THE THREE COMMITTMENTS: CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND DISPROPORTIONATE SUSPENSION OF BLACK MALES

THE THREE COMMITMENTS: CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND DISPROPORTIONATE SUSPENSION OF BLACK MALES

A dissertation submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University

In partial fulfillment of The Requirements for

The Degree

Doctor of Education In

Educational Leadership

by

Macheo Kahil Payne

San Francisco, California

December 2012

Copyright by Macheo Kahil Payne

2012

CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL I certify that I have read The Three Commitments: Critical Race Theory and

Disproportionate Suspension of Black Males by Macheo Kahil Payne, and that in my

opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a dissertation submitted in partial

fulfillment of the requirements for the degree: Doctor of Education in Educational

Leadership at San Francisco State University.

____________________________________ Shawn Ginwright, Associate Professor of Africana Studies, San Francisco State University

____________________________________ Jeff Duncan-Andrade, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies, San Francisco State University

____________________________________ Jamal Cooks, Associate Professor of Secondary Education, San Francisco State University

THE THREE COMMITTMENTS: CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND

DISPROPORTIONATE SUSPENSION OF BLACK MALES

Macheo Payne San Francisco State University

2012

Research shows for the past 35 years, disproportionate suspension of black males compared to

white males, occurs primarily from disruption, defiance & disrespect (the 3 D’s). Three primary

factors were found to contribute to this trend; institutional bias, teacher bias & cultural

mismatch. Research also indicates that this is a significant equity issue and recently has become

a civil rights issue (Losen & Skiba, 2010). Current analysis of this problem is inadequate

because although research & literature explicitly recognizes race as a fundamental variable in

disproportionality it doesn’t recognize racism as the fundamental cause of disproportionality on

an institutional and systemic level. Critical Race Theory (CRT) establishes racism as a

fundamental feature of education and disproportionality as a manifestation of that feature. Thus,

addressing disproportionality must be rooted in addressing racism explicitly and ideally at the

institutional or systemic level. This study examines the classroom to get insight and clues about

race based-solutions in an effort to support future studies that may explore race based solutions

at the institutional or systemic level. In this study, the CRT tenet of challenging race neutrality

is operationalized and examines how a teacher “sees” race and addresses teacher bias as well as

institutional bias and cultural mismatch, exploring potential race-based solutions. This case

study used an intensity sample to identify two exemplary teachers who approached teaching

black males differently and found that they employed 3 common elements termed the Three

Commitments. They are a Courageous Commitment, Emotional Commitment and a

Commitment to Social Justice. These Three Commitments are potential race-based solutions

that can be applied and tested on an institutional and systemic level to eliminate the ongoing

race-based inequity of disproportionate suspension of black male students.

I certify that the Abstract is a correct representation of the content of this dissertation.

_____________________________________________ ___________________

Chair, Dissertation Committee Date

RUNNING HEAD: The Three Commitments

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This dissertation is dedicated to my family. Starting with my ancestors, I thank my

grandfather Pops for always encouraging me to pursue higher education. I thank all of my

grandparents for their example as dedicated, hardworking black people committed to

family, community and social justice. I am thankful for my parents for their love and

support that provided me with the foundation for who I am today. I acknowledge and

thank my wife and partner Kafi, for encouraging and supporting me through every aspect

of this process. Your unwavering confidence in me has been a source of strength and an

inspiration to me. I thank my sons Elijah and Cameron for cheering me on. This work is

dedicated to both of you. I want to thank my chair, Shawn Ginwright for the substantial

commitment you made to support me in completing this project. You have been an

invaluable friend and colleague.

RUNNING HEAD: The Three Commitments 6

Table of Contents CHAPTER(1(..............................................................................................................................................(8!INTRODUCTION(...............................................................................................................................................(8!General!Description!of!Research!Area!...................................................................................................................!8!Purpose!of!Study!...........................................................................................................................................................!10!Background!&!Rationale!...........................................................................................................................................!11!

CONCEPTUAL(FRAMEWORK(.....................................................................................................................(14!Critical!Race!Theory!....................................................................................................................................................!14!Theoretical!Underpinnings!......................................................................................................................................!15!

CHAPTER(2(...........................................................................................................................................(18!LITERATURE(REVIEW(.................................................................................................................................(18!Teacher!Bias!...................................................................................................................................................................!20!Institutional!Bias!..........................................................................................................................................................!22!Cultural!Mismatch!........................................................................................................................................................!23!Conclusions!and!Implications!.................................................................................................................................!25!

Research(Questions(.....................................................................................................................................(26!

CHAPTER(3(...........................................................................................................................................(27!RESEARCH(DESIGN(.......................................................................................................................................(27!Selection!of!Sample!......................................................................................................................................................!29!Selection!...........................................................................................................................................................................!30!Overview!of!Data!Collection!....................................................................................................................................!30!Using!the!3!D’s!Protocol!............................................................................................................................................!31!Role!of!the!Researcher!...............................................................................................................................................!35!Observation!Data!Analysis!.......................................................................................................................................!35!Interview!Data!Processing!.......................................................................................................................................!36!Analysis!.............................................................................................................................................................................!37!

CHAPTER(4(...........................................................................................................................................(40!FINDINGS(.........................................................................................................................................................(40!Case!Summary:!Ron!.....................................................................................................................................................!40!Case!Summary:!Kelly!..................................................................................................................................................!42!The!Three!Commitments!..........................................................................................................................................!43!Courageous!Commitment!.........................................................................................................................................!44!Courageous!Commitment:!Key!Features!............................................................................................................!46!Emotional!Commitment!............................................................................................................................................!56!Emotional!Commitment:!Key!features!................................................................................................................!57!Commitment!to!Social!Justice!.................................................................................................................................!62!Commitment!to!Social!Justice:!Key!features!.....................................................................................................!63!

CHAPTER(5(...........................................................................................................................................(69!RESTATING(THE(PROBLEM(.......................................................................................................................(69!SUMMARY(OF(METHODS(............................................................................................................................(71!SUMMARY(OF(FINDINGS(.............................................................................................................................(73!APPLYING(THE(RESEARCH(........................................................................................................................(76!FUTURE(DIRECTIONS(..................................................................................................................................(78!

REFERENCES(........................................................................................................................................(79!


APPENDICES(.........................................................................................................................................(84!APPENDIX(A:(Observation(Protocol(.......................................................................................................(84!APPENDIX(B:(Interview(Protocol(Questionnaire(...............................................................................(84!APPENDIX(C:(Key(Terms(.............................................................................................................................(85!Key!Terms!........................................................................................................................................................................!85!


CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

General Description of Research Area

The purpose of this study is to explain the causes of disproportionately high suspension

rates of black males in schools by examining classroom teachers with effective, low-referring

discipline practices. Nationwide, disproportionality of suspension of black male students

compared to white male students, has been a persistent trend in US public schools for over 35

years (Children’s Defense Fund, 1975; Skiba, Michael, Nardo, Peterson, 2002; US Dep. Of Ed

2012). Black males are suspended at rates 2 to 3 times more than their white counterparts (Skiba

et. al., 2002). Evidence shows that race is a dominating factor in this trend, even when controlled

for poverty (Wu, Pink, Crain, Moles, 1982; Skiba et. al., 2002) black students are suspended

primarily for disruption which is a more subjective reason while white students are suspended

primarily for more objective observable offenses (Skiba, 2008). These discrepancies are not

simply due to black students misbehaving more than white students. In fact, studies show black

students being punished more severely for minor infractions than white students (Skiba et. al.,

2002). The office discipline referral (ODR) is the first step procedurally to the initiation of an out

of school suspension (OSS) the documented point of origin for this disproportionality. Studies

consistently showed that black students were sent out of class the majority of the time for

defiance, disrespect or disruption, infractions that are highly subjective and subject to teacher

and administrator discretion and bias (Skiba et. al., 2002, Fenning and Rose, 2007). White

students however were predominantly sent out for more objective offenses like cutting,


vandalism, smoking, etc., infractions that carry a mandatory referral or suspension. This

evidence suggests that the disproportionality of suspension is at least partially rooted in

administrator and teacher bias and that black students are held to a separate and unequal standard

of conduct.

In an effort to contribute to an effective solution, this study will explore effective

classroom practices that facilitate greater engagement and thus less disciplinary actions toward

black male students. Research suggests that there are three primary reasons for this trend in

disproportionality: institutional bias, teacher bias, and cultural mismatch (Skiba, 2002, Fenning

2007, Noguera 2010, Monroe, 2005). Many of these studies offer race neutral interventions such

as conflict management, mental health programs, tutorial & mentoring programs, and positive

behavior support (PBS). Some interventions like Positive Behavioral Supports show consistent

success in reducing suspensions, but not disproportionality (Sandomierski, 2011). While PBS

accurately focuses on the institution to create systemic change, it does not adequately address the

issue of race and disproportionality. Thus, as found in Sandomierski’s study, schoolwide office

discipline referrals are reduced where Positive Behavioral Supports is implemented but overall,

black students remained overrepresented in office discipline referrals and office discipline

referrals. This indicates that the root of the disparity is not being addressed by current reasons or

proposed interventions. The reasons [Skiba 2002, Noguera 2010 and Monroe 2005] cited are

institutional bias, teacher bias, cultural mismatch. These reasons help to identify the root of the

overrepresentation of black males in suspension by examining the racial trends and elements of

teacher related causes of disproportionality. However this approach lacks an explicit

acknowledgement of existing institutional racism. Identifying bias frames the identification as a

phenomenon local to schools. Identifying elements of racism points to a more systemic problem.


Since research clearly demonstrates disproportionality as a problem consistent along racial lines,

solutions need to make race more central as well, specifically addressing racism.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) provides a tool to better understand how racism contributes

to disproportionality. One such tool is the tenet of challenging the assumption of race neutrality

or the myth of colorblind institutions (Soloranzano, 1997). Many white educators have been

conditioned that noticing race as a white person is inappropriate and racist therefore develop a

habit of avoiding, even denying race as a factor in anything, opting for a colorblind approach to

their students and families. Many people of color however deem it critical to their survival to

recognize race and racial dynamics (Singleton, Linton, 2006). This conflict leads some white

educators to consider any discussion about race by a person of color as racist. CRT boldly

situates American racism and its historical, legal complexity at the foundation of the American

education system. CRT asserts that the heart of inequity and black/white disparities in education

are rooted in racism’s primary concept of white supremacy, the superiority or all things white

over all things nonwhite.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study is to explore aspects of classroom discipline practices that

mitigate student office discipline referrals, by examining classroom teachers with effective, low-

referring discipline practices. This study departs from prior research on the topic, which focuses

almost entirely on documenting how and why disproportionality occurs (Skiba, Noguera,

Fenning, Monroe, Townsend). Rather, this study uncovers potential clues that point toward

solutions to eliminate this problem. By identifying teachers with successful discipline practices

and examining elements in those classrooms, this study will look at discipline strategies that

keep students in class and reveals elements of effective engagement and teaching that can inform


teachers who wish for more effective classroom management of black male students. This

project will investigate what constitutes effective classroom practices with black male students.

Eliminating discipline referrals increases the likelihood of eliminating disproportionality of

suspension of black male students in those classrooms and schools.

The aim of this study is to study characteristics of the teacher who is the initiator of the

suspension sequence, not the student who is the subject of any suspension. Because students are

suspended, we naturally spend a great deal of focus on students and their behaviors that lead to

suspension. What gets less attention is the fact that teachers and administrators have dozens of

alternative interventions before resorting to a suspension. It is usually the teacher who initiates a

process where the end result is a suspension. This study examines what teachers can do to

mitigate initiation of suspensions through decreased referrals. Research indicates that one

element of successful classrooms is strong teacher-student relationships. Establishing positive,

supportive relationships with all students is a critical element of effective teaching and

contributes to student success (Darling-Hammond, 1992). It is anticipated that the findings will

show this to be a central component to a teacher’s success in keeping black males in the

classroom.

Background & Rationale

This issue of disproportionate suspension of black males has gained national attention

(Civil Rights and School Discipline Conference, 2010). Leading scholars have presented

evidence that demonstrated how black male students receive more harsh school discipline and

suspensions on the basis of race, not behavior (Losen & Skiba, 2010). This discriminatory

exclusion pattern is a predictor of higher levels of academic failure and increased risk for going

to prison later in life (Foster 1986; Morrison, & D’Incau, 1997; Noguera, 2003). Black males are


suspended more than any other group, and are the most likely group to be incarcerated. The

greatest predictor of involvement in the juvenile justice system is a history of disciplinary

referrals at school, more so than poverty indicators, or poor academic performance. (Public

Policy Research Institute, 2005). Research has also found a high correlation between suspensions

and low academic achievement (Gregory, Skiba, Noguera, 2010). These indicators of race-based

mistreatment indicate a higher likelihood of incarceration for black males and connections

between suspension and academic failure point to a significant equity problem.

An abundance of research demonstrates that black male students are disproportionately

suspended from schools nationwide compared to white male students (Mosca & Hollister, 2004;

Skiba & Peterson, 1999; Skiba, 2000). For 35 years disproportionality in suspension has

persisted and has likely contributed significantly to the black male high school dropout rate,

which is twice that of white males (Skiba, Michael, Nardo & Peterson, 2002), and the low

national high school graduation rate among black males, which is one fourth that of white males

(UCLA Civil Rights Project, 2010) making this a significant issue in education. Research

demonstrates that disproportionate suspension of black males reflects a discriminatory pattern on

the basis of race and gender (black male) and does not reflect a higher rate of negative behavior

patterns in black males (Monroe, 2005 p.46). This discriminatory pattern is a civil rights issue

and a critical equity issue in education (UCLA Civil Rights Project, 2010).

Most schools in America have exclusion policies with suspension usually designated as a

last resort, while relying on in school interventions first (Black, 1999; Henault, 2001). In school

interventions include conferences between the administrator the teacher, the student and parents

or guardians and are standard procedural steps before suspension. With student behavior as the

primary focus, suspension policies aim to discourage behavior that violates school rules. Because


State, district and school guidelines for suspension are detailed but vague and allow significant

site discretion, teachers and administrators are tasked with determining which behaviors are

serious enough to warrant referral and suspension to address those behaviors (Bowditch, 1993).

This allows for two students to get vastly different consequences for the same violation.

