No description available.

A free and appropriate public education is promised to every child in the United States. However, zero tolerance school discipline policies have broken that promise, pushing students out of the classroom and into the school-to-prison pipeline. Despite the growing body of research demonstrating negative social and economic impacts of exclusionary discipline, public school administrators have been slow to adopt innovative policies that provide rehabilitative alternatives. The purpose of this study was to compare, using the consequences of innovations application of Rogers's diffusion of innovations theory, the impact of various school district approaches to school discipline on suspension rates while controlling for race and socioeconomic status. This study used a quantitative, nonexperimental, nonequivalent groups, posttest-only research design using secondary analysis of data reported by 218 school districts in a New England state for the 2016-17 school year. Analysis of covariance indicated that there is a significant relationship between approaches to school discipline and suspension rates when controlling for racial and socioeconomic composition (p < .05). Race and economic disadvantage significantly influenced suspension rates (p < .001), and districts implementing alternatives differed significantly in their racial and socioeconomic compositions (p < .001). Policy implications include the promotion of alternative approaches to school discipline. Implications for social change include evidence to support the work of those addressing the needs underlying student behavior rather than crime and punishment models to produce safe and supportive schools and dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline.

Abstract The purpose of this exploratory, qualitative single case study was to explore the Full Service Community Schools model in one, urban elementary school. More specifically, the study sought to understand the impact this model had on students and teachers at one particular research site. This study was also intended to examine the impact the Full Service Community School model had on the role of school administrators. The research questions that guided this study were: (1) How does the Full Service Community School model impact students? (2) How does the Full Service Community School model impact teachers? (3) What impact does the Full Service Community School model have on the role of school administrators? The study found students who were struggling academically were assigned a volunteer that served as a tutor and provided individualized instruction to the students. These students were found to complete their classwork and homework when working with tutors while practicing academic skills they had not mastered. Findings also suggested students formed relationships with their tutors which prompted personal dialogues to occur. Students would talk to their tutors about problems they were facing at home and school. In addition, this study also found aggressive and defiant students were provided a volunteer who served as a mentor. These students would work on social, emotional and behavioral skills. Mentors would motivate the students to behave appropriately in school and reward them when this was accomplished. Lastly, the after school component of the Full Service Community Schools model was found to impact students because it gave students a safe and structured environment to attend when the regular school day had ended. The findings of the study found the Full Service Community Schools model impacted teachers in several ways. Volunteers serving as mentors and tutors worked with the most challenging students. This gave teachers more instructional time to work with other students. When volunteers listened to students’ problems, teachers were freed up to continue teaching. Also, teachers were able to relinquish responsibilities to the volunteers who worked with students. The volunteers gave teachers an extra set of hands in the classroom. Lastly, this study found the Full Service Community School model impacted the role of administrators the least. The model put extra responsibilities on principals due to having extra individuals in the building during and after the school day. Administrators also had to coordinate the schedules of these individuals. On a positive note, volunteers working with disruptive students did assist administrators because these students were less likely to visit the office.