More than 20 years have passed since the initiation of "zero tolerance" policies that followed passage of The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 (PL No. 103-882, Sec. 14601). Researchers and advocates have long voiced concerns that the Act has resulted in frequent use of negative, reactive, and harsh consequences in schools, including punitive and exclusionary discipline practices (e.g., Skiba et al., 2011; Smith & Harper, 2015). Specifically, suspension, expulsion, changes of placement, and restraint are commonly used to address a variety of youth behaviors. Furthermore, corporal punishment is still used in 19 states to address student misbehavior (The Center for Effective Discipline, 2013). Only recently has the broadening of "zero tolerance" policies received national repudiation (see U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2014b), and many state education agencies (SEAs) and local education agencies (LEAs) and schools have yet to alter their reliance on these approaches. Evidence exists suggesting that the use of punitive and exclusionary discipline practices (i.e., suspensions, expulsions, restraints, corporal punishment, changes of placement) disproportionately affects certain youth, and national trends have indicated the disproportionate use of punitive discipline practices across gender, race, and disability (Bowman-Perrott et al.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether students’ academic self-efficacy levels increase through a 20 week of education that is based on the problem-based learning theory and transmitted in an inter-disciplinary manner in Project Children’s University. The project aimed to teach students to learn how to learn. Eventually, students will be life-long learners and gain sustainable learning skills. In order to observe the effect of Project Children’s University, academic self-efficacy levels are measured in terms of “self-efficacy in ability”, “context”, and “education quality domains”. Changes in treatment group students’ academic self-efficacy levels are modeled in growth curve modeling framework throughout three waves. Then, they are compared with those of control group students using Welch’s t test. Results have shown that the levels of academic self-efficacy throughout the research have fallen significantly for the treatment group students. In addition, the levels of self-efficacy in ability of the treatment group students were significantly higher than the levels of the control group students. On the other hand, the levels of context of the treatment group students were significantly lower than the levels of the control group students. In conclusion, Project Children’s University has failed to increase students’ academic self-efficacy levels, but entitled them to understand what academic self-efficacy really means, to socialize, to be self-confident students, and to criticize themselves more rationally.

No abstract

No abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of Head Start on early literacy skills relevant to school readiness of English language learners compared to their peers. The comparisons of literacy outcomes were conducted between English language learners and non-English language learners when both groups participated and were not in Head Start. A total of 47 covariates were involved in propensity score analysis, and average treatment effects for the treated individuals were used to estimate the literacy outcome differences from the comparisons. The results indicated that early literacy outcomes of English language learners and non-English language learners were significantly different in recognizing alphabetic letters and rhyming words regardless of whether or not both English language learners and non-English language learners attend in Head Start. Being in Head Start did not contribute to reducing the gap between English language learners and non-English language learners. Finally, the limitations of this study and future directions for research and practice are discussed.