Are We Doing Enough?

Richard Welsh of New York University recently shared the results of his research review (conducted with Shafiqua Little of Research for Action) regarding the suspension and exclusion of Black public school students. The findings reported are stated with a high level of confidence by the authors and are consist with previous reports on the topic.

The studies have largely dispelled the notion that racial differences in exclusionary discipline are due to either higher rates of involvement in misbehavior or more severe misbehavior among Black students.

At all socioeconomic levels, Black students are more likely to be suspended than white students.

Discipline disparities are better explained by the behavior of adults…teachers, assistant principals, and principals in schools than by student misbehavior or poverty.

Teachers refer Black and white students differently for the same level of misbehavior.

Black students are referred more than white students for subjective behaviors (defiance of authority, disrespect, excessive noise, threat, and loitering). These are behaviors that are determined by the teachers’ personal interpretation of what the student was thinking, planning, intending or doing, because it is his/her natural inclination.

When Black students have a Black teacher, they have lower rates of suspensions and expulsions, but the teaching workforce remains largely white.

As someone who has seen “innovative” instructional programs come and go over a forty-five year career in education, one of the findings of great interest to me was in regard to some highly acclaimed models. The report states that, “Studies published in the past five years have found that program-based interventions, like Positive Behavioral Interventions and Support (PBIS) and Restorative Practices, do not appear, on average, to have greater benefits for Black students. Additionally, social and emotional learning (SEL) has little empirical research evidence to suggest that SEL is an effective way to end racial or ethnic disparities.” The basic criticism of these programs is that they are primarily intended to help students (presumably minority students) to assimilate to the existing school culture, rather than crafting the school culture to fit the social, emotional, and cultural needs of students.

Welsh does offer some consolation, stating that if these programs are infused with culturally responsive practices, then, and only then, is there promise for reducing inequality in suspensions. In addition, he gives his blessing to two other programs,

GREET-STOP-PROMPT coupled with classroom coaching, and, Double-Check, which he describes as promoting cultural responsivity teaching and student engagement coaching.

Brief descriptions of these programs are contained in a widely quoted 2019 article “Closing in on Discipline Disproportionality” in the journal School Psychology Review.

GREET-STOP-PROMPT, which resulted in a 65 percent reduction in discipline referrals for African American males in one study, relies on a three-prong approach:

1) Implementing proactive classroom management strategies;

2) Using self-regulation techniques for educators to reduce the impact of their own biases in their responses; and,

3) Response strategies that emphasize empathetic yet consistent ways of dealing with problem behavior.

DOUBLE CHECK is a process of self‐reflection for the teacher that encourages culturally responsive practices through a five-prong approach that includes connecting to the curriculum, building authentic relationships, pausing for reflective thinking, communicating effectively, and acting with sensitivity to a child’s culture. A study that included more than 150 teachers showed that those who received coaching in Double Check strategies observed more student cooperation and less disruptive behavior.

It is stated that even though all of the teachers who received training reported improvement in their culturally responsive behavior management and self-efficacy,

The teachers who received coaching engaged in significantly more instances of proactive behavior management and anticipation of student problems in the classroom. Student cooperation was also higher and disruptive behaviors lower in coached teachers’ classrooms, relative to non-coached teachers. Coached teachers also had a reduced number of office discipline referrals for Black students.

Since there is a major emphasis on providing hands-on coaching, it is important to note that in the Double Check program analysis it is stated that the teachers engaged in an average of 3.69 hours of direct contact with the coach. That would suggest a high return for a reasonably modest investment.

Addressing a closely related issue, the over-representation of Black students in special education classrooms, I found a very helpful 2014 publication, Why Are So Many Minority Students in Special Education? Understanding Race & Disability in Schools by Beth Harry and Janette Klinger (Teachers College Press).

The disproportionate placement of Black (and Hispanic) students in special education is well known and is something I personally experienced as a Special Education teacher for eight years. The researchers found that misidentification of culturally or linguistically diverse children and their subsequent over-representation in special education programs were caused by: teacher and clinician biases; inappropriate statewide policies (such as using scores from biased standardized tests to diagnose language impairment); and, the “wrongful viewing” of these children as having disorders by society at large.

It must be noted that in 2014 it was politically correct to use the term “wrongful viewing” rather than to suggest anything about systemic racism. The inability to separate the racial identities often assigned to Black students from their actual strengths and abilities as learners are carefully skirted in this study. The common view of students in special education programs as having an “intrinsic disorder” is touched upon, but delicately. Perhaps these researchers haven’t had the experience I have had — sitting with a bright, capable, charming, energetic and highly personable Black eleven-year-old sobbing uncontrollably over being “locked up” in a classroom for “losers” (his words).

I know that we have made substantial progress in recent years, but I am haunted by the fear that we have simply not done enough.

P.S. If you are wondering where you personally stand in the range of behaviors that reflect a teacher who is culturally responsive, you might want to take the Self-Assessment Checklist for Personnel Providing Services and Supports to Children and their Families, located at https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/diversity-and-social-justice/cultural-competence/self-assessment-checklist