Do no-excuses disciplinary practices promote success?

Getting Developmental Science Back Into Schools: Can What We Know About Self-Regulation Help Change How We Think About “No Excuses”?

“…Practices such as data-driven instruction, extended instructional time, high-dosage tutoring, rigorous and intensive professional development for teachers, and high expectations seem to better explain academic achievement in these schools (Dobbie and Fryer, 2013; Torres and Golann, 2018). By contrast, Golann and Torres (2018) in their review of the literature on “no excuses” disciplinary practices found that there is no evidence to suggest that “no excuses” or “zero tolerance” discipline practices are positively linked to student achievement and may in fact undermine other aspects of student success and well-being. We argue that “no excuses” practices may be actively harmful to the development of healthy social-emotional skills and behavior.…”

“…Common features of “no excuses” behavior policies include: (1) extremely high expectations for young children’s behavior, for example calling for 100% of students on task 100% of the time (Lemov, 2015), (2) use of negative consequences or punishment, including removal from classroom, loss of privileges, and public reprimands for minor infractions such as classroom interruptions or not correctly standing in line (Lamboy and Lu, 2017), and (3) a reliance on highly structured, adult-control of behavior, such as physically re-situating children’s hands on their desks, or rigidly prescribing in detail how children should look when they are appropriately engaged (Goodman, 2013; Lemov, 2015; Taylor, 2015). Some argue that this approach to school discipline mirrors the broken windows theory of policing (Kelling and Wilson, 1982), in which teachers are instructed to “sweat the small stuff” (Whitman, 2008) and students are given automatic consequences for behaviors like eye-rolling or squirming in their seats (Balogh, 2016; Balonon-Rosen, 2016; Golann and Torres, 2018). Often conceptualized in the context of charter management organizations (CMOs), elements of “no excuses” and exclusionary disciplinary practices can also be found in public and private schools across the United States.…”

“…This catch-22 leads many districts to resort to what appear to be quick-fix solutions relying on adult-regulation and strict control of children’s everyday behaviors. Scientific studies about the importance of grit, self-discipline, and similar skills are sometimes used to justify the “no excuses” approach to learning and behavior (Whitman, 2008; Sondel, 2016), but this approach to behavior management is a misinterpretation of research on self-regulation 1 and paradoxically can undermine children’s opportunities to develop critical social and emotional skills (Golann, 2015; Lewis, 2015; Engber, 2016; Sondel, 2016; West et al, 2016; Golann and Torres, 2018; Soutter, 2019) – skills that are a foundation for success in school and life-long health (Jones and Bouffard, 2012). Indeed, more and more “no excuses” schools explicitly state that they focus on character, values, and other SEL-related skills.…”

“We Make Our Own Rules Here”: Democratic Communities, Corporate Logics, and “No Excuses” Practices in a Charter School Management Organization

“…As Saltman (2007, 146) argues, “Neoliberalism appears in the now common sense framing of education through presumed ideals of upward individual economic mobility (the promise of cashing in knowledge for jobs) and the social ideals of global economic competition.” While the motivation of ensuring children can escape poverty is no doubt laudable, the methods of its enactment arguably threaten global democratic ideals by shifting