Charting School Discipline
dc.creator | Wolf, Kerrin | |
dc.creator | Kalinich, Mary Kate | |
dc.creator | DeJarnatt, Susan L. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-29T16:17:38Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-06-29T16:17:38Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Kerrin Wolf, Mary Kate Kalinich & Susan L. DeJarnatt, Charting School Discipline, 48 Urb. Law. 1 (2016). | |
dc.identifier.citation | Available at: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/state_local_government/publications/urban_lawyer/2016/48-1/school-discipline/ | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0042-0905 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/6647 | |
dc.description.abstract | Exclusionary school discipline can steer students away from educational opportunities and towards the juvenile and criminal justice systems. As many public school systems have turned to exclusionary school discipline practices over the past two decades, they have also increasingly adopted charter schools as alternatives to traditional public schools. This research is examines the student codes of conduct for the charter schools in the School District of Philadelphia to consider the role of their disciplinary practices and the potential effects on charter students. We analyzed every disciplinary code provided to the Philadelphia School District by charter schools within Philadelphia during the 2014-2015 school year. Our goal was to examine the provisions relating to detention, suspension, and expulsion, along with other disciplinary responses, to determine what conduct can result in disciplinary consequences, what responses are available for various types of misbehavior, and whether the code language is clear or ambiguous or even accessible to students or potential students and their parents or caregivers. We conclude that too many of the codes are not well drafted, and too many follow models of punitive discipline that can be used to push out non-compliant or challenging students. Some codes grant almost complete discretion to school administrators to impose punitive discipline for any behavior the administrator deems problematic. We hope that this work will spur future research on implementation of charter school discipline policies to illustrate how charter schools are using their codes. Further, we hope to see the charter sector develop model disciplinary codes that move away from a zero tolerance punitive model towards disciplinary systems based on restorative principles. | |
dc.format.extent | 46 pages | |
dc.language | English | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Faculty/ Researcher Works | |
dc.relation.haspart | The Urban Lawyer, Vol. 48, Iss. 1 | |
dc.relation.isreferencedby | American Bar Association | |
dc.rights | All Rights Reserved | |
dc.subject | Exclusionary school discipline | |
dc.subject | Charter schools | |
dc.subject | School-to-prison pipeline | |
dc.subject | Education reform | |
dc.subject | Suspension of charter students | |
dc.title | Charting School Discipline | |
dc.type | Text | |
dc.type.genre | Journal article | |
dc.relation.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/6629 | |
dc.ada.note | For Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu | |
dc.description.schoolcollege | Temple University. James E. Beasley School of Law | |
dc.temple.creator | Kalinich, Mary Kate | |
dc.temple.creator | DeJarnatt, Susan L. | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2021-06-29T16:17:39Z |