Abstract
This paper analyzes national level data, gathered for the Safe School Study, to directly address the question, “Why are students suspended from school?” Data are available on students in both junior and senior high schools from a representative sample of the nation's schools. Using a range of analytical techniques, the paper attempts to tease out the relationships between (1) student misbehavior at varying types of schools and suspension rates, (2) the effects of teacher judgments and attitudes, (3) the effect of administrative structures, (4) the effect of perceived academic potential, and (5) the effect of racial bias. It is concluded that suspension rates cannot be regarded as a simple reflection of student misbehavior in school, but rather as the result of a complex of factors grounded in the ways schools operate. Suspension rates are best predicted by (1) knowing the kind of school a student went to, and (2) knowing how that school was run.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Edelman, M. W., Beck, R., and Smith, P.V.School Suspensions: Are They Helping Children? Cambridge, Mass.: Children's Defense Fund, 1975.
Garibaldi, A. M. (Ed.).In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Conference Report. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1979.
Hargreaves, D.Social Relations in a High School. New York: Humanities Press, 1967.
Kelly, D. H., & Pink, W. R. School commitment, youth rebellion and delinquency,Criminology. 1973,10 (4), 473–485.
Lines, P. M. The case against short suspensions. InDiscipline and Learning: An Inquiry into Student-Teacher Relationship (Rev. ed.). Washington, D. C.: National Education Association, 1977.
Mizell, M. H. Designing and implementing in-school alternatives to suspension.The Urban Review, 1978,10 (3), 213–226.
National Institute of Education.Violent Schools-Safe Schools. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1978.
Neill, S. B.Suspension and Expulsion: Current Trends in School Policies and Programs. Arlington, Va.: National School Public Relations Association, 1976.
Pink, W. T. Rebellion and success in the high school.Contemporary Education, 1978, LXIX (2), 78–84.
Polk, K., & Schafer, W.Schools and Delinquency. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.
Rubel, R. J.The Unruly School: Disorder, Disruptions, and Crimes. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books, 1977.
Schafer, W. E., & Olexa, C.Tracking and Opportunity. Scranton, Pa.: Chandler Publishing Co., 1971.
Stinchcombe, A. L.Rebellion in a High School. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1964.
United States Senate Subcommittee to investigate Juvenile Delinquency.School Violence and Vandalism: Models and Strategies for Change. Hearing Before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 94th Congress. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1976.
Williams, J. In-school alternatives to suspension: Why bother? In: A. M. Garibaldi (Ed.),In-School Alternatives to Suspension: Conference Report. Washington, D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1979.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was Supported by the National Institute of Education (NIE-P-79-0032). Views contained or opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NIE: no official endorsement is suggested.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, SC., Pink, W., Crain, R. et al. Student suspension: A critical reappraisal. Urban Rev 14, 245–303 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02171974
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02171974