher and participants is analogous with ethical concerns, highlighting the
importance of informed consent. The author continues by defining informed consent as
providing participants with a clear understanding of the following rights: (1) a clear description
and purpose of the study; (2) the ability to withdraw at any point of the study; (3) the removal of
all unnecessary risks; (4) ensuring that the welfare and societal benefits outweigh risks; (5)
guarantee that the experiment is conducted by a qualified researcher (Glesne, 2011). More
specifically, all participants received a pseudonym to ensure their identity was protected. All
participants were asked if the interviews would be recorded; however, they were given the option
to deny the right to record. In that case, the researcher took copious notes. The interview
recordings were secured in external memory systems that could not be accessed by external
means. In addition, to further secure the safety of the participants involved in this study, the
study was processed and reviewed by the University of Southern California Institutional Review
Board, meeting its requirements for protecting participants’ welfare. Moreover, through IRB
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 87
approval process, the researcher provided all pertinent information about the study in writing,
clearly explaining how the study was ethically conducted (Krueger & Casey, 2009).

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 88
Appendix D: Limitations and Delimitations
The primary stakeholder and participant for this study was secondary education
administrators. Working in the same role and capacity as the participants, the researcher
reiterated their confidentiality among the other elements of the IRB approval process. Potential
participants had the choice to willfully participate or withdraw from the study at any time
without the fear of retribution. As a member of the focus organization, the researcher has an
invested interest in identifying the knowledge, motivation, and organizational gaps that may
influence the identified problem of practice. In the pursuit of identifying said influences,
participants may feel dubious about the researcher’s roles as researcher and peer, again
underscoring the importance of providing potential participants with informed consent and
acquiring the approval to conduct the study by the University of Southern California IRB.
Moreover, the researcher provided information, including research questions to the participants
in a nonthreatening, nonjudgmental way in order to prevent them from feeling discomfort or
unsafe in sharing their thoughts and experiences.
In addition, the decision of developing and exploring the research questions implies a
certain degree of bias by the researcher. The impact of potential biases was addressed through
the development of a research methodology that includes measuring tools that elicit data points
that directly address the core inquiry of the study and not presuppose assumptions held by the
researcher. As an example, the researcher must not elicit information that may cause participants
harm, such as pressuring participants to provide self-incriminating or defaming information
(Rubin & Rubin, 2012).
DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 89
Appendix E: Immediate Feedback Survey

DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES 90
Appendix F: Blended Evaluation Tool
Survey Items are measured using a Likert 5-point scale – Strongly Agree, Agree, N/A, Disagree,
Strongly Disagree
Level One: Reaction
Engagement
1. "I exerted effort to stay engaged with my training facilitator."
2. The training was interesting.
Relevance
3. The training subject is relevant to me as a secondary school administrator.
4. The training activities and information relevant to my job responsibilities.
Satisfaction
5. The training was a valuable use of my professional development time.
6. I would recommend this training program the Other secondary school administrators.
Level Two: Learning
7. The training provided me with information that will help me desegregate data.
8. The training provided me information that will help me develop a job aid that supports
instructional staff’s implementation of disciplinary interventions
Level Three: Behavior
9. I have the resources I need to support an equitable environment at my school site.
10. I have the support to apply what I learned in the training around disciplinary practices.
Level Four: Results
11. I have seen a significant difference in teacher’s implementation of administrative
referrals.
12. I have experienced a schoolwide reduction in exclusionary discipline.

Asset Metadata

Creator Garcia, Ulises Abel (author)

Core Title Impact of disciplinary and alternative practices on educational access

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 11/26/2019

Defense Date 08/06/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag African-American,alternative disciplinary practices,Discipline,disproportionate,effective disciplinary practices,exclusionary discipline,Knowledge,Latino,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,stakeholders,Students,students of color,suspensions, expulsions

Language English

Advisor Freking, Frederick (committee chair), Keller, Frances (committee member), Ott, Maria (committee member)

Creator Email uabelgarcia@gmail.com,uagarcia@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-237563

Unique identifier UC11673732

Identifier etd-GarciaUlis-7846.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-237563 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GarciaUlis-7846.pdf

Dmrecord 237563

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Garcia, Ulises Abel

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Abstract (if available)

Abstract In the educational system of the United States, there exists a disproportionate implementation of exclusionary discipline towards African-American and Latino students in comparison to White students (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2014). It is demonstrable that a disproportionate implementation of exclusionary discipline generates dire long-term outcomes for those students who are impacted by the disciplinary disparity (Rocque & Paternoster, 2011). Analogously, in a qualitative research method, the researcher of this study utilized a semistructured interview procedure to interview secondary school administrators from a diversely populated school district in Southern California. The results of the study informed the recommendations, which involved the implementation of a strategically developed training program for secondary school administrators using the New World Kirkpatrick Model. The Model assists in establishing a desired outcome for addressing potential influences that negatively impact disciplinary practices by strategically evaluating relevant data towards addressing said goal.