School safety is most frequently cited as the most urgent priority in schools, and a

primary justification for the use of suspension (Noguera, 2003). However, suspension rates for

serious offenses that pose safety issues such as fighting, bringing a weapon, and destruction of

school property are relatively small for black and white males indicating suspension is not

primarily used for school safety (McAndrews, 2001). This means that although safety is often

cited as a reason for suspension, safety is actually not an issue in most suspensions. Recent

research by Gregory, Skiba, and Noguera (2010), found that black students tend to be suspended

for subjective offenses (disruption, defiance, disrespect, threat, excessive noise) while white

students are primarily suspended for more objective, observable offenses (smoking, vandalism,

cutting class). Schools seem to be less tolerant of black male behavior and more tolerant of the

same behavior when exhibited by white males.

While some may argue that this finding simply reveals that black males exhibit a

different set of behaviors than white males, research on referrals show that white students are

referred less frequently for the same behaviors exhibited by black students (Monroe, 2005). The

disparity is not just in the rate, but the frequency of referral and suspension of black males over

white males for the same behavior (Skiba, et. al. 2002). This data adds to a body of evidence

revealing more of a bias against black males, rather than a trend rooted solely in behavior

patterns of black male students. Research suggests as a result of disproportionate suspensions

and exclusion from classroom learning links black male students to low academic achievement,


low graduation rates, high dropout/push out rates (3 times that of white students) and the school-

to-prison pipeline (Noguera, 2003; CDF, 2008, Nicholson-Crotty, 2009) where black males who

have been suspended at least once, are 10 times more likely than white students to be in the

juvenile justice system. Furthermore, compared to white males, black males earn college degrees

at half the rate. Black males have twice the unemployment rate, 10 times the incarceration rate,

and 16 times the murder rate of White males (Kaiser, 2006).

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Critical Race Theory

Critical Race Theory (CRT) is the primary lens from which this study views the problem

of disproportionality. CRT in education as well as supporting theories, provide evidence

supporting the claim that disproportionality in suspension does not originate with black males

and their behavior, but stems from a larger system failure to enact effective alternative discipline

strategies. This results in harm to black male students in the form of exclusion from school

through suspension.

Critical Race Theory (CRT) in education is based in legal studies and examines the

institution of education in this country from a wide lens, looking at the racist foundations of

America. Solórzano (1997) identified five tenets of CRT that can and should inform research.

The centrality and intersection of race and racism and racism (challenge to white supremacy and

the centrality of whiteness); the challenge to dominant ideology (challenge to race neutrality or

color-blindness); the commitment to social justice (critical theory, critical pedagogy, etc.); the

centrality of experiential knowledge (narrative and storytelling); and the utilization of

interdisciplinary approaches (CRT in compliment with other liberatory frameworks).


Theoretical Underpinnings

The dominant theories that have explained the problem of disproportionality in the

research are institutional bias, teacher bias, and cultural mismatch. These three explanations are

flawed and inadequate for the following reasons. Institutional bias is when a set of policies

produce a negative impact on a whole group. Institutionally biased policies are very difficult to

challenge because policies are disproportionately applied to groups on a legitimate but mostly

discretionary basis, making challenges to due process difficult (Gregory, Skiba, Noguera, 2010).

Institutional bias accurately shares the blame on an institutional level and even recognizes

racial bias at this level but fails to recognize inherent bias against black students as an

institutional norm rather than an exceptional condition that results from unfair policies like zero

tolerance policies (ZTP’s) (Monroe, 2005). Teacher bias focuses primarily on hidden bias of the

teacher in the classroom. Teacher bias is particularly challenging when a teacher is unable or

unwilling to examine their bias by examining their own beliefs, stereotypes and practices from a

race-based lens. (IAT, Harvard, Gladwell, 2010). Lastly, cultural mismatch accurately identifies

cultural differences and dynamics in the classroom that contribute to black males being over

disciplined but implies that black culture and behavior is defective and incompatible with an

academic environment which is biased against black culture.

Suspension of black male students in schools can be viewed as an indicator of a larger

social dynamic that is mirrored by gross negative outcomes for black males in society. The high

rate of black male gun violence and incarceration of black males contributes to a pervasive

perception in schools that black males are dangerous and bad (Foster, 1986, Monroe, 2005).

Black boys internalize this perception of black boys in schools as well, and being feared as

dangerous becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy (Rhem, 1999).


This black male trajectory is also characterized as the ‘school to prison pipeline’

(Nicholson-Crotty, 2009). This is a process where black males, facing discriminatory treatment,

are overly criminalized in schools, being referred for arrest and criminal charges for behavior

that outside of school, would not warrant an arrest (Noguera, 2003). The result is the social

reproduction process in schools, preparing and routing black males for prison, more so than for

college or the workforce. Social reproduction theory and the reframing of the achievement gap as

an opportunity gap give context to disproportionate suspension rates of black males in schools

and suggest how black males are pushed and pulled into the trap of failure in schools and society.

CRT in education adds an additional frame to view the problem, highlighting the education

system and the legal system as the primary culprit for continued discrimination of black males in

schools.

The CRT challenge to dominant ideology counters claims that the legal system of justice

is colorblind, race-neutral and provides equal opportunity (Solórzano, 1997). In education, this

CRT tenet is at the heart of disproportionality of black males because while disproportionality of

suspension of black males is explicitly examined with race as the variable, the problem of

disproportionality in the research literature is examined from an assumption that the source of

disproportionate suspensions must originate from black male behavior and not the institution that

is suspending them, which is assumed to be race-neutral.

This study will examine teacher discipline practices in the classroom from a CRT lens to

explore to what extent is race an acknowledged factor in reducing out of class referrals of black

male students. In other words, do teachers see race as opposed to being colorblind to race and the

accompanying bias against black male students. This study seeks to explore to what extent the

CRT tenet of challenging race-neutrality can address teacher bias against black male students


and address cultural mismatch, which negatively impacts black male students as well. This study

also explores the CRT tenet of the centrality of whiteness and how institutional bias against

black male students is mitigated through effective classroom discipline practices.


CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

This research review focuses on two tenets of Critical Race Theory that are most relevant

for explaining disproportionate suspension of black males: ‘the centrality and intersection of race

and racism’ and the ‘challenge to dominant ideology’. The centrality and intersection of race and

racism, alternately termed the ‘centrality of whiteness’ (Ladson-Billings, 1995) claims that race

and racism is a central rather than marginal factor in individual’s experiences (Solórzano, 1997).

The challenge to dominant ideology counters the colorblind myth or the assumption of race

neutrality, claiming that no laws or policies can legitimately be considered race neutral and

attempts to claim race neutrality or colorblindness actually reinforce inequity and racism by

default. This chapter will examine CRT studies that describe cultural mismatch as one of the

causes of disproportionality in suspension, as well as studies that describe the centrality of

whiteness. Studies that show institutional and teacher bias are viewed through the ‘challenge to

dominant ideology’ tenet.

By using the CRT framework to teach a writing class, Knaus (2009) demonstrates how

teacher agency (Duncan-Andrade & Morrell, 2009) is used in addressing institutional racism at

the classroom level. Knaus discusses how he taught a class and used it as a case study,

imbedding CRT in the curriculum and instruction. The study analyzed students’ narratives of

their own oppression, thus aligning with the tenet of the centrality and intersection of race and

racism. Knaus does this by challenging the students to put race, gender and socioeconomic status

at the center of their writing.


Knaus found that by writing and speaking in class about racism, sexism and other forms

of oppression in the class, the students felt more connected to the class and took more of an

interest in learning the academic material for the course.

This study proved very effective in engaging students academically and highlighted

strong caring relationships between the teacher and students and explicitly acknowledged the

responsibility and agency of the teacher to counteract a larger racially biased institution by

putting the dialogue about the impact of race, socioeconomic status and gender at the forefront.

However, as a CRT case study of effective teaching, there was no mention of discipline practices

that led to reduced referrals out of class. This notion of looking at discipline in an effective

classroom environment is a gap that my study seeks to fill.

Gay (2006) examines culturally responsive teaching and classroom management through

a CRT lens. Through a meta analysis of prior research, the article discusses several categories

relating to effective discipline, including teacher student dynamics, racial bias, and how relevant

curriculum impacts the learning environment.

A few of the authors that Gay reviewed (Charles 2000, Epanchin, Townsend, & Stoddard

1994, Haberman 1991, Jones & Jones 2004) found that when classroom discipline is a major

concern for a teacher, it is more of a reflection of a larger classroom management issue. The

article highlights the effectiveness of culturally responsive teaching fostered by proactive,

positive teacher student relationships, minimizing discipline problems making it a less relevant

issue (Gay, 2006). This is a significant finding although the use of CRT to view the problem was

through the interdisciplinary layer of multicultural education, specifically highlighting effective

culturally responsive interventions.


Gay’s (2006) article exemplifies the CRT tenet of challenging the dominant ideology by

highlighting the negative impact of the biased, unfair curriculum and policies in schools that do

not reflect non-dominant childrens’ culture. Conversely, the positive impact on students of color

when the curriculum and policies do reflect their culture is also highlighted. Gay’s (2006) article

did not, however, directly address disproportionality in discipline for black students. While it is

conceivable that a teacher does not pursue culturally responsive pedagogy or social justice

pedagogy and still effectively addresses discipline for black male students in a way that supports

their learning, this is not the norm. It is much more likely that a teacher who tries to ignore race

or be “colorblind” in the classroom and treat all students equally is more likely to reproduce

inequity and perpetuate institutional bias, teacher bias and unwittingly push black male students

out. This phenomenon is represented in the CRT model as inability or unwillingness to examine

the context of inequity and bias against some groups while refusing to be self-critical and

examine their views and practices with a race critical lens.

All three categories of explanation; teacher bias, institutional bias, and cultural mismatch,

cover a broad range of phenomenon that centers around institutional and teacher behavior as well

as black male student behavior. The following review examines these categories in the research,

the common themes as well as the shortcomings in accurately explaining disproportionate

suspensions.

Teacher Bias

The problem of teacher bias is not only that teachers have a negative perception of black

male students, creating hyper visibility (Skiba, 2002) and causing them to get suspended more,

but many teachers deny treating students differently according to race. This finding, in a study by

Gregory and Mosley (2004) illustrates this by surveying fifty teachers from a large urban high


school in California, about their attitudes regarding discipline and the factors involved in the

discipline decisions. The study found that very few teachers consider factors that are within their

own control as the cause of discipline problems, lending credence to the perception that

discipline problems in their classroom are the students’ fault and completely out of their control.

The study found that there were a few teachers who were able to recognize their role in

preventing misbehavior. A few of these teachers were also able to reflect on how race is

intertwined with discipline. The majority of teachers however were not able to recognize or

reflect on these possibilities (Gregory & Mosley, 2004).

Gregory & Mosley’s (2004) study examines culturally responsive discipline as a potential

intervention, focusing on teacher-student relationships in eliminating the disproportionality in

discipline. The study lacks an analytical treatment of race as a fundamental feature of

suspensions in school policy. Also, the race-neutral or colorblind reasons that teachers gave for

student misbehavior, such as lack of structure and normal adolescent behavior, could not account

for the disproportionality according to race, thus assigning race neutral reasons for a race based

trend (Gregory & Mosley, 2004). This study is an example of the challenge to the dominant

ideology tenet of CRT.

Race is an implicit factor in discipline when exploring disproportionality among black

male students because of teacher bias. Fenning (2007) did a meta analysis examining qualitative

research finding some ethnographic and interview data identifying teacher perception as a reason

for labeling and removing students of color from class (Balfanz et. al., 2003; Bowditch, 1993;

Vavrus & Cole, 2002).

Balfanz et. al. (2003), Bowditch (1993), Vavrus & Cole (2002), reveal that perceptions of

loss of control and fear influence teacher decisions to exclude black males from class,


highlighting race as a factor in teacher practices in the classroom. Fenning (2007), recommends

positive behavioral supports (PBS), a race-neutral intervention to address this problem. Unlike

the first article (Gregory & Mosley, 2004) which largely reported race-neutral, color-blind

reasons given by teachers for ODR’s, Fenning (2007) acknowledges race in teacher reasons for

office discipline referrals but offers Positive Behavioral Supports as a race-neutral, color-blind

intervention. Both conclusions fail to challenge the dominant ideology that is clearly impacting

black males based on their race.

Institutional Bias

On a policy level, zero tolerance policies that mandate rigid disciplinary responses, such

as suspension or expulsion for broad categories of behavior, is one of the more obvious examples

of institutional bias (Martinez, 2009). Although Martinez demonstrates how zero tolerance

policies disproportionally affect black males on the basis of race, implying institutional bias, the

article assumes that the institution is racially neutral (and not racist) by focusing on how the

institution is ill equipped (p.155) to deal with black male misbehavior.

Similarly, Dunbar and Villarruel (2004) found that zero tolerance policies (ZTP’s) and

practices are shown to impact black males disproportionately according to region (urban vs.

rural). Again, by illustrating the impact of institutional bias by race, yet examining these

differences according to region, a race neutral variable, this study contributes to the nuanced

examination of this complex problem but falls short of challenging the dominant ideology of

whiteness. Again, race is implied in the regional category because of much higher concentrations

of black students in urban areas (Dunbar & Villarruel, 2004). Using a policy analysis framework,

Dunbar and Villarruel interviewed 36 principals in a qualitative study that found fundamental

differences in interpretation and application of zero tolerance policies. Differences between


urban and rural principals resulted in much higher suspension and expulsion rates in urban

schools because of the stricter application of ZTP’s. However, the study did not find significant

differences in student behavior or level of violence in the schools. Both studies, Martinez (2009)

and Dunbar and Villarruel (2004), point out the racial bias in disproportionality of discipline

among black males, but fail to directly address it, instead focusing on other categories to explore

the problem.

This pattern in the research of avoiding race and racism as a potential cause of

disproportionality, while acknowledging the problem on the basis of race, highlights the

challenge in proving racial bias in disproportionality. Simply naming institutional bias as the

cause of disproportionality in discipline is not precise enough to effectively address the problem.

Only through using the CRT tenets to examine the problem of disproportionality in suspension

can researchers address the complexities of institutional racism and how it is imbedded in the

dominant ideology.

