The Entangled Relationship Between Policy and Practice in Schools
Let’s begin with a story—a true story about a Black middle school boy. Let’s call him “James” for the sake of anonymity and FERPA. James was seen as one of his school’s most challenging scholars. One Wednesday morning during class, James was tapping his pencil on his desk. Per his school’s discipline policy, James received two demerits from his teacher for disruption and being off-task. James continued to tap his pencil. When his teacher whispered in his ear to stop tapping the pencil, James responded, “bruh, your breath stank!” James received another demerit for off-task and a dean referral for gross disrespect. His teacher described the incident in his behavior log as: James continued to loudly bang his pencil on the desk after several warnings and redirections. He was defiant and refused to follow the classroom expectation. He was also extremely disrespectful and shouted that my breath stinks when I asked him to stop banging his pencil. He also called me out of my name.
Twenty-three minutes later during the same class period, James shouted “Kobe!” just as he threw a water bottle in a trash can that was approximately 2ft away from where he was standing. His teacher described this incident in his behavior log as: James created a very unsafe environment. He threw a bottle clear across the classroom when he was supposed to be in his seat completing classwork, almost hitting two scholars in the head. He yelled “Kobe” at the top of his lungs, creating another extreme disruption to the classroom environment. Per his school’s discipline policy, James received two demerits and a dean referral for this single incident — one demerit for disruption, one demerit for out-of-area, and a dean referral for throwing objects.
Tapping a pencil, telling a teacher her breath smells, and throwing a water bottle into the trash can earned James three after school detentions, an in-school suspension the following day, and he was prohibited from attending an upcoming field trip. It was only 8:40am.
Seems like extreme consequences for just three infractions within the first few minutes of the day, right? Well, according to the school’s discipline policy [and the description James’ teacher provided of his behavior], James earned it. Let me break down the policy a bit more.
Per the policy, a dean referral translates to an after school detention. James had earned two dean referrals that morning. One for gross disrespect and one for throwing objects. This means that James had earned two detentions by 8:40am.
James also earned five demerits that morning. Three for tapping his pencil and two for throwing a water bottle into the trash can. Five demerits in one day equals a guaranteed spot in after-school detention. This now means that James had earned three detentions by 8:40am.
Also according to the discipline policy, three consecutive detentions earns a scholar an in-school suspension. Therefore, by 8:40am James had also earned himself an in-school suspension for the following day.
On Friday, upon his return from in-school suspension, James had another day full of infractions and earned the ensuing consequences. During his third visit to the Dean’s office that day, James was asked, “why are you having such a rough day?” He replied, “Why not? Even if I have a good day, they [teachers] will still find a way to light me up with referrals and demerits, so I might as well earn them.” Needless to say, James did just that. And according to the school’s discipline policy, multiple and repeated consequences earned for the same behavior eventually leads to out-of-school suspension and ultimately a recommendation for withdrawal/expulsion. About a month later, James withdrew from his school.
Unfortunately, James’ story is not unique. Even more unfortunate is the fact that James’ school’s discipline policy is not unique. Imagine how different the outcome might have been for James if the school’s discipline policy was different and did not create the opportunity to issue grave consequences for minor or non-violent infractions. Some might argue that James’ outcome might still be the same because the real issue is his teacher’s tendency to criminalize typical kid behavior. While this may also be true, would it have even been possible for his teacher to successfully criminalize his childishness if there weren’t policies that presented the opportunity in the first place?
Policies determine practice, and practice determines outcomes. School leaders who are committed to creating a more just and antiracist school, are charged to embark upon the process of identifying, changing, and eliminating the policies that perpetuate the school to prison pipeline for scholars like James. This is something that I urge other school leaders and policy-makers to do as well. Even if we cannot eliminate the racial bias that shapes teachers’ perception of our scholars and their behavior, we can control the outcome and impact of that bias. As Dr. King stated, “It may be true that morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. It may be true that the law cannot change the heart, but it can restrain the heartless. It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can restrain him from lynching me.”