Reflecting on Authoritarian Disciplinary Techniques That Have a Negative Impact on School Settings and Foster Systemic Violence and Student Disengagement.

by Gary Pieters, OISE/UT

February 17, 2000

SES1953S: Teaching Conflict and Conflict Resolution: Politics and Practice

The purpose of this reflection essay is to discuss, explore, elaborate upon and examine the ways in which authoritarian disciplinary techniques in school systems foster systemic violence and student underachievement in schools.

The scholarly readings from this course [SES1953S], which I plan to rely upon, include, Epp [1996] "Schools, Complicity and Sources of Violence", and Noguera [1995] "Preventing and Producing Violence: A Critical Analysis of Response to School Violence".

As I continue to make meaning of the readings from Epp and Noguera, I find myself constantly relating to the key points of both articles which are relevant to the teaching and learning environment that I am enmeshed in as a teacher.

Between 1996 to the current period, I have taught [single and/or combined] grades 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in urban and suburban school settings in Los Angeles County and the Greater Toronto Area. The experience of being an educator provides me with daily opportunities to be a participant and observer in how roles, responsibilities, authority and power relations are transacted between student-student, student-teacher, student-administrator in educational settings.

Thus for the purpose of this reflection essay, I am situated in dual roles as researcher and practitioner. The central focus of my reflection essay is to reinforce the findings of Epp and Noguera that authoritarian discipline is a form of systemic violence that at its root cause can foster resistance, alienation, disengagement and overt violence among students. This being the case, it can be argued that authoritarian disciplinary techniques are punitive and have a negative impact on the student's learning environment and academic achievement.

Some of the areas that this reflection essay will examine are the differential application of school policies and procedures resulting in adverse impact to some students in the form of disproportionate suspensions and expulsions from school settings. There is also the paradox of 'Safe Schools' and 'Zero Tolerance' policies which produces punitive results through the rigid and inflexible application of disciplinary policies in the school systems.

As an educator and equity advocate, I find myself constantly struggling with the ways in which authoritarian disciplinary policies are applied in maintaining social control in schools. While on one hand, I agree that there is the need for ground rules in classrooms and schools in order to promote a learning experience that is successful for all. On the other hand, it is evident that the authoritarian disciplinary policies in schools are making the learning environment a punitive place for students. Epp has defined this issue as 'systemic violence'. In her view, systemic violence in education is any practices and procedures that prevents students from learning, thus harming them' [Epp 1996, p.1]. Like Epp, Noguera supports the idea that traditional methods of social control are unsuccessful in curbing school violence. Noguera emphasizes that the installation of metal detectors, the enactment of zero tolerance policies, the use of police officers and security guards, and the application of rigid and inflexible policies have not only been a source of systemic violence but also make schools resemble prison-like, 'lock-down' facilities for students [Noguera 1995, p. 190]. These issues are a response to the over-regulation of public spaces and knowledge production in the hope that such measures will foster a false sense of security that society is safer, hence schools are safer places because of these interventions. However, it can be argued that these interventions are ironic since there implementation position schools as sites of marginalization, rather than sites of possibility where students become disengaged from schools because of the overpolicing and over-securitization of educational settings [Giroux 1994].

As an educator in the California and the Ontario education systems, I have witnessed first-hand the devastating impact of the social controls that Noguera and Epp talk about. Administrators and teachers use a menu of consequences including detentions, suspensions [and to the extreme] expulsions to send a message on the desirable/undesirable behaviors that conformed to their notions of good school culture. Consequences can be harsh for minor infractions such as students not standing in line, students talking back to educators, students wearing durags to school or dress code violations. In one of the communities which I served as an educator, a coalition of community organizations in Southern California held press conferences and school board presentations which raised concerns about excessive consequencing of racialized students, particularly those of African descent/black students. The coalition expressed concerns that principals and vice-principals use student suspensions [and to the extreme expulsions] as their first and only choice of discipline without concern for the excessive nature of the punishment. They also expressed the concern that principals and vice-principals are using [police] as weapons of intimidation against students [Ikharebha 1998 p.11]. In Ontario, organizations such as the Organiation for Parents of Black Children [OPBC] have voiced similar concerns about disciplinary practices in Toronto area schools.

It can be argued that positive school and classroom discipline drives teaching and learning which in turn produces improved student achievement. However, is the intention of discipline to reverse undesired behaviours or to punish students? If it is to reverse undesired behaviours, students are provided with opportunitities to improve through counselling, peer mediation, advisory, mentoring, and inclusive learning communities interventions. If the intent is to punish, then removal from the school setting through suspensions and expulsions will be seen as the only ways to consequence student misbehaviour in school settings. In systemic terms, these latter authoritarian actions are meant to foster alienation and disengagement from the education process. Overt reliance on punitive disciplinary techniques may in fact have a disproportionate negative impact on the students they are designed to help. Such policies may make the school climate ridden with fear, unsafe, intimidating, alienating and impersonal and may also have the effect of pushing students out of school or fostering school drop outs. With these factors in mind, educators can make choices in creating inclusive learning communities that negate the negative impact of punitive disciplinary measure through the fostering of communities of learners who see daily modeling of mutual respect and equity in social relations in the educational setting.

