Suspension is commonly used in schools, yet these practices can adversely affect students’ education well-being and do not improve student behavior. This study assesses the use of the Monarch Room (MR) intervention, a trauma-informed alternative to school discipline suspension policies, among 620 court-involved girls placed in residential care and enrolled in an urban-located public charter school. Teachers readily utilized the intervention as a first response to dealing with problematic behavior, and as a result, MR use significantly decreased reliance on suspension practices. Multiple stays in residential treatment and race were significant predictors of MR use.
American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2006). Are zero-tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/zero-tolerance.pdf
2.
ArciaE. (2006). Achievement and enrollment status of suspended students: Lessons from a large multicultural school district. Education and Urban Society, 38, 359-369.
3.
BalfanzR. K.ByrnesV.FoxJ. (2013, January). Sent home and put off-track: The antecedents, disproportionalities, and consequences of being suspended in the ninth grade. Paper presented at the Closing the school discipline gap: Research to practice, Washington, DC.
4.
BormanG. D.HewesG. M.OvermanL. T.BrownS. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73, 125-230.
5.
BurleyM. (2010). High school graduation and dropout trends for Washington State foster youth (2005-2009) (Document No. 10-10-3901). Olympia: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
6.
CameronM. (2006). Managing school discipline and implications for school social workers: A review of the literature. Children & Schools, 28, 219-227.
7.
CameronM.SheppardS. M. (2006). School discipline and social work practice: Application of research and theory to intervention. Children & Schools, 28, 15-22.
8.
CasellaR. (2003). Zero tolerance policy in schools: Rationale, consequences, and alternatives. Teachers College Record, 105, 872-892.
9.
ChristleC.NelsonM. C.JolivetteK. (2004). School characteristics related to the use of suspension. Education & Treatment of Children, 27, 509-526.
10.
ColeS. F.O’BrienJ. G.GaddM. G.RistucciaJ.WallaceD. L.GregoryM. (2005). Helping traumatized children learn. Boston, MA: Advocates for Children.
11.
ColemanG. (2001). Issues in education: View from the other side of the room. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group Inc.
12.
CourtneyM. E.TeraoS.BostN. (2004). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
DormanC.LindseyN. L.WoodinM.CohenR. L.SchweitzerJ. A.TonaJ. T. (2009). Using sensory tools for teens with behavioral and emotional problems. Bethesda, MD: The American Occupational Therapy Association.
15.
FabeloT.ThompsonM. D.PlotkinM.CarmichaelD.MarchbanksM. P.BoothE. A. (2011). Breaking schools’ rules: A statewide study of how school discipline relates to students’ success and juvenile justice involvement. Council of State Governments Justice Center and The Public Policy Research Institute. Retrieved from http://csgjusticecenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Breaking_Schools_Rules_Report_Final.pdf
16.
FenningP. A.BohanonH. (2006). Schoolwide discipline policies: An analysis of discipline codes of conduct. In EvertsonC.WeinsteinC. (Eds.), Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues (pp. 1021-1040). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17.
FenningP. A.RoseJ. (2007). Overrepresentation of African American students in exclusionary discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42, 536-559.
18.
GordonR.Della PianaL.KeleherT. (2000). Facing the consequences: An examination of racial discrimination in U.S. public schools. Oakland, CA: Applied Research Center.
19.
GreenwoodC. R.HortonB. T.UtleyC. A. (2002). Academic engagement: Current perspectives on research and practice. School Psychology Review, 31, 328-349.
MendezL.KnopfH.FerronJ. (2002). School demographic variables and out-of-school suspension rates: A quantitative and qualitative analysis of a large, ethnically diverse school district. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 259-277.
MilnerJ.LomoteyK. (2014). Handbook of urban education. New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
MunnP.CullenM. A.JohnstoneM.LloydG. (2001). Exclusion from school: A view from Scotland of policy and practice. Research Papers in Education, 16, 23-42.
31.
OhlsonM. (2009). Examining Instructional Leadership: A Study of School Culture and Teacher Quality Characteristics Influencing Student Outcomes. Florida Journal of Education Administration & Policy, 2, 102-111.
32.
PecoraP. J.KesslerR. C.WilliamsJ.O’BrienK.DownsA. C.EnglishD.WigginsT. (2005). Improving family foster care: Findings from the Northwest Foster Care Alumni Study. Seattle, WA: Casey Family Programs.
33.
PlantyM.HussarW.SnyderT.KenaG.KewalA.KempR. J.. . . DinkesR. (2009). The condition of education 2009. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2009081
34.
RauschM. K.SkibaR. J. (2004). Doing discipline differently: The Greenfield middle school story. Bloomington, IN: Center for Evaluation and Education Policy. Retrieved from http://ceep.indiana.edu/ChildrenLeftBehind
35.
RichartD.BrooksK.SolerM. (2003). Unintended consequences: The impact of ‘zero tolerance’ and other exclusionary policies on Kentucky students. Report prepared by the National Institute on Children, Youth & Families at Spalding University, Louisville, KY.
36.
RoleyS. S.BisselJ.ClarkG. F. (2009). Providing occupational therapy using sensory integration theory and methods in school-based practice. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63, 823-842.
37.
SbarraD. A.PiantaR. C. (2001). Teacher ratings of behavior among African American and Caucasian children during the first two years of school. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 229-238.
38.
SekayiD. N. R. (2001). Intellectual indignation: Getting at the roots of student resistance in an alternative high school program. Education, 122, 414-422.
39.
SmithgallC.GladdenR. M.HowardE.GoergeR.CourtneyM. (2004). Educational experiences of children in out-of-home care. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago.
40.
SullivanM. J.JonesL.MathiesenS. (2010). School change, academic progress, and behavior problems in a sample of foster youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 164-170.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families Administration on Children, Youth and Families Children’s Bureau. (2014). Child welfare outcomes, 2009-2012. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/cwo09_12.pdf
46.
VerdugoR. R. (2002). Race-ethnicity, social class, and zero-tolerance policies: The cultural and structural wars. Education and Urban Society, 35, 50-75.
47.
WaldJ.LosenD. J. (2003). Defining and redirecting a school-to-prison pipeline. New Directions for Youth Development, 99, 9-15.
48.
WolpowR.JohnsonM. M.HertelR.KincaidS. O. (2009). The heart of learning and teaching: Compassion, resiliency, and academic success. Olympia, WA: Washington State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Compassionate Schools.
49.
ZimaB. T.BussingR.FreemanS.YangX.BelinT. R.FornessS. R. (2000). Behavior problems, academic skill delays and school failure among school-aged children in foster care: Their relationship to placement characteristics. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9, 87-103.