Cultural Mismatch

The third and most commonly explored cause of disproportionality focuses on black

males’ behavior and its origins in African American culture. According to Fenning (2007) and

Theodos, Benner, and Bohanon-Edmonson (2004), disproportionate minority discipline and

exclusion is a combination of student misbehavior and the institutional reaction to student

behavior. This primarily places the blame on the student, casting the institution as merely

responding to black male misbehavior.

Thus, according to these authors (Fenning, 2007; Theodos, Benner, & Bohanon-

Edmonson, 2004), the disproportionate discipline is caused by the misbehavior of the minority

students. The resulting recommendation, a PBS intervention, is aimed solely at school-wide


culture as a proactive strategy to reduce individual student misbehavior. While this intervention

proves to be effective in reducing overall misbehavior, the reduction in overall suspensions for

all students preserves the disproportionality of minority suspensions, leaving in place the core

factors that cause the disproportionality, albeit minimizing it. This proposed intervention (PBS)

is inadequate and doesn’t begin to acknowledge the teacher bias and institutional racism, thus

reinforcing the centrality of whiteness with a colorblind analysis of the problem.

One of the seminal works that explores cultural mismatch in disproportionality of black

males in suspension is Monroe (2005), who takes on cultural bias against black males in a

synopsis of research findings. Monroe’s analysis of research shows how black males are unfairly

targeted for discipline according to racial stereotypes. By noting negative teacher attitudes and

reactions to black male cultural behavior, Monroe addresses a dynamic that is missed by most

researchers regarding disproportionality: adult misbehavior.

By recommending race-based interventions that include race conscious teacher

preparation and examination of attitudes and misconceptions toward black students, Monroe

(2005) is consistent in highlighting the racial basis of this problem and making a

recommendation that is race-based. However, Monroe (2005) does not effectively address the

source of the racial bias. By focusing on teacher and institutional response to black male culture,

race is still presented as a marginal factor, as something that is only relevant when black students

are present because of their so called provocative culture (Monroe, 2005).

Soloranzano (1997) reinforces the CRT tenet of the centrality of whiteness, casting black

male culture as the “other” and as defective. By failing to view this problem of cultural mismatch

through CRT, this article fails to recognize the centrality and intersection of race and racism.

Instead, this perspective blames the victim through an analysis that uses multiple examples, all


focusing on black male culture and behavior as the source of the problem. By using the CRT

frame, this study views this cultural dynamic differently by focusing on black males as the

population that is impacted the most by this problem of disproportionality.

Conclusions and Implications

This section examined how the research literature blames the problem of

disproportionality in discipline of black males on teacher bias, institutional bias and cultural

mismatch. This paper analyses how these explanations at best, point out race as an issue while

stopping short of calling it racism, and at worse, effectively blames black males for this

mistreatment.

By showing how these studies lack CRT as a critical conceptual framework to analyze

the problem, this review identifies a gap in the research. In examining articles that view the

problem through teacher bias and institutional bias, I show how they overlap the CRT tenet of

the centrality and intersection of race and racism. I discussed how the subtle focus on teacher or

institutional bias against black male misbehavior misrepresents the problem and misses a critical

perspective. This perspective looks at how the problem lies with the teachers’ bias and the

institutional bias based on race, not the black males’ behavior. While evidence shows that black

teachers suspend black male students’ less than white or Asian teachers, the findings do not

indicate any reversal or elimination of the disparity (. White or black, teachers still send black

males out of class more than white males.

In examining articles that explored disproportionality through cultural mismatch, I

presented the CRT tenet of the centrality and intersection of race and racism. This tenet explains

how the cultural mismatch perspective was better able to highlight teacher and institutional bias


according to race. Nevertheless, the cultural mismatch view is also flawed in its inherent

implication that black culture is defective.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to explain the contributing factors to disproportionately high

suspension rates of black males in schools by examining classroom teachers with effective, low-

referring discipline practices. Based on the above literature, I developed the following questions:

1) What are the features of discipline strategies and practices that mitigate disruption and office

discipline referrals among black male students?

2) Are there beliefs and assumptions (personal values) that effective teachers have about their

students and their behavior that challenges race neutrality or the colorblind myth?

a) How do those beliefs support effective discipline strategies & practices?


CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH DESIGN

The following Research employs a case study of two teachers who were studied

independently and the data from those studies were examined across the two cases. This study

examined two classroom teachers with effective, low-referring discipline practices in Oakland.

The two teachers were observed and interviewed. These two case studies were examined and

analyzed based on trends and themes that answered the research questions. By using a case study

design as a basis for the research, this study was able to explore how effective teachers employed

discipline practices for black male students. Each teacher demonstrated key features of

classroom discipline practices in the study. Using CRT, the study examined race as a factor in

classroom discipline practices by observing specific interactions the teachers had with black

male students in their class. Specifically the study examined how teachers challenged the CRT

race neutrality or colorblindness when working with black males. By examining the classroom

interactions between teachers and students, observations revealed how these two teachers

responded to common classroom behavior. Additionally, the use of interviews allowed the

teachers to discuss how they viewed their students’ race in relation to how they managed

behavior of black male students and did discipline in the class.

The use of a cross-case study design provided the researcher an understanding of teacher

practices through the collection of information using a customized data collection protocol in the

two classrooms as well as accompanying interviews with the teachers. The protocol categorized

behaviors according to more objective classification of what the prior literature identifies as the


three D’s, disruption, defiance & disrespect, the primary reasons given for black male

suspensions.

By utilizing this observation protocol along with follow up interviews, the researcher

was able to understand how teacher discipline practices and their values and beliefs about their

students’ behavior impacts their black male students. This research contributes to understanding

how office discipline referrals and disproportionate suspensions of black male students can be

significantly reduced or eliminated through effective discipline practices.

Table 3.1

RESEARCH'DESIGN'

Phase'#1' Intensity'sample:'Principal'nomination'of'select'pool'of'effective'teachers'&'preAinterview'and'consent'of'nominees''

Phase'#2' Qualitative:'observation'of'classroom'during'instruction'Phase'#3' In'depth'interviews:'Recorded'and'transcribed'follow'up'interview'of'observations'

with'the'teachers'Phase'#4' Confirm'observations:'Transcriptions'verified'with'teachers'interviewed'

This research was conducted in four phases. The first phase of this project focused on

generating an intensity sample of teachers whom embody the theoretical principles under study.

The study was particularly interested in those teachers who had a lower than average number of

overall referrals, including black males at their school site. Because one way to eliminate

disproportionality is to increase referrals of other groups, this study hopes to identify specific

discipline strategies that will eliminate black male disproportionality by significantly reducing

out of class referrals. By using a nomination procedure, administrators at two schools were asked

to forward the names of two teachers they know of that fit the criteria. Teachers were identified

based on having a low or zero office discipline referral rate of black students, and effective at


teaching their subject. ‘Effective’ meant that the teacher was excellent at teaching the academic

material for the course and demonstrated a good classroom discipline practices. Verification that

teachers met these criteria was at the determination of the principal. Phase two involved sixteen

total classroom observations which were 50 minutes on average, of the two teachers selected.

Phase three focused on conducting in-depth interviews about how each teacher enacted those

features. Phase four involved follow up observations or interviews of teachers to confirm any

gaps in information or unclear findings as well as confirmation from teachers of the accuracy of

data captured from observations and interviews with teachers.

Selection of Sample

This study analyzed the discipline strategies of two middle school teachers in Oakland,

CA. The study focused on Oakland because it has the third largest population and proportion of

black male students and the largest proportion of suspended black male students in the state of

California. The study focused on middle school teachers because studies show that middle school

suspensions have the highest indicator of increasing the odds of contact with juvenile justice

(Nicholson-Crotty, 2009). Finding out what works well in these classrooms may translate into

effective practices that can be examined by similar teachers in Oakland middle schools. The

principals were identified according to who responded to an inquiry of all Oakland Middle

school principals by email to identify their most effective teachers in 1. Teaching the subject

material, 2. Having low or no office discipline referrals, 3. Having the respect of students and

families. Teachers that met these criteria had no more than 2 office referrals for a period of one

year as well as verification of exemplary standing according to principal evaluations within the

past 2-3 years. This selection process was tiered with the first tier and involved contacting the

principal of each school and asking for nominations of their top 2 performing teachers in the 3


above categories, teaching, low referrals & student respect. From this list of teachers, 2 were

selected by contacting each teacher and asking them to participate in the study.

Selection

Initially twelve teachers were identified by principals. Those teachers were contacted by

an email stating the intent and purpose of the study and asking the teacher if they were willing to

arrange a face to face meeting to allow the researcher to explain the study and its procedures and

obtain consent. Five teachers agreed to participate and signed a consent form. Those teachers’

principal was also contacted and asked to sign a similar consent to allow the research to take

place at their school site.

A researcher participant rapport was established through this initial meeting by the

researcher discussing his own background, and interest in conducting this research, particularly

letting each teacher know that the researcher is not an outsider but a native to the area and deeply

rooted and committed to the communities they are teaching in, not just the research.

Of the five teachers, one teacher only had one black male student in all five of her

classes, which was too low to quality for this study. Two other teachers that initially agreed to

participate later were unavailable to participate in the research. The study ended up being

conducted on the remaining two teachers.

Overview of Data Collection

Table 3.2

Cases'' Ron' Kelly'Number'of'black'male'students'

45'in'3'separate'classes' 22'in'3'separate'classes'

Hours'of'observations' 7' 8'


31

31

Interviewed' 1A'50'minute'interview' 1A'50'minute'interview'Class'characteristics' 'History'and'social'studies'classes' Middle'school'math'classes'Teacher'characteristics'

Male'10th'year'teaching,'from'bay'area.'Identifies'as'Puerto'Rican'and'Black.'36'years'old.''

Female'3rd''year'teaching,'from'bay'area.'Identifies'as'mixed'race,'half'Puerto'Rican'&'half'White.''

Data collection occurred in three sequences. The first sequence was the classroom

observations. Each participating teacher agreed to a minimum of five classroom observations.

The observations were all scheduled within a three month span during the spring of 2012. Each

observation was one hour long or one class period. Observations were documented silently using

a customized written observation protocol (see Appendix A). The second sequence involved

individual teacher interviews. Each interview was scheduled for one hour. The interviews were

conducted using an interview protocol of eight questions (see Appendix B). Interviews were

audio recorded and both were conducted within one month of the last classroom observation.

The third and final sequence of data collection was follow-up interviews with teachers by email

to confirm the data collected in the first interview. Short follow up questions were asked and a

transcript of the first interview was attached for the participants review and verification for

accuracy. Both teachers verified the accuracy of the interview transcript.

The classroom observations were documented using an observation matrix which was

designed to capture critical interactions between the teacher and students around the 3 D’s

(disruption, defiance, & disrespect). The 3 D’s are behaviors most cited in black male

suspensions and highly subjective. By coding these behaviors according to prior research reasons

for suspension, this protocol would directly observe and address the behavior that is at the core

of this disproportionate suspension of black male students.

Using the 3 D’s Protocol


32

32

For the purpose of this study, the researcher conducted classroom observations using an

observation protocol observing teacher discipline procedures. For example, when a teacher told a

student to move to another seat and that student refused, or deliberately moved slowly, the

teacher may have deferred dealing with the situation directly and kept teaching, only to return to

that student a few minutes later to check in with them, thus mitigating a referral out of class for

behavior that could likely be labeled disrespectful or defiant. The 3 D’s, are the three biggest

reasons for African American male office discipline referrals and suspensions (Skiba, et. al.,

2002) and was the focus of the interactions between teacher and students.

The interviews were conducted, using open ended questions to document teacher

attitudes about students who exhibited disruptive, disrespectful or defiant behavior as well as

teacher attitudes about their discipline strategies and student engagement in the class. The

content focus and questions of the interview protocol matched the content focus and observation

categories of the observations so that the data was matched. Observed behaviors and strategies

were reinforced, explained and sometimes incongruent by the teachers’ perspectives in the

interviews. The purpose of this approach was to limit variability allowing deeper data analysis on

a clearer more organized observation and interview.

Follow up questions were asked over email of the two teachers interviewed to follow up

with any areas that may have been missed in the interviews and to also give the teachers an

opportunity to reflect on their interview and offer further insight they may have on their

practices. The observation protocol was designed to observe relevant phenomenon relating to

teachers’ discipline practices.

The interview protocols involved 8 standard questions (see appendix C) that mirrored the

specific observation protocol points. These questions reinforced, clarified or contradicted what


33

33

was observed in the classroom. The interviewees were asked at the end if they have anything else

to add about any of the primary categories. All observation notes were kept safely in the

researcher’s home and audio recordings of the interviews were stored securely on the

researcher’s computer. The data will be kept by the researcher in perpetuity.

The collection of the data occurred in several stages. The initial observations were

documented by hand using data collection forms designed to capture teacher behavior and

responses to student behavior. The weakness of this method was observer bias, interpretation,

and accuracy in documenting interactions. The strength of the method was that the observer

documented according to specific types of interactions that were classified as disruptive,

disrespectful or defiant. The observation protocol involved noticing and documenting how the

teacher addressed 3 types of behavior: 1. Off task behavior or students not doing their work but

not distracting other students, 2. Disruptive behavior or students engaging other students, and 3.

Challenging or oppositional behavior or students challenging or the teacher directly.

Following the observations, the interviews were recorded on an audio device, transcribed

by the researcher and coded based on the themes that surfaced from the classroom observations

and categories identifies in prior research. Institutional bias, teacher bias and cultural mismatch

were lenses used to identify key patterns in the data.

The analysis design was “complimentarity” which sought elaboration, enhancement,

illustration, clarification of the results from one method (observations) with the results from the

other method (interviews). In other words, the interviews served to strengthen the final analysis

and interpretation of the observations. This method was chosen to increase the interpretability,

meaningfulness, and validity of constructs and inquiry results by both capitalizing on inherent

methods strengths and counteracting inherent biases in methods and other sources (Greene,


34

34

1987; Greene & McKlintock 1985; Mark & Shotland, 1987; Rossman & Wilson, 1985). Simply

put, the significance of the observations were strengthened or clarified by the teacher in the

interview.

Observations revealed how contact points secured between teacher and students who

exhibited behavior that could have been classified as disruptive, defiant or disrespectful.

Disruptive was considered any behavior that was off task but not necessarily involving multiple

students or engaging the teacher directly. This behavior was typically students daydreaming or

otherwise disengaged in the lesson or attempting to engage in off task behavior by themselves.

