62 DISCIPLINARY ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM PLACEMENT TRENDS AND RECIDIVISM RISK FACTORS Tyler Yarbrough, EdD Journal of K-12 Educational Research 2021, VOL. 5, ISSUE 1 www.dbu.edu/doctoral/edd Context School practices and policies have yielded disproportionately high exclusionary discipline rates for the most vulnerable students: the economicallydisadvantaged, minorities, those with special needs, and those who identify as bisexual, gay, lesbian, and transgender (Losen, 2015; Mittleman, 2018b; Vincent et al., 2012). Exclusionary discipline practices—including inschool suspensions, out-of-school suspensions, disciplinary alternative education program (DAEP) placements, juvenile justice alternative education program (JJAEP) placements, and expulsions—unevenly affect minority students in both frequency and severity of the sanctions (Balfanz et al., 2015; Fowler, 2011; Losen, 2013; Welsh & Little, 2018). These practices result in lower student achievement and a shift in affected students’ life trajectory (Welsh & Little, 2018). In fact, when students receive exclusionary consequences, it results in repeated school removals and a higher risk of juvenile arrest (Mittleman, 2018a). The consequences of recurrent disciplinary penalties are grave, and they have far-reaching impact on society at large. That is the catalyst of the current study. Introduction At a large, suburban school district, students who have committed certain offenses as outlined in the District’s Code of Conduct or who have broken state laws are temporarily placed in a DAEP. Attendance in the program is mandated for a determined period of time (Texas Education Agency, 2007). Within the target District, there are two off-campus DAEP sites: one for elementary and middle school students, and the other is specifically for high school students. The current study focused on the high school DAEP. Students may be placed at a DAEP more than once; for the purpose of the current study, this phenomenon is called recidivism. Although research exploring DAEP recidivism is limited, researchers have defined recidivists as students who have more than one DAEP placement in a single school year (Anzalone, 2015; Barrera, 2011; Booker & Mitchell, 2011). The current study probed general placement trends, recidivism patterns, and factors that impact recidivism. Furthermore, the current study examined the sociodemographic features of DAEP recidivists. Literature Review Over the last decade, researchers have found that minority students are more likely to be placed in a DAEP than their White and Asian peers; minority students also have a higher risk of DAEP recidivism (Booker & Mitchell, 2011; Vanderhaar, 2010). Booker and Mitchell (2011) concluded that minority students and boys were more likely to be referred to DAEPs for discretionary reasons and were more likely to return within the same school year. Some researchers contend that recidivism was the result of inadequacies at the home campus (Avery, 2016; Cobb, 2008). Cobb (2008) found that students who struggled academically and behaviorally lacked positive relationships with teachers and administrators at their home campus before their DAEP placement were more likely to return to the DAEP. Avery (2016) found that home campus limitations—school structure, population size, students labeled as “troublemakers” or “bad students” by home campus administrators, teachers who struggle with
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODc4ODgx