Noguera, like Epp, believes that the traditional approaches that are used in schools to curb undesired behaviors are in fact having an adverse impact on the school climate in the form of systemic violence that is pervasive throughout school systems by way of the negative practices in schools. It can be argued that authoritarian practices of social control including the use of 'zero tolerance policies' are harmful in their application. Noguera contends that racial minority students bear the brunt of such policies. In recent times this has taken on a salient focus as communities in Canada and the United States organize protest lobbies to expose the hypocrisy and double standards of such policies in schools. Opponents of the punitive nature of these practices argue that while on the surface they appear seemingly neutral, school suspensions and expulsions are used to excessive consequence racialized students in a manner that can be described as racial profiling in schools.

On Yahoo news available on the Internet at http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/Full_Coverage/US/Illinois_School_Expulsions/, it is stated that in late November 1999, six black high school students were expelled from Eisenhower High School Decatur high school in suburban Illinois following a fist fight at a sports event. This event attracted the attention of Jesse Jackson, who led protests in the area to focus attention of the disproportionate impact of the 'zero tolerance' policy on infractions that can lead to expulsion. In another school situation available at the Ontario Network for Human Rights web site at http://www.oocities.org/CapitolHill/6174/psd/juvio15.html, a caucasian student committed a homicide on an intermediate school campus and the school district did not (immediately) expel the student who was involved in the fatal fistfight which the coroner ruled a homicide. Members of the community decided that there were racial motives in this incident since the student who died was black. The two current examples indicate that the selective application of 'zero tolerance' policies in schools do not pass the test on fairness and consistency. The incident in Illinois confirms Noguera's position on the adverse impact of zero tolerance policy in fostering negative school practices where 'rigid and inflexible application of punishment for infractions' are imposed in a way that criminalizes children's behaviors. [Noguera 1995 p. 190]

Like Epp and Noguera, I believe that negative practices in schools have an adverse impact, which emerges in the form of systemic violence that has an insidious effect on school climate, tone and the educational experience of all students. I often encourage students to engage in critical thinking around the manner in which authoritarian school climates reproduces social control that limits individuality, creativity and questioning. These practices may have an impact in creating disengagement, displaced anger and other forms of alienation. As a result, I believe that negative school practice foster and create the same problems they are designed to avoid. Though policies that are punitive and produce systemic violence, schools perpetuate the same forms of oppression that are pervasive in the broader society. The response to such an atmosphere fosters frustration among students who see schools as producing the same hierarchical pecking order that forms the basis of wider society. As an educator, I believe in practices that enable students to unlearn the oppressive aspects of schooling through a pedagogy of inclusive learning communities where rights and responsibilities are shared and mutual. I also believe in educating students about their rights and responsibilities as active citizens who need to feel safe while making others feel safe as well.

This reflection essay definitely asserts that authoritarian disciplinary measures do not resolve and suppress conflicts, instead newer and more pervasive conflicts emerge. For example, I witnessed a student being suspended for wearing his hat during lunch when the temperature was below zero freezing. While the school interpreted the student intent as defiance and dress code violation, the student justified wearing his hat as a health and safety consideration given the prevailing weather conditions at that time. Did the consequencing in the form of a suspension fit the perceived school infraction? Noguera has alluded to this source of conflict when he talked about severe and harsh punitive disciplinary measures being imposed upon students "even when the infractions are not of a violent nature." [Noguera 1995 p. 190]

In concluding this reflection essay, I believe that the traditional measures of social control in school systems have a negative impact on the school climate and tone for students and educators whose worldwiew do not mirror the dominant ideology of schools. While the impact results in systemic violence, there is hope that the discussion of alternatives will produce positive results for student engagement and experiences within educational settings.

Bibliography

Ikharebha, E. (1998) Comments and Concerns From The Public Arena. Antelope Valley Coalition for Empowering Consumers.

Noguera P. Preventing and Producing Violence: A Critical Analysis of Responses to School Violence. Harvard Educational Review 1995 (65)2:189-212.

Ontario Network for Human Rights (1999-2000) http://www.oocities.org/CapitolHill/6174/juvio15.html

Yahoo Full Coverage News - Illinois school Expulsions (1999-2000) http://fullcoverage.yahoo.com/Full_Coverage/US/Illinois_School_Expulsions