Defiant behavior was identified as any behavior that was off task and involved more than one

student. It was usually non-academic discussions or behavior that was not connected to the

lesson. The final category of disrespectful behavior was any behavior that was directly engaging

the teacher or out of compliance with teacher direction. This usually took the form of a student

not doing what the teacher has asked a student to do or the student engaging directly with the

teacher, asking a question or arguing about being redirected.

The interviews followed up to explore those interactions observed from the data, and

asked questions so the teacher could further explain deeper meaning, reasoning, and rationale for

the interventions selected during key contacts.

The information from the observation and interview from each teacher was matched up

according to each category used in the observation tool (see appendix) and corresponding

question in the interview. For example, classroom management strategy observation, was

matched up with the teacher reflection describing their classroom management strategy. The two

sources for each question (observation and teacher’s answer) was examined for similarities,

differences and trends with each teacher. Then data from all of the teachers was examined for


35

35

trends in consistency or inconsistency, strength or weakness to exploring the research questions.

Similarities, trends and differences were noted and summarized, highlighting how teachers

responded to disruptions, defiance and disrespect from black male students. First the information

from the observations were analyzed to determine if the teachers were creative in their responses

to student behavior. This anecdotal evidence contributed to the research on disproportionate

discipline from the CRT framework.

Role of the Researcher

While conducting the study the researcher attempted to act as natural as possible.

Teachers/participants were asked to simply explain to students that the researcher is a student

and will be in the class to observe the classroom. The researcher had minimal participation in the

classroom but engaged appropriately by responding when engaged by students and redirecting

students as much as possible by asking them about the class and the school in general. These

interactions informed the context of the observation but was not used in any substantive way in

the data collection or findings.

Observation Data Analysis

Observation data was analyzed by coding behaviors according to key themes. These key

themes were identified by first coding the behaviors observed and creating categories for the

types of interventions the teachers employed. A dozen different categories were identified and

they were arranged according to frequency. The categories that showed the highest frequency

were set aside and revisited after the interviews were conducted and transcribed. The categories

of interventions were then examined for interventions to the behaviors most likely to warrant an

out of class referral. This third layer of analysis highlighted interventions that were particularly


36

36

disruptive and evoked high emotions. These interventions revealed clear trends across both

cases. These high emotion interventions revealed two distinct elements for mostly the same

interactions but revealed different elements that warranted further exploration. The two elements

were emotional charge and how the teacher manages the emotional aspect of the event and the

other element was a focus on academic engagement and reengagement, despite the disruption.

This bore out the two categories of ‘expansive view’ and emotional flexibility.

Subheadings for each category were distinguished through cross examination of the

interview data and the observation data.

Interview Data Processing

The interviews were transcribed and line numbered. Each answer was broken into smaller

paragraphs of 2 to 3 sentences. Then the transcripts were reread several times for common

themes that were also reflected in the observation data categories of different forms of behavior

redirections and the prior research themes of institutional bias, teacher bias and cultural

mismatch. Interview themes emerged in three primary categories. The first two categories,

‘expansive view” and emotional flexibility, addressed the first research question and arose

primarily from the observation data but was confirmed in the interview data. The third category,

beliefs informing practice emerged almost entirely from the interview data and addressed the

second and third research question.

After the three categories or elements were identified, the transcripts were highlighted

according to each element and divided into three sections. Three copies of each transcript had to

be printed and each set of copies was used to highlight each element separately because some

quotes fit in multiple categories.


37

37

Analysis

Analysis consisted of comparing the findings to the framework of Critical Race Theory,

specifically the challenge to race neutrality, to see if elements of the classroom and interviews

were consistent or inconsistent with the tenets of CRT and if behaviors can be explained or not.

The patterns that were highlighted was CRT tenet of ‘expansive view’ approaches to keeping

students engaged in learning and the race based approach illuminated in the beliefs informing

practice category. This was important in order to ground the analysis and findings with the

framework and lens of CRT for this significant problem of disproportionality. This data

expanded CRT by including teacher beliefs informing practice in addressing oppression as well

as adding a dimension of ‘expansive view’ tenet which Crenshaw (1995) identifies as a term to

describe legal examination of addressing hidden discriminatory practices. This study develops

CRT in educational practice as a classroom strategy to remedy hidden discriminatory bias and a

way to measure the impact of that bias.

Teacher observations were cross examined for similarities and differences as well as

consistencies in each case study from observations to interviews. This information and insights

was compared to key elements of effective discipline outlined in the prior research as well as the

key reasons for office discipline referrals; disrespect, defiance and disruption as well as more

neutral classifications such as off task behavior, disruptions, and challenges. This was important

to highlight the range of findings whether consistent or inconsistent with the anticipating

findings.

Being consistent with the design of the study, it was crucial to examine and analyze the

findings horizontally and vertically. Each case was reviewed and studied as well as matching

observations and interviews across both cases.


38

38

Data was reduced to the highest correlation of findings within and across cases; (validity)

of practice (ex. engaging all students creatively), principle (ex. belief in students right to be in

class and learn) and outcome (students are engaged and stay in class). This increased

consistency according to the framing in the problem statement and articulation of the key

elements of the problem in the prior research review.


CRT Table 3.2

KEY TENETS TO CRT

Two tenets of CRT used to frame the causes of

disproportionality

Centrality of Whiteness White ideology, values,

and interests are at the center of all

aspects of dominant culture &

policy.

The Challenge to dominant ideology

Countering the claims that the legal system of

justice and all post-modern American

institutions, namely public education is colorblind, race-

neutral and provides equal

opportunity (Brown v Board).

THE THREE COMMITTMENTS

Effective elements for significantly reducing or eliminating out of class referrals of black male

students

Courageous Commitment:

Taking extraordinary steps to ensure students stay in class and

learn.

Emotional Commitment: Utilizing a wide array of tools to

manage their own emotions.

Commitment to Social Justice &

Equity: Deliberately direct

attention and resources to

counter institutional racism

and inequity.

RESEARCH REVIEW

Primary causes for disproportionality cited

in research

Teacher Bias Hidden stereotypes

compel adults to have different

expectations and hold black students

to a different standard.

Institutional Bias

Inequality is reproduced

regardless of individuals in the

institution or assumed institutional

intolerance of racism.

Cultural

Mismatch Black students culture is pathologized and

viewed as incompatible with

the educational setting.

APPLIED CRITICAL RACE THEORY Addressing disproportionality of suspension of black

males using CRT as a theoretical frame


CHAPTER 4

FINDINGS

The purpose of this study was to explain how teacher responses to student behavior,

influence disproportionately high suspension rates of black males in schools. By examining

classroom teachers with effective, low-referring discipline practices, this study identified key

elements of a classroom management and discipline strategy that can contribute to the significant

reduction or elimination of this disparity. The following research questions guided this study: (1)

What are the features of discipline strategies and practices that mitigate disruption and office

discipline referrals among black male students? (2) Are there beliefs and assumptions (personal

values) that effective teachers have about their students and their behavior that challenge race

neutrality or the colorblind myth? (a) How do those beliefs support effective discipline strategies

& practices?

Using classroom observations and in depth interviews, study participants revealed their

discipline strategies and practices as well as their attitudes toward their students and their

personal beliefs and values about teaching and how they approach discipline. This chapter

presents a description of each case, then displays the findings of both cases based on classroom

observations and individual in depth interviews with teachers.

Case Summary: Ron

Ron is a 36 year old male history and social studies teacher at the Oakland Community Middle

School (OCMS). Having taught for 10 years, he deliberately choose OCMS to teach because of

their predominantly black student population and the neighborhood the school is situated in

which features high poverty rates and high levels of community violence. This is Ron’s first year


41

41

teaching at OCMS and has taught at 9 different schools in 10 years. He teaches US history and

social studies for 7th and 8th grade students. The school serves approximately 215, 6-8 graders

and has 10 teachers and 2 administrators. The school is predominantly black and male. Eighty

percent of the students are African-American and 115 out of 215 are male. Ten percent are

Latino and the rest are Arab, Asian, and other races.

Ron was observed eight times. His classes averaged 25 – 30 students with over half of

those students being black males. His classroom is decorated with posters of African-American

and Latino historical figures as well as posters for hip-hop artists. He uses media and music

everyday in his class to creatively expose his students to a variety of cultures and practices from

around the world in a way that engages their interest and sparks critical thought. He frequently

uses a microphone for students to participate in class and remind other students to be quiet when

others are talking, reinforcing the ground rule of “one mic”, where one person talks at a time.

Of Puerto Rican heritage, Ron offers creative opportunities for students to earn extra

credit points in his class by attending relevant community events. He clearly brings multiple

skills and talent in his classroom. As an independent filmmaker, Ron uses multiple forms of

media to creatively engage students. He teaches standing up and never sits down. He moves

around the classroom teaching from all areas of the classroom. His classroom is highly organized

with procedures in place when students enter the classroom. There is assigned seating and

students have a writing prompt when they first enter the class.

The classes involved a high level of engagement. Students were never asked to be

completely silent but were always expected and asked to engage in the work of the class. He

frequently spoke to students about staying focused and on task. When doing discipline, he never

stopped the flow of his class for more than 10 – 15 seconds. During the 8 observations he never


42

42

wrote a referral and he never required an extended intervention with any student. He later

explained that there were more incidents that involved referrals out of class and physical contact

with students, fights etc. at the beginning of the year. Since the observations took place during

the last 3 months of school, he indicated that there was a significant amount of improvement

with his relationship and rapport with his students and that they were more acclimated to his

form of discipline and management.

Case Summary: Kelly

Kelly is a 26 year old female math and algebra teacher at the Marcus Foster Middle

School (MFMS). In her third year of teaching, she worked at MFMS because of their

predominantly black student population. This is Kelly’s second year teaching at MFMS. She

taught math and algebra for 6th, 7th and 8th grade students. The school had 430 students, 28

teachers and 2 administrators. The school is predominantly black and male. Fifty five percent of

the students are African-American and 230 out of 430 are male. Thirty seven percent are Latino

and the rest are Asian, Pacific Islander and other races.

Kelly was observed 8 times for an average of 45 minutes. Her classroom environment has

a lot of student work on the walls. She had large posters in the front of the room of Che Guevara,

a Cuban revolutionary and Barack Obama, the current US president. The other poster was a

motivational poster of the ocean with the word “persistence” on it. The other features of her

classroom were multiple reminders of the discipline policy. She exhibited a calm demeanor,

never raised her voice and walked around the room constantly. Her classes were frequently

smaller than the school average with 20 – 25 students. She taught using creative projects. For

instance they had a mathematical problem that analyzed the assassination of former US president

John Kennedy which included a description packet, a video and a mathematical grid. Students


43

43

had multiple “entry points” to engage in learning. There was no one way to engage with the

problems but rather several angles which a student could approach the problem. Kelly was

highly organized and procedures were posted on the board. She walked around the class and

would frequently kneel next to her students to assist them individually.

She spoke evenly and quickly and was able to multi-task instruction, redirection and

respond to request all at once. She would frequently encourage and compliment her students for

their effort in math.

The Three Commitments

While there are a number of studies that have examined factors that contribute to

effective classroom discipline. This study has identified three primary elements that contributed

to effective teachers doing discipline in a way that mitigated suspensions and out of class

referrals for Black male students (See Table 4.1). These primary elements, termed the three

commitments (the 3 C’s) were heavily evidenced in the observations and interviews and are in

essence a response to the 3 D’s of disproportionality: disruption, defiance and disrespect. The

three C’s counter the impact of disproportionality by directly addressing the inherent biases of

the 3 D’s: teacher bias, institutional bias, and cultural mismatch. By challenging these

institutional and interpersonal biases against black male students at the classroom level, the 3 C’s

represent potential interventions at the institutional level as well.

This chapter is organized in the following way. First, this chapter outlines the discipline

strategies that reflect the first commitment, the ‘courageous commitment’ approach to student

learning. In this approach, both teachers took extraordinary steps to ensure that students stayed in

class and learned. The second element is ‘emotional commitment’ and this is discussed and

demonstrated by the data. Lastly, the ‘commitment to social justice’ is discussed. This


44

44

commitment confirms the existence of institutional racism and highlights strategies and practices

that explicitly attempt to keep black male students from being suspended.

Table 4.1 The Three Commitments

Courageous Commitment

The first element identified is the courageous commitment to student engagement and

learning. This element focuses on the courage that these teachers exhibit when conceptualizing a

discipline policy and implementing their strategies in the classroom.

There were key strategies that the teachers explained in interviews and practiced in their

classrooms that stood out as critical strategies for effectively addressing institutional racism.

These strategies did not pathologize black male culture (cultural mismatch), they did not ignore

potential teacher bias or limit the risks to simple bias. These strategies took into account

The(Three(Commitments(Critical(Race(framing(of(teacher(practice(that(keeps(black(males(in(the(classroom.(Effective!Element! Description!of!Element! Key!Features!

1.!Courageous!commitment!(Addresses!institutional!bias)!

Teachers!taking!extraordinary!steps!to!ensure!students!stay!in!class!and!learn.!

• Learning!focused!discipline!

• Multiple!avenues!to!access!learning!

• Student!centered!policies!

2.!Emotional!commitment!(Addresses!cultural!mismatch)!

Utilizing!a!wide!array!of!tools!to!manage!their!own!emotions.!

• Socio\emotional!attunement!

• Relationship!building!• Emotionally!struggle!

with!practice!3.!Commitment!to!social!justice!(Addresses!teacher!bias!&!institutional!bias)!!

Addressing!institutional!racism!toward!black!males!at!the!classroom!level,!based!on!teacher!beliefs!&!experiences.!

• Beliefs!informing!practice!

• Personal!regard!for!students!&!teaching!

• Social!Justice!charge!


45

45

institutional racism and worked to teach and discipline black males from a race-based, and

courageous approach. The term courageous commitment reflects the personal commitment that

these teachers exhibited to their students staying in class and learning. They linked their own

success and sense of self-efficacy as a teacher to evidence (empirical as well as antidotal) that

their students were learning and being prepared for success in overcoming institutional barriers

of racism and inequity. The teachers in these two cases positioned themselves as responsible to

support their students learning and success in school. They extended themselves personally and

emotionally as well as professionally in a way that is best described as courageous. They both

exceeded their expectations as a teacher in an institution that is expected to fail most of their

students. Because of the difficulty that the students’ behavior and lack of academic preparation

posed daily, they faced significant challenges. They could have easily pointed to numerous

factors outside of their control to explain why these students may have not been successful in

their class. Instead, they focused on what they did have control of which was their classroom.

They took extraordinary measures to learn about their students and shape a learning environment

and discipline policy that fostered and supported the success of every student. To the extent they

achieved that, was the extent that they felt successful as teachers. Both teachers expressed a

belief that they were only successful as teachers to the extent that their students were successful

in their class.

When the teachers in this study approached student learning as their personal

responsibility, they took extraordinary steps to ensure that those students stayed in class and

learned. One obvious reason to keep students in class to ensure learning is that a student cannot

learn the material if they are not in the class or if the class time is spend disciplining and

reprimanding students. Instead teachers were observed doing the following to keep students in


46

46

class and learning. Teachers valued learning as a focus over compliance. This was evidenced by

teachers giving explanations for all procedures and behavior expectations placed on students.

Learning objectives were also explained constantly and put into context of a larger learning

scheme. When students were disruptive or off task, the nature or content of their behavior was

addressed in a way that reminded students of the learning expectation and how the procedure or

behavior expectation that was being violated, prevented them from learning. This is significantly

different from a compliance based strategy that emphasizes compliance for the sake of

reinforcing the authority of the teacher. A learning focused redirection emphasizes a

teacher/learner partnership and the agreements that the teacher is accountable to meet as well as

the student. This approach makes for a more practical approach to discipline that reinforces

learning and gives students more room to reengage with learning.

Courageous Commitment: Key Features

One key feature of courageous commitment was a learning focus that emphasized

learning over rule compliance. As long as students were engaged in academic learning, they were

supported in their behavior appropriately in a way that encouraged continued academic learning,

instead of rule compliance. For instance Ron remarked to 15 students at once “Thank you, this

whole side of the room for being quiet and working” while remaining in the general area of a few

students who were talking and not doing work. Even if students bordered on being inappropriate,

RON found creative ways to reframe students as academic learners rather than misfits. One

example is when a student asked a black male student how to spell the word “asthma” and the

black male student said “spell it how it sounds: ass….ma”. At that point Ron responded “That

kind of talking is alright as long as you are spelling words in the assignment.” As a result, the

student stopped the behavior and returned to work. It was obvious that the student was trying to


47

47

creatively use profanity and Ron’s response was a creative way to redirect the student to not use

profanity but stay engaged in the work. Another example of that was when students were talking

to each other and Ron said “If you’re talking about the assignment, its ok.” This fostered

responsible self regulated behavior by extending a level of trust to the students to be appropriate

with their conversations and not need the teacher to referee or control every conversation in the

classroom.

Students frequently would be engaged in chatter and Ron would choose to redirect

students to do their work every time. He repeated “Stay focused” 3 times in an attempt to keep

students engaged in academic work. One particular learning focused redirection, Ron connected

engagement in class with classmates to community service, revealing a social justice value. In

this instance a black male student was talking and Ron remarked “You’re doing a lot of talking”.

The student replied that he was helping another student. The teacher replied “Sounds like you’re

doing a lot of community work. Helping out your community?” This was a strategic reframing of

cooperative learning as community engagement on a more macro level outside the school but

also casting the students as a community. Indeed his classroom was framed as a community of

learners.

In general, Ron teacher never spent more than a few seconds redirecting students before

returning to academic instruction. In the first observation the class seemed chaotic. The noise

level seemed very high. After a few minutes of closer observation, there were only 6 students

talking and 22 students quietly working. The teacher constantly redirected students but never for

more than a few seconds at a time. He spent the majority of the time instructing and supporting


48

48

the 22 students engaged in work and framed most redirections of the 6 students as entreaties to

reengage in the work.

Ron explained in his interview that when establishing classroom norms “I try and take it

away from just being like ‘You are the student, you shut up because I am the teacher’ but instead

it’s like how can we work on creating an environment where we’re all getting out of it what we

need.” This was evident in how Ron consistently kept the focus on behavior facilitating learning,

not rigid expectations.

While observing Kelly one of the best examples of learning focused discipline was

observed. A black male student came in the room late and the teacher asked him to take off his

hat. He didn’t and the teacher walked to the other side of the room to help another student giving

the student some time to comply with the request. When the teacher returned, she said again

“take off your hat”. At this point the student threw off his hat causing a tense moment. The

teacher knelt to talk quietly with the student, and then she got up and asked a question about a

math problem on the board and the same student was the first to engage, answering the question

and continuing after that moment to participate and do his work.

Kelly again displayed the ability to focus on learning when a black male student was

having a non-academic conversation with another student and the teacher walked over and asked

“Ok, let me see what you did. Show me your work.” This intervention addressed the talking

indirectly through interruption and redirection to academic engagement.

In the interview, Kelly really didn’t articulate this learning focused strategy she

demonstrated in her classroom. She actually mentioned a few practices that run contrary to

learning focused and in class flexibility. She mentioned more compliance focused and out the

door policies “If (students) are not doing work I don’t want them in the classroom”. She


49

49

followed that statement up acknowledging that she goes back and forth on that practice clarifying

that “some students can absorb stuff and that it’s the students that don’t do work and are

distracting to others (that have to go).” This was not demonstrated in the observations and she

acknowledges that her practice and her students’ ability to be more easily redirected evolved. In

the interview when asked if more challenging interactions were missed, she said yes, and then

quickly affirmed that her students are good.

Kelly also used warnings and threats implicitly and explicitly. Threats are gateway

interventions to power struggles and exclusion because they limit options for the teacher as well

as the student. Yet still, in observations, she demonstrated great skill in reengaging students in

learning focused behavior and deftly avoided power struggles. This may reveal more traditional

and punitive training that the teacher received; being in conflict with a more learning focused

value and practice as a teacher.

While an effective classroom requires some levels of structure, order and class

compliance to function properly, the main goal of any classroom is student learning and this

doesn’t always happen in complete silence with the teacher talking and students listening. In fact,

learning is optimized when students are engaged in their learning, talking to each other and the

teacher, asking questions and building knowledge together. Sometimes, this even means not

doing what the teacher says or being out of compliance with the rules of the class. The teachers

observed, prioritized learning over compliance. Rule violations were referenced but opportunities

for reengaging with learning took priority over a drawn out discipline process. In other words,

students who were out of compliance were allowed every opportunity to learn first, and be held

responsible later. “Setting an example” or “teaching a student a lesson” by using an authoritarian

stance, demanding immediate compliance and dispensing consequences on the spot was not


50

50

observed. Consequences were dispensed subtly if at all and students were allowed to atone for

their transgressions through reengagement of learning.

Ultimately, Kelly expresses why she works so hard to keep them in the class learning “I

view them as the product of whatever I am teaching them so I want them to learn as much as

they can in my class because I feel like that's a reflection about me as a teacher.”

The heart of disproportionate suspensions is the out of class referral. These teachers were

very effective at addressing student behaviors without sending students out of class. A primary

criteria for selection of teachers in this study was a record of very few or no referrals. While each

teacher admitted to a handful of referrals during the course of the year, they cited extreme cases

(fights and extreme belligerence). Beyond the emergencies, they employed creative in class

strategies to keep students in the class and learning. Some of the strategies included back of the

class conferencing and in a few instances having students step outside for one minute while the

teacher speaks with the student and then has the student reenter the class.

What stood out with these strategies is that they never stopped teaching for more than 10

seconds. Oftentimes, sending a student out of class takes a couple minutes because of the

requirement of a referral. Typically a teacher sends a student out of class out of emotional

frustration and doesn’t take the time to write out a detailed referral so they send the student out

without one or send the student with a sparsely written one leaving the administrator with little

information and only the students side of the story which leaves the principal with little option

but to send the student back to class. This is the point at which most black male students become

a victim of disproportionality at an institutional level. Colorblind teachers have unexamined

biases against black male students and thus exhibit low to no tolerance of their behavior. They

even view them as not only disruptive but dangerous to the teacher and other students.


51

51

The teachers observed showed a range of capacity to address behavior in the class.

Creative engagement, well prepared lessons that provide students with multiple entry points

making the material easily accessible to a range of student abilities is one element. The other is

an ability to employ multiple in class discipline strategies that address behavior and provide the

opportunity for students to reengage in the learning.

In observations, Kelly used in class consequences when students crossed her line. She

had a range of in class consequences that included moving to a time out chair which they could

return to multiple times if they needed to, each time, for longer periods of time. She also had

delayed consequences which she verbally announced and documented. Each time she would

quickly move on. Ron in observation had a different style. He gave numerous warnings before

issuing a consequence. He gave a few students a consequence of stepping outside the classroom

for a minute and he would give the class a direction and step outside to speak privately. This was

effective in giving the student a moment to focus and speak with the teacher without an

audience. RON also would reassign students to different seats or enlist other students to support

students who were disruptive and challenged with the work. But addressing the students’

academic challenge, their behavioral challenge faded away.

In the interviews, both teachers expressed a more strict policy. Both articulated policies

that had an out of class option but the road to that option was not a straight line. Both teachers

had resetting levels if a student reengaged in class or if a student was advancing too quickly to

the out of class option. Ron expressed that he never followed a clear sequence that led to a

student going out of the class. He varied the steps in an order to build the student’s capacity to be

successful.


52

52

Classroom discipline policies are mostly created at the teacher’s discretion. School wide

guidelines set the overall limits and expectation but it is largely up to the teacher to decide what

the classroom norms and expectations are and what it takes to issue an office discipline referral

and send a student out the door. Establishing an effective classroom discipline policy is difficult

and Kelly was told in before she began teaching in her teacher training program that as a middle

school teacher, student discipline was going to be the biggest challenge. As a result, she spent the

first 2 weeks of school going over classroom procedures and reinforcing expectations.

Reminders about the behavior expectations are on the wall.

The teachers in this study had discipline policies that served as the foundation for their

discipline strategies in the classroom. The teachers had very different approaches. One teacher

operated from a mostly informal policy with basic and generally defined rules while the other

teacher used a very defined policy that she reinforced with students during the first 2 weeks of

school and the first day back from holidays and 3 day weekends. They both had different results

as well. What was similar was how they used a discipline policy to support students for success.

Ron describes his philosophy behind his discipline policy “Some people are like “I got

this formula: It’s A, then B and then C and D, is see you later!” I don’t stick to that but I have

certain responses that the kids have all gone through A,B,C,D and so that they are used to it and

they know what to expect and that (I) the teacher won’t hold a grudge but, if they push it, it will

be predictable. It’s not in the same exact order but sequential.” Ron confesses that his policy is

vivid in his head but that articulating it is more difficult. He explains further why he doesn’t

focus on a written policy, “I’ve never written down my discipline policy besides having 2 or 3

rules because I don’t like to have the class have 15 rules to abide by because I remember what it

would be like for me to walk in the classroom and tell me 15 things to do. It’s not a pretty sight.”


53

53

By acknowledging challenges with a complicated discipline policy, Ron opted for a policy that

was more responsive to his students, “if you’re at a new school you are establishing relationships

for the first time. So my discipline policy is different. I don’t have a universal discipline policy

because obviously each classroom it’s a different reality. And each group of kids (are different).

But if you are at a new school the relationship is at that very beginning.” Finally he describes

how he used discipline to focus on learning with his students, “the main thing I work on is

having students understand that in order for the class to learn, we have to be able to roll as a

class.” With a shared sense of why discipline is important in his class, he tries to establish a

purpose for learning with order, “how can we work on creating an environment where we’re all

getting out of it what we need. And so it doesn’t necessarily mean they understand what that

looks like or that they’re willing to participate but ideologically they understand yeah we all need

that.” When asked how does he actually do discipline, how exactly does this look in his

classroom, he described a classroom management strategy of engagement that focuses on a

varied and engaging lesson with anticipated responses and an anticipation of possible behaviors,

“I start my lesson with a do now. Usually it’s something that captures their imagination,…

something that’s like “ok we were bored and now it’s quiet all of a sudden, just for that 5 or 10

minutes it’s quiet. They are seeing kids in Rwanda doing some new funky dance, they are

watching somebody do turfing on the great wall of China. They’re watching something and its

quiet for that and then it’s time to write and (the students are) like “aww, I don’t want to write..

Aw that was tight!” And so on, all this talking starts. So I have multiple layers (of intervention).

First I say “hey what’s up? it would be good to get you on point…”, kick back chill, just holler at

you then it gets a little intense and I’ll be like “enough with the playing, It’s time to get serious”

and then I go back and do one more nice (intervention). I do it back and forth because I know


54

54

one doesn’t work for all of them.” By acknowledging students varying capacities, Ron uses what

works for the student and doesn’t expect all students to conform in the same way. By seeing his

lesson as an integral part of discipline, he highlights his responsibility and ability to influence the

students’ behavior by controlling the environment in a planned, thoughtful, yet spontaneous way.

Kelly has a much more predictable policy:

“I always start with giving them the eye, like I see you, and then it’s like a silent

warning I guess. And then if they continue, I go over to the desk as a first warning

and kind of tap on the desk and touch their shoulder or hand like Chill out and

then I’ll give them a verbal warning like okay this is your warning and they’ll

understand that they have a verbal warning, then usually when they do that same

thing again, then I’ll ask them to get up and take a 5 minute time out or chill out

over there move seats for 5 minutes.”

She continues:

“If they continue in that spot, that time out to disrupt the class, then I’ll ask them

to stay there for 10 more minutes then I’ll usually go over there and talk to them

to see what’s going on like why are you acting out today, what’s going on, kind of

figure that out and if they still can’t control themselves after 10 minutes I’ll ask

them to leave, I’ll send them to a buddy room, I’ll call home and talk to a parent

or try to get in contact, and if it’s something really intense, like if they are cussing

me out or threatening me, then I’ll send them to the principal’s office and we’ll

have a conference, and that’s usually how it goes.”

Kelly had a policy that was clear and sequential. She described her policy from the

perspective of her students. Both teachers did this. Kelly as a part of her discipline sequence tries


55

55

to find out what is happening with the student that may be behind the behavior. Ron considers

what it was like for him in the classroom and experiments with interventions in search of the

effective response are to reengage his disruptive student. Both teachers put the student at the

center of their thinking regarding discipline. By putting the student in the center, they build

lessons that minimize disruption. By using student centered considerations, thoughtful planning

and anticipated challenging behavior, both teacher make it significantly more difficult for

students to be sent out of class. They expressed multiple strategies and considerations for de-

escalation rather than initiating power struggles.

Both teachers had the out of class option but made it almost impossible for a student to

fall into that option behavior wise. These key features, demonstrated by both teachers reflected

courage to take responsibility for the students learning regardless of that happens outside of the

classroom. It took courage to explore ways of reaching students that often might be outside of

the teachers comfort zone and certainly outside the students comfort zone. And courage is

required to practice classroom policies that not only put students at the center of consideration

but implicitly and sometimes explicitly challenge racist and institutionally biased school wide

policies and practices (disproportionate out of class referrals of black male students & zero

tolerance discipline policies or the 3 D’s).

Table 4.2 Courageous Commitment: Key Features

Courageous(Commitment:(“If(they(fail,(I(failed”(Teacher(taking(extraordinary(steps(to(ensure(students(stay(in(class(and(learn.(

Key!features! Ineffective!practices!1.(Learning(focused(discipline! Compliance(focused:!Following!rules!&!

teacher!direction!creates!power!struggles!where!learning!gets!lost.!!

2.!Multiple(avenues(to(access(learning! ‘Out(the(door’(practices:!Discipline!that!relies!heavily!on!threats!and!‘cumulative!


56

56

Emotional Commitment

The second element is an emotional commitment. Teaching is an emotional endeavor and

it is certainly an emotional experience for the students as well. The process of doing discipline

can certainly require some emotional flexibility (Sutton, 2009). This category highlights not only

the teacher’s ability to creatively and strategically respond to the wide range of students’

emotions without being drawn into students’ negative emotions, particularly anger and

frustration. This element may arguably be at the heart of the overreliance on the three D’s as a

reason for referral. Perceived student disruptions, defiance, and disrespect stem from a subjective

interpretation and emotional judgment about not only the students behavior but their motivation

and intent. When students negative emotions get teachers upset, Skiba (2002) calls these ‘power

struggles’ and notes that they only escalate the disruption causing the teacher and student

significant frustration. What was observed in classrooms and later confirmed in interviews across

cases, was a flexible approach to responding to these disruptions. The teachers struck a balance

between reinforcing the expectation and being flexible in how it was met. What was emphasized

was the ever present opportunity to learn and teachers encouraging students to re-enter learning.

Student behavior is perhaps most difficult to deal with when the teacher is not prepared to

manage their own emotions in response to student behavior. There were behaviors observed in

the teachers that reflected an emotional flexibility that reflected a broader commitment to

addressing the inequity and institutional racism in the classroom. The interviews yielded some

intolerance’!of!‘frequent!flyers’!!3.!Student(centered(discipline(policies! ‘Set(Up(To(Fail’(discipline(policy:!Rigid,!one\

way!discipline!policies!that!set!students!up!to!fail.!


57

57

important information about what the teachers believed about the students and how those beliefs

significantly influenced how they responded to student behavior. This section discusses features

of how emotional commitment showed up in the data.

Emotional Commitment: Key features

Student behavior that is challenging is typically indicates some kind of emotional state

that the student is struggling with. Teachers who recognize this can become responsive to

students in a way that supports them to engage in learning quicker. This requires a teacher to

have a certain level of emotional attunement to their students. Kelly demonstrated emotional

attunement when her student threw his hat off and she avoided taking it personal and acted in a

way that deescalated the situation and reengaged the student.

Ron addresses student excitement in an emotionally encouraging way when a student

yells, “I finished my work!” and he responds, “How does that feel? Feel good?”

Even the most well prepared teacher might be offended by a random disruption in class.

In fact, the more prepared a teacher is and the more attached they are to their lesson, the more

likely they might take personal offense such disruptions and for good reason. This is

counterproductive and typically proves ineffective because in taking offense, the teacher resorts

to punitive discipline measures, further taking away precious time and attention away from the

lesson they worked so hard to prepare. What these effective teachers did was see disruptions as

opportunities to reengage students in learning. This was because the teachers say most

disruptions as manifestations of student anxiety, frustration, or outright anger and that their job

was to route all disruptions quickly back into opportunities for learning.

Perhaps the most challenging student behavior in a classroom is an angry or frustrated

student. Any sign of anger or frustration in a class is typically cause for immediate dismissal,


58

58

especially if the anger is directed toward the teacher, sending the not so subtle message to all

other students: “Any expression of anger and frustration will be punished!” This rarely works

because the source of their anger is not addressed and they lose their opportunity to learn.

When anger was framed by the teacher as a result of anxiety in the classroom around the

material as well as broader social and environmental factors, not due simply to poor student

choices (never paying attention in class) or even poor social, environmental and political

circumstances (poverty, violence, lack of family & community support), but anger that stems

from the institutional and systemic racism that continues to uniquely impact black students

(Kelly talk about her class in college & their anger & Ron talk about anger & racism & his

background with channeling anger). With this reframing of the problem, these teachers

responded to anger intentionally to get them to focus on learning. (Kelly & the hat throw). When

the teacher refocused the student to the work, it appeared that the teacher allowed a violent angry

outburst but with this unique understanding of student anger, she actually gave the student an

opportunity to learn despite being angry. Since external conditions are frequently cited by

educators as reasons why they can’t get students to learn in class, this example illustrates that

despite external conditions, despite student anger, the student can learn if the teacher properly

supports these students, especially black male students to learn.

Kelly mentions how when she gets frustrated by racist or sexist outbursts of anger

directed toward her or other students, she reminds herself “I had to understand that it’s not really

about me and step back. So that was hard.”

Ron uses a martial arts metaphor to describe his students’ anger that is directed at him

“learning how to direct (anger) is like Aikido. I’m not going to sit there and try and block one of


59

59

(the students) punches when they are going at me. I’m going to just learn how to step out the

way, and guide (the students) arm and movement and then direct it in a different way.

Ron also talks about anger and how he handles the anger of oppression that his students

bring in his class. “So my students are really angry, upset and don’t know how to articulate it so

in my head theoretically what I do is I try and help them articulate why they are angry and use

that anger and divert it into action. And I think that there are so many reasons, rightful, just

reasons why they are angry that if I could learn how to take that anger and help them articulate

why they are angry and then give them a little bit of understanding of the social, cultural,

political, context of this country, that anger could be used to fuel (the student) kicking ass and

getting an A.”

Negative emotions are unavoidable by teachers. Dealing with 20 -30 students at one time

for 5-6 hours a day, there are many times that even the best teacher may get upset, discouraged,

frustrated or feel any other number of negative emotions. Without realizing it, many teachers

may automatically assign the blame for these emotions to the students every time. This way of

thinking builds resentment in the teacher toward students and the students most blames for

disruptions end up being black males. The teachers observed used a different approach. Although

they both had nonnegotiable behaviors, they came to school prepared to deal with them instead

of setting up rules in hopes of students never breaking them, and thus teachers being upset that

they are being “forced” to give a negative consequence because they set it up, or not giving the

consequence and failing to follow their own discipline procedures. Both of these are frustrating

and stress inducing to any teacher.

Instead these teachers came prepared to deal with their students and kept an awareness of

where and why these behaviors might come into this classroom. They didn’t take the infractions


60

60

personally and refocused their response to reflect what the students needed. These teachers

constantly reflected on their own practice and examined why they responded and how they could

respond better next time.

The teachers then shared in their interviews their thinking behind these strategies and

what beliefs were behind these strategies.

What Kelly was taught in her training was to be consistent and treat all students the same

according to a uniform discipline policy. What she discovered was that it wasn’t a practical

approach. When asked about challenges she said “I do have consistency as a challenge. It’s hard

because you kind of know, I can let some kids get away with some stuff because they are trying

to be funny or it kind of works with what we are doing so it’s like, do I give you a warning or

that was kind of funny and it wasn’t really disrupting anything, that’s kind of hard.”

When she focused more on preparation and engagement, she felt that she had more leverage with

the subject material than with any punishment. By relentlessly looking for creative ways to

engage her students in math, she demonstrated an ability to not be ruffled by off task or

challenging behavior.

In this instance, any reasonable teacher would have likely thrown that student right out of

class. Coming late, disruption the class, then violently throwing his hat on the ground might get

an average teacher a little bit upset. This teacher stayed emotionally grounded and focused on

academic engagement and was successful. She never stopped teaching. Other students didn’t

stop working and the student who lost his cool, quickly regained composure and began

practicing math. The teacher’s emotional flexibility was not demonstrated by her showing a

range of different emotions but rather by demonstrating an ability to regulate and control her


61

61

emotions in the face of a student outburst which allowed her to quickly and successfully redirect

student’s emotions.

Another example of emotional flexibility was when teacher 1 would lead discussions, he

frequently would redirect students who were talking and immediately return to the discussion.

Although he redirected students repetitively, he never stopped for more than a few seconds and

always quickly returned to teaching. In particular, his emotional flexibility was demonstrated by

his consistent pattern of praising students and matching their enthusiasm and inquisitiveness,

even if they were being disruptive seconds before. In one instance, a black male was talking

constantly at the back of the classroom and was asked a dozen times to stop talking. During the

class discussion, the student stopped his side conversation and asked a question to the teacher

which the teacher replied and encouraged the student to participate more. In this example, a

typical response to this student may have been to simply give a few warnings and send the

student out or not take their attempt to participate on task with the classroom discussion, but it

was as if the teacher was waiting for the student to participate and was immediately available to

bring him into the discussion. The emotional flexibility in this case was the ability to hold the

goal of on task engagement despite repeated off task conversation.

The emotional commitment to serve black students effectively required the kind of

commitment that pushes a teacher’s emotional capacity beyond their comfort zone. These

teachers demonstrated this commitment and demonstrated an ability to reflect on their

experiences to improve how they handle situations in the future. This emotional commitment that

these two teachers demonstrated required them to take responsibility for how they handled

emotionally charged situations. They were both able to reflect on their interactions and learn

from them. Through this struggle to become better teachers, they approached discipline practices


62

62

with a socio-emotional skill set in order to mitigate flare ups and keep students in the class

learning.

Table 4.3 Emotional Commitment: Key Features

Commitment to Social Justice

The third element is the influence of background beliefs that are rooted in social justice

and challenge race neutrality. This element was revealed mostly in the conversations with the

two teachers that were interviewed but also demonstrated in observations.

This section explains the final element in three primary themes. First, the background

beliefs of the teachers are discussed and illustrate exactly what they believe about the impact of

racism and inequity on their black male students. Second, the teacher’s personal charge as

educators is revealed. They explain their love and joy of teaching and their students and why

they deliberately chose to work with black males. Thirdly, this section shows how these teachers

view themselves as agents of positive change and have committed to overriding oppression in

their classroom by employing whatever strategies that ensure that the educational inequity that

their black male students experience stops with them.

Emotional(Commitment(Utilizing(a(wide(array(of(tools(to(manage(their(own(emotions.(Key!Features! Ineffective!Practice!

Socio`emotional(attunement! Emotionally(tone(deaf:!Teacher!misreads!or!is!unresponsive!to!student!emotional!cues.!!

Relationship(building! Doing(the(minimum!to!get!to!know!students!personally!

Emotionally(struggle(with(practice( Blame(outside(factors:(Teacher!points!to!external!factors!outside!of!their!control!as!a!determinant!for!classroom!challenges!and!student!failure!in!their!class.(


63

63

Commitment to Social Justice: Key features

Personal background and experience informed both teachers about the existence of

racism and inequity in very different ways and from very different perspectives; however both

teachers expressed a personal commitment to social justice and teaching black students. They

talked about how racism exists in education and how their role is to counter some of the impacts

in their students lives, not by lowering their expectations but rather by raising them higher than

they were professionally obligated to and raising their level of support to ensure that they met

those expectations. Both teachers expressed a high level of responsibility as a teacher for their

students learning. Both teachers took a race-based approach to teaching. They choose to teach

black students who were underserved by the education system. It wasn’t just disadvantages

students and not just underperforming students. The context of oppression and racism played a

central role to their understanding of what these student face and how they could support them as

their teacher. Here are some direct quotes from Kelly:

Regarding students and why they may be disruptive, she doesn’t assume ill intent. “I

don’t believe any of my students are malicious like trying to be totally disruptive because they

hate me or they hate somebody else. I just think there’s just some other thing going on and it’s

not really an attack, it’s just kind of like that’s their way of coping with the environment that

their in.”

Kelly reflected on growing up and her family leaving Oakland because of institutionally

racist factors, but how she didn’t know what was happening at the time. Later in college, she

took a course that opened her eyes to educational inequity. “In college I took a course on values,

culture, ethnicity, whole bunch of stuff and it was telling me about the opportunity gap and the

educational gap, and I had no idea.” She continues, “I lived in Oakland but my parents moved to


64

64

Dublin so that I didn’t have to go to Oakland schools because they weren’t good but I didn’t

really understand that that’s was why we moved and reading all those passages and dissecting it

and really seeing the huge differences of different cities and different races and ethnicities and

how much they differed between wealth and different poverty levels.”

Ron similarly expressed how background beliefs and experiences shaped his approach in the

classroom. When referencing the classroom experiences of his students he assumes that they

have experienced bias already. “I understand that historically education may have made you feel

like “this” and we have that conversation “how do you feel in other classes? How do you feel

like they were dissing you? How do you feel like they were punitive and didn’t care about

anything that was going on in your life? Or maybe they just want to get you in trouble and keep

you in detention…etc.”

Ron continues, talking about what he believes impacts his students “I know that my

students are brilliant young beings who have not been given the opportunity or skills to find their

brilliance sometimes.” Alluding to systemic oppression. He continues, sharing his personal

experience and connecting it to his belief about what his students face “My belief about learning

is based on things that I have personally going through the public school system have had. The

teacher that hated me the most, I wasn’t going to get an A because they weren’t going to give me

one but I’ll get an A- or a B+.”

Ron refers to what his students feel in a typical classroom and why “I want their whole

relationship to education to be different, because in the majority of these classrooms in this

country it’s not a beautiful thing. There’s not real beauty in education. What they are learning

rarely relates to their reality. So they’ve already dismissed it. They’re like “school sucks, school

is wack, school is boring, school is the worst! Like, this is torture!” And what I hope by the end


65

65

of the year is that they find other words to talk about school and find other words to talk about

education.”

All three teachers expressed love either in the classroom or in the interview. Their love,

connection and attachment to their students is what gives them the motivation to work overtime

to prepare engaging lessons, remain focused on learning when addressing disruptions and

cultivate the emotional flexibility when dealing with students ranges of emotions.

Kelly gives a few examples of what her personal commitment to the students is and why.

When asked how she viewed her students she replied “I am really attached to them…I want them

all to go to college. I want them all to take at least pre calculus in high school. I see them as cool

kids that I want them to do well in everything. I really do love all my kids and they’re really cool

people and I think they could be very successful if they just keep on track. That’s how I view

them. I am super attached to them.”

Ron has a similarly passionate response to the same question: What is your view of your

students? “I love my students. The reason why I do this work and the reason why I been teaching

in the schools that I choose to work at is because I feel like part of my purpose on this earth is to

reach a certain population that most people have little to no success.”

These beliefs and approaches reflected the expansive view approach to addressing

institutional racism. Acknowledging that it exists and taking responsibility to remedy it by

focusing on student learning outcomes. These teachers were not colorblind and were very much

aware of classroom bias and larger systemic bias. This approach challenged the race neutral

approach to education that sees black students from a deficit-based lens (cultural mismatch &

teacher bias) and focuses on how to remediate their learning. Instead they saw their students as


66

66

full of strengths, possibilities and potential yet impacted by institutional racism. In addition to

how they saw oppression, they saw their role to override it.

Kelly talked about her commitment to address inequities in education. “(learning about

the opportunity gap and the educational gap) surprised me and I was like ok, I want to be that

change in that community where I can help those kids and be an ally with them so they have a

better shot, because I had no idea about that so I was like ok, this is what I’m going to do”. She

connected her experience of moving from Oakland because of educational inequity to her

personal decision to work in Oakland and address those same inequities.

Ron connects his purpose as a teacher to addressing these inequalities. Here he talks

about his students and how he acknowledges how institutional racism in education may have

impacted his students and how he tries to build trust. “I understand you may have gotten

whooped on by teachers, not physically but verbally and you may have felt like you are the

crumb on the bottom of the floor, but look at how I work my classroom, look at what I do on a

daily basis and allow me to be a little bit different and see the differences.”

Issues of oppression that manifest in the classroom are paramount for both teachers.

When asked what their most challenging behaviors are in their classroom Kelly said first and

foremost, racial slurs are not tolerated and addresses every time indicating a clear recognition of

racially offensive speech. Ron explains further “(I have no tolerance for) racism, sexism and

homophobia. It is very rampant and very present in our communities and so in the classroom it’s

no different.. These things come up because not only do they think it but they hear it so they just

say it and it’s hard to try and continue to teach a lesson. When there’s that kind of stuff

happening because you need to address it.” He explains how he may address it in his class

“(When students attack each other along racial, gender or homophobic lines) I’ll go into the


67

67

whole structure of “crabs in a barrel” and how poor people and oppressed people are

continuously being put against each other.”

Ron explains how his belief in addressing oppression with his teaching super cedes his

employment status at any particular school “Having a masters degree & having a teachers

credential has enabled me to not sacrifice my educational philosophy as a teacher. Hence I have

worked at 9 different schools in 11 years and it’s like “Oh, it didn’t work? Alright. You want me

to change my teaching style? Here’s a handshake, I look you in the eye and throw em up.” I’m

already working for the system and have conflicts with that being a radical independent thinker

and so the one thing I’m not going to change is what’s going down in my classroom.” Ron

teaches from a social justice standpoint and literally put’s his job on the line to fight oppression

of black male students from within a system that he sees as fundamentally flawed.

Table 4.4 Commitment to Social Justice: Key Features

Commitment(to(Social(Justice(Responding(to(institutional(racism(toward(black(males(at(the(classroom(level,(based(on(

teacher(beliefs(&(experiences.(Key!Features! Prior!Research!Reference!

Beliefs(informing(practice:!Teacher!can!relate!to!institutional!racism!through!reflection!of!personal!experience!

1.(Addresses(Teacher(Bias:!Teacher!rejects!colorblind!myth!and!accepts!the!reality!of!race\based!inequity!for!black!males!in!education.!

Personal(regard:!Expressed!love!for!students!and!teaching!!

2.(Addresses(Cultural(Mismatch:!Teacher!loves!and!appreciates!the!cultural!and!racial!identity!of!students!as!important!and!is!personally!committed!to!making!the!educational!setting!culturally!compatible!to!them.!

Social(justice(charge:!Deliberate!attempt!to!address!institutional!racism!and!inequity.!

3.(Addresses(Institutional(Racism:!Teacher!educates!for!a!higher!purpose!of!supporting!black!male!students!to!overcome!institutional!racism!!


Table 4.5 Effective Elements

COURAGEOUS COMMITMENT

Taking extraordinary steps to keep students in class and learning.

“If they fail, I failed.”

Learning focused

discipline: Academic

engagement is prioritized over rule compliance.

Multiple avenues

to access learning: Multiple in class

strategies and variety of

opportunities for students to access

learning.

Student centered discipline policy:

Reinforcing policies to support building student

capacity.

COMMITMENT TO SOCIAL JUSTICE

Commitment to social justice and

equity. “My job is to

override oppression.”

Background

beliefs: Teacher can relate to

institutional racism through reflection

of personal experience.

Personal regard:

Love and caring for students & teaching

Social justice

charge: Deliberate attempt to address institutional racism

and inequity.

EMOTIONAL COMMITMENT Utilizing a wide array of tools to

manage their emotions.

“Don’t take it personally.”

Emotional

attunement: Able to ‘read’ and

respond to student disruption from social emotional

lens.

Relationship building:

Connecting with students & taking emotional risks.

Emotionally struggle with

practice: Teacher reflection and

examination of own practice.

The Three Commitments Effective elements for significantly reducing or eliminating

out of class referrals of black male students Macheo Payne

using CRT in Discipline


69

69

CHAPTER 5

RESTATING THE PROBLEM

The purpose of this study was to examine classroom teachers with effective, low-

referring practices in an effort to explain disproportionately high suspension rates of black males

in schools. Disproportionality of suspension of black male students compared to white male

students, has been a persistent trend in US public schools for over 3 decades. Evidence that

shows black male students being suspended at 2 to 3 times the rate of their white male

counterparts also shows that race is a dominating factor in this trend, even when controlled for

poverty (Wu, Pink, Crain, Moles, 1982; Skiba et. al., 2002). Evidence shows black students are

suspended primarily for disruption, which is a more subjective reason, and that white students

are suspended primarily for more objective observable offenses (Skiba, 2008). These

discrepancies reveal black students being punished more severely for minor infractions than

white students (Skiba et. al., 2002).

By exploring effective classroom practices that facilitate greater engagement and thus

less disciplinary actions toward black male students this study sought to identify key elements

that teachers use in the classroom toward that end. Research showed the three D’s are the

primary reason black male students are sent out of the class and suspended at the highest rate

nationally. These studies accurately described the intricacies of this phenomenon yet failed to

locate a central cause to this phenomenon.

By examining this issue through Critical Race Theory (CRT), this study acknowledges

the impact of racism in education, and sought to identify strategies to address manifestations of

institutional racism (disproportionality of suspension) that may provide teachers and schools

with the tools at the classroom level to substantially reduce or eliminate the disparity of


70

70

suspension. Using the CRT tenet of challenging the assumption of race neutrality or the myth of

colorblind institutions, this study identified race as a critical factor to examine in the classroom,

where disproportionality of suspension is initiated with the out of class referral.

Instead of further documenting how and why disproportionality occurs, this study

uncovered potential clues that point toward solutions to eliminate this problem. By identifying

teachers with successful discipline practices and examining elements in those classrooms, this

study looked at discipline strategies that keep students in class and revealed common discipline

practices that accomplished this effectively. This study may serve to inform teachers who wish

for more effective classroom management of black male students. By investigating what

constitutes effective classroom discipline practices with black male students, this study’s

findings can be used to eliminate out of class discipline referrals and increase the chances of

eliminating disproportionality of suspension of black male students in classrooms and schools.

With national attention (Civil Rights and School Discipline Conference, 2010), leading

scholars have presented evidence that disproportionate suspension of black males represents a

discriminatory exclusion pattern (Losen & Skiba, 2010). Further, studies suggest this is a

predictor of higher levels of academic failure and increased risk for going to prison later in life

(Foster 1986; Morrison, & D’Incau, 1997; Noguera, 2003). Because black males are suspended

more than any group, and are the most likely group to be incarcerated, being suspended from

school has been linked to being the greatest predictor of involvement in the juvenile justice

system, more than poverty indicators, or poor academic performance. (Public Policy Research

Institute, 2005). These indicators represent a higher likelihood of incarceration for black males

and connections between suspension and academic failure suggest that disproportionality poses a

significant race-based equity problem in education.


71

71

SUMMARY OF METHODS

This study explored the ways in which effective teachers practiced effective discipline,

termed in this study as the three commitments, in their classrooms. Through interviews, and

extensive classroom observations, this study utilized a case study design examining two

classroom teachers with effective, low-referring discipline practices in Oakland, CA. The two

teachers selected for this study were observed in their classrooms sixteen times and interviewed

as well. These two case studies were examined and analyzed based on themes highlighted from

the literature, then reported using key elements revealed in the observations and interviews. By

using a case study design as a basis for the research, this study was able to explore how effective

teachers employed discipline practices for black male students. Using CRT, the study looked at

race as a factor in classroom discipline practices. Specifically, this study examined how teachers

challenged race neutrality or colorblindness in education.

This study was able to gain an understanding of how teacher discipline practices and their

values and beliefs about their students’ behavior impacts black male students in their classroom.

This research contributes to understanding how office discipline referrals and disproportionate

suspensions of black male students can be significantly reduced or eliminated through effective

discipline practices.

Conducted in four phases, the first phase generated an intensity sample of teachers in

Oakland, CA. public middle schools, whom embody the theoretical principles under study.

Several teachers were identified based on principal nominations of teachers who send students

out of class far below the average. Phase two involved multiple classroom observations of the

two teachers selected. Phase three consisted of in-depth interviews getting them to articulate their

discipline philosophy, practices and beliefs. Phase four involved follow-up observations and


72

72

interviews of the two teachers to confirm gaps in information and unclear findings as well as

confirmation from teachers of the accuracy of data captured from observations and interviews

with teachers.

Observations were conducted using a protocol designed to capture teacher student

interactions involving student behavior that was consistent with what the research highlighted as

the three D’s, which was behavior that was most frequently cited as reasons for black males to be

sent out of class and eventually suspended. Each teacher was observed eight times for a full class

period, totaling over 12.5 hours of classroom observation over a 3 month span of time. After

observations were completed, the teachers were interviewed separately for 1 hour. Both teachers

were asked the same 8 questions and 2 additional questions that followed up on interactions of

interest observed in the classroom. Each interview was transcribed and coded for key themes.

Relying heavily on prior research categories of causes for disproportionality: institutional bias,

teacher bias, and cultural mismatch, as well as two CRT tenets of ‘expansive view’ outcomes

and the challenging race neutrality, three key elements emerged and were developed into a table

of significant findings with evidence from the data supporting the effective elements as well as

key features of the effective elements. These elements, termed the three commitments were

found to counter the three D’s which are the top reasons for suspension of black males, and also

address the primary reasons for disproportionality in the research, teacher bias, institutional bias

and cultural mismatch.

The result was a set of research findings that addressed the research questions directly. It

was revealed how black males were effectively and creatively engaged in an intentional effort to

keep them engaged in the classroom, learning. Teachers beliefs and attitudes were expressed in

the interviews and data revealed how their background experiences and beliefs inform and


73

73

influence their classroom practice. Using the CRT lens, the findings reveal a set of practices that

these two teachers used to effectively address disproportionality of suspension of black males at

the classroom level.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The key findings of this study, outlined in detail in chapter 4 revealed the effective

elements termed the three commitments, discovered in both teachers’ classroom practice as well

as their interviews. Although there was no connection between the two teachers studied, there

were similarities in the findings. They worked at different schools, came from different

backgrounds and had significantly different educational experiences as students and as

professional educators. They exhibited very different styles in the classroom and their

classrooms were run differently. One teacher was a male and one was female. One openly

identified as a male teacher of color and appeared as such. The other identified as mixed race

only when asked and appeared as a white woman. The differences were across the board and yet

the findings were consistent for both teachers. The three commitments; the courageous

commitment, an emotional commitment, and the commitment to social justice were consistently

represented by solid corresponding data in observations as well as interviews.

The first commitment, the courageous commitment represents an important reframing of

disproportionate suspension of black male students as a black male behavior problem to a teacher

and institutional problem. These teachers showed that as the adult in the class, they were

courageous enough to structure and conduct their class in a way that emphasizes learning and

engagement and eliminates all non-emergency, non-safety reasons for out of class referrals. By

focusing on learning over rule compliance, teachers were able to avoid the power struggles that

are common in classrooms with black male students. The teachers demonstrated flexibility in the


74

74

classroom to sort and manage disruptive or challenging student behaviors in a way that kept

students in the classroom and kept avenues for academic reengagement open. Lastly, teachers

were able to form and implement discipline policies that were student centered and designed to

meet the educational learning objectives for student success and implemented in a way that

allowed for adjustment based on student capacity. In other words, teachers provided adequate

support to students to meet the expectations of behavior in the classroom, setting them up for

success, not failure. This was significant because it frames discipline as a shared responsibility.

The teacher takes equal, even more responsibility for the climate and behavior in the classroom.

As the architects of the lesson, these teachers didn’t see their lesson and teaching method as

separate from student behavior and how they did discipline. Discipline was seen as an integral

part of the organization and preparation of the lesson. These courageous set of practices support

the teacher in having more responsibility in keeping black males in class and learning despite

systemic issues of race and bias demonstrated in the literature. This addresses element counters

the institutional biases that push black male students out of the class faster and more frequently.

Teachers take responsibility for their students learning and reject external reasons or excuses for

student failure.

The second commitment, the emotional commitment, revealed important connections

between teaching and emotional maturity. While it is reasonable and arguably unavoidable for

teachers to experience a range of emotions, positive and negative in teaching, these teachers in

this study utilized a wide array of tools to manage their own emotions and redirect their students’

emotional behavior. By being able to read and respond to student disruption from an emotional

lens, these teachers exhibited an emotional attunement to their students and themselves. The

teachers connected a greater awareness of inequity and racism as having a real impact on their


75

75

students and their emotional disposition in their classroom. The teachers in this study showed in

very different ways, how to respond to black male behavior in a balanced, yet real way that

properly anticipated and framed challenging behavior in a way that redirected it in more

constructive, learning focused behavior. This ‘commitment’ is significant because when a

teacher and student gets angry, the teacher has the institutional power to suspend and the student

has far less avenues to deal with the situation. Emotional commitment on the part of the teacher

through emotional attunement, relationship building, and emotionally struggling with their own

practice, supports a much more equitable approach to teaching that greatly minimizes teacher

bias and cultural mismatch in the classroom.

The third commitment, the commitment to social justice is a significant finding because it

addresses a key CRT tenet of challenging race neutrality, the notion that eliminating racial bias

and disparate outcomes by race can be achieved by ignoring race and pretending that students are

not treated and impacted differently because of their race. The findings from this study indicate

the opposite. They indicate that teachers who keep students in class and reduce or eliminate

disproportionality of suspension through very few or zero out of class referrals of black male

students do not do so on accident but through deliberate action that is informed by a personal

history and awareness of inequitable practices through systemic discrimination. The teachers in

this study revealed that they not only are aware of the inequitable forces coming to bear on their

black male students, they deliberately teach where they teach to address that inequality. Through

race-based strategies and a deep personal commitment to the students personally and impacting

the system at large through their individual efforts, these teachers communicated a commitment

to override the oppression through their classroom teaching. Both teachers’ demonstrated

exceptional skill and ability to teach in less challenging environments yet choose to teach in a


76

76

more difficult setting with a high concentration of black males. They did this to deflect the

negative influences that impact these students, particularly black male students by constantly

focusing on student learning and constantly taking responsibility as teachers. These teachers

formed close personal connections to the work and to the students. The influence of background

beliefs, personal commitment and an explicit mission to override the oppression of black male

student drove these two teachers to perform uncommonly well in a challenging environment.

Both teachers exceed the national average lifespan of teaching in urban schools. Ron has been

teaching in high poverty schools for 11 years and Kelly entered her 4th year in a high poverty

school. This uncommon commitment and uncommon results reflect their powerful commitment

to social justice and in this way countered teacher bias and institutional bias.

APPLYING THE RESEARCH

Disproportionality of suspension has been occurring for over three decades and very few

efforts have significantly impacted the reduction or elimination of this disparity. Prior research

reveals that a great deal has been learned about how it occurs on multiple levels including

institutional level, classroom level and the level of the student. This research addresses

disproportionality at the classroom level and offers some insight about how black male students

can be engaged effectively, rather than sent out of class and suspended. Teachers can directly

access these findings and reflect on their own classrooms. The findings offer a core set of

practices that can not only inform other classroom teachers, but can possibly be applied at the

institutional level as well. These clues to equitable teaching of black males, the three

commitments, can be used in teacher recruitment and training for new teachers, integrated into a

teacher training course that examines equity, and it could be used by new teacher coaches, or

BTSA coaches that are required to support beginning teachers for their first 2 years of teaching


77

77

in the classroom to obtain their clear teaching credential. This study could also be used by school

districts that have a problem with disproportionality by using the elements in concert with similar

findings around caring, relationship building and effective classroom management to develop

trainings for professional development opportunities for teachers. Principals and site

administrators can use these elements to support classroom teachers who are struggling with

black male students in their classroom. District leaders can direct energy and resources using the

three commitments on a district level to push district leaders to adopt a courageous commitment

for these outcomes schoolwide. Districts could systemically embed socio-emotional lens through

mental health resources and counseling in schools for students as well as training for school

leaders and teachers. Finally, districts and school boards could explicitly adopt a social justice

mission and focus in district strategic plans and strategic visions. Also formalizing mechanisms

of accountability for a social justice mission through voluntary resolution plans to address

disproportionate discipline and suspension of black males on a district wide level in coordination

with the Dept. of Education’s office of civil rights.

Most significantly, this study can be used to frame disproportionality of suspension of

black males as an adult problem, and a symptom of institutional racism, using the CRT lens of

challenging race neutrality and using the expansive view to measure equitable systems. By

holding institutions, principals and teachers, all adults involved, as having the responsibility and

the power and capacity to eliminate disproportionality, address racism explicitly through

practice, it can have a powerful effect on future research on the topic and ultimately in

classrooms across the country. The most powerful finding is that with just two cases, it was

demonstrated that teachers can come from very different places and arrive at a common place of

addressing the opportunity gap head on, explicitly supporting black male students to overcome


78

78

institutional and teacher bias that stem from systemic racism embedded in the educational

system.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

This study would yield stronger more valid results if it were duplicated with a larger

sample size of ten or more teachers. It would also be strengthened with a control group selection

of teachers who were not necessarily identified as effective teachers but include less effective

teachers in discipline. Additionally, this study would be significantly enhanced if students were

interviewed about what they experience in classrooms with effective discipline practices as well

as classrooms with less effective discipline practices.

This additional layer of research would provide substantial depth to the findings. A larger

sample would make the findings more generalizable across a broader group of teachers. A

control group of teachers would reveal more solid consistencies or inconsistencies with the

findings being in alignment with the research questions. For example, there may be a teacher that

sends out black male students regularly but also exhibits some of the background beliefs. Lastly,

interviewing students would give insight to what students think and feel when they exhibit

disruptive or challenging behavior. It could also reveal what a particular student’s awareness is

of the origins of their emotions or the core reason they are sent out of class or kept in class.

Some questions might arise such as: Do they experience and articulate experiencing racism

through discipline practices? How do they articulate what happens to them in school regarding

discipline and suspension? The findings could be substantially extended and provide yet more

insight into what exactly is the cause of disproportionate suspension of black males and more

importantly what are effective interventions that can eliminate this widespread disparity in

Americas public education system.


79

79

REFERENCES

Banaji, M. R., Nosek, B. A., & Greenwald, A. G. (2004). No place for nostalgia in science: A

response to Arkes and Tetlock. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 279-310.

Cartledge, G., Tillman, L. C., & Johnson, C. T. (2001). Professional ethics within the

context of student discipline and diversity. Teacher Education and Special

Education, 24(1) 25-37.

Christle, C., Nelson, C., and Jolivette, K. (2004). School characteristics related to the use

of suspension. Education & Treatment of Children, 27(4), 509-526.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1992). Reframing the school reform agenda: New paradigms must

restore with local educators. School Administrator, 49(10), 22-27.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a national

commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5–15

DeShano Da Silva, C., Huguley, J. H., Kakli, Z., Rao, Radika. (2007). The opportunity gap:

Achievement and inequality in education. The Harvard Educational Publishing Group,

Cambridge.

Dray, B. J., & Wisneski, D. (2011). Mindful Reflection as a Process for Developing

Culturally Responsive Practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(1), 28-36.

Dunbar, C. and Villarruel, F. (2004). What a difference the community makes: Zero

tolerance policy interpretation and implementation. Equity & Excellence in

Education, 37(351-359)

Fatt, R. (2009). Keeping youth connected. Focus on Oakland. Retrieved

from http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/files/Oakland-profile.pdf

Fenning, P. and Rose, J. (2007). Overrepresentation of African American students in


80

80

exclusionary discipline: The role of school policy. Urban Education, 42(6), 536-

559.

Fenning, P., Theodos, J., Benner, C., & Bohanon-Edmonson, H. (2004). Integrating

proactive discipline practices into codes of conduct. Journal of School Violence, 3(1),

45-61.

Gay, G. (2006). Connections between classroom management and culturally responsive

teaching. Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary

issues (pp. 343-370).

Gregory, A. & Mosely, P. M. (2004). The discipline gap: Teachers' view on the over-

representation of African American students in the discipline system. Equity &

Excellence in Education, 37(1), 18-30.

Gregory, A., Skiba, R., Noguera, P. (2010). The achievement gap and the discipline gap:

Two sides of the same coin? Educational Researcher, 39(59).

Haberman, M. (1991). Pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(4),

290–29

Knaus, C. B. (2009). Shut up and listen: Applied critical race theory in the classroom. Race,

Ethnicity & Education, 12(2), 133-154

Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice

field like education? Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7-24.

Martinez, S. (2009). A system gone berserk: How are zero-tolerance policies really

affecting schools? Preventing School Failure, 53(3), 153-158.

Monroe, C. R. (2005). Understanding the discipline gap through a cultural lens:


81

81

Implications for the education of African American students. Intercultural Education, 16,

317- 330.

Noddings, N. & Shore, P. (1984) Awakening the Inner Eye: Intuition in education (New York,

Teachers College Press)

Noguera, P. (2003). Schools, prisons and social implications of punishment: Rethinking

disciplinary practices. Motion Magazine.

Public Policy Research Institute, Study of Minority Overrepresentation in the Texas Juvenile

Justice System Final Report (2005)

Raible, J., & Irizarry, J. G. (2010). Redirecting the teacher's gaze: Teacher education,

youth surveillance and the school-to-prison pipeline. Teaching and Teacher

Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 26(5), 1196-1203.

Sandomierski, T., (2011), "Disciplinary Outcomes by Race and Gender in Schools Implementing

Positive Behavior Support: Does Fidelity of Implementation Reduce Disproportionality?"

Theses and Dissertations. University of South Florida. Paper 3329.

Solorzano, D. G. (1997). Images and Words that Wound: Critical Race Theory, Racial

Stereotyping, and Teacher Education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24(3), 5-19.

Skiba, R., Michael, R., Nardo, A., Peterson, R. (2002). The color of discipline: Sources of

racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. The Urban Review 34(4).

Skiba, R., and Peterson, R. (1999). The dark side of zero-tolerance: Can punishment lead

to safe schools? Phi Delta Kappa, 80, 372–376.

Skiba, R. J. (2000). Zero-tolerance, zero evidence: An analysis of school discipline

practice. Bloomington: Indiana University Education Policy Center. Retrieved

from http://www.indiana.edu/~safeschl/ztze.pdf


82

82

UCLA Civil Rights Project (2010). Study finds big racial gap in suspensions of middle

school students. Retrieved from

http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/news/study-finds-big-racial-gap-in-suspensions-of- middle-

school-students

Wu, S. C., Pink, W. T., Crain, R. L., & Moles, O. (1982). Student suspension: A critical

reappraisal. The Urban Review, 14 (4), 245-303


83

83


APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Observation Protocol

Student Action & code

D1- disruptive C- challenging D2- defiant O- off task D3- disrespect BM- Black male

Teacher Response R- redirect S- Prob. solve T- threat N- No action C- conseq. D-defer action

Comments

1 D1- BF asks if she can move her seat

R- grants permission, asks why? Then says I want to check in with you later

Didn’t stop teaching but acknowledged her frustration and his intent to discuss it with her later

2 D1- BM asks if he can move closer

R- says fine “you’re the one who sat in the back”

Again, didn’t miss a beat with lecture

3 D1- BF begins sneezing uncontrollably

P- tells student to go get some water

Showed concern and class didn’t question the grant

4 D3- BM keeps writing when told to stop taking notes for a second

R- verbally says “people are still writing” and convers the slide so they can’t keep writing

Students are task oriented and eager to get all info being presented- good problem to have in class

5 D1- IF get’s up to throw something away

N- doesn’t stop teaching, student sits back down and get’s back to work

Must not be a procedure. Student didn’t distract learning

APPENDIX B: Interview Protocol Questionnaire

General Questions: RQ1: What are your discipline procedures? RQ1: What are your behavior expectations in class? RQ1: How do you do discipline in your class? RQ2: What students are your most challenging students? RQ2: What do you think about the black male discipline gap? What causes it? RQ2: Why do you think that? RQ2: What do you believe you can do to address it? What do you consider disrespectful behavior? And how do you respond? Follow Up Questions:


85

85

1 & 2. What is your seating policy? When the student asked to move, what were your considerations? 3. What accommodations do you make for students? What is your policy regarding physical needs (allergies, bathroom, etc.? 4. I noticed you are in touch with students activity at all times. What is your thinking behind managing the class this way? 5. What is your policy around movement around the classroom? 6 & 7. How do you balance allowances with being consistent? 8. What do you consider defiant behavior? And how do you respond? 9. What do you consider disruptive behavior? And how do you respond?

APPENDIX C: Key Terms

Key Terms

Below are a list of terms in the research questions and operational definitions for them.

a. Disproportionality in this paper means- Overrepresentation of black males in out of school

suspension ratio (total number of suspensions of black males over total number of black male

students) versus White male out of school suspension ratio. This is caused by inequitable and

unfair treatment on a systemic basis according to race and gender (black & male) and not an

overrepresentation of black males exhibiting behavior that warrants suspension (Skiba, 2002).

b. Critical Race Theory in Education- CRT begins with the notion that racism is normal in

American society. Since schooling in the US puports to prepare citizens, CRT examines the

intersection of citizenship and race. (Ladson-Billings, 1998).

c. Effective Teachers- These are teachers who are respected by their principals, students and

families and effective at teaching their subject matter. According to nominating principals,

effective teachers have not sent students out of class at all this school year (Ladson-Billings,

1998; Darling-Hammond, 1998).


86

86

d. Effective Discipline- Discipline strategy that successfully reengages all students, particularly

black males in learning and almost never involves punishment, referrals, or other punitive

measures. This approach to discipline is not colorblind and recognizes the inequitable

circumstances of underserved students and black male students in education. (Haberman, 1991)

e. Discipline Strategies- Deliberate practices the teacher uses to address off task behavior,

disruptive behavior, or challenging behavior in an effort to reengage students in learning.

(Haberman, 1991)

f. Effective Relationships- Purposeful practices that bond the teacher with students appropriately

enabling the teacher to support each student to realize high academic expectations set by the

teacher. (Nell Noddings, 1984)

THE THREE COMMITTMENTS: CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND DISPROPORTIONATE SUSPENSION OF BLACK MALES

Documents

Transcript of THE THREE COMMITTMENTS: CRITICAL RACE THEORY AND DISPROPORTIONATE SUSPENSION OF BLACK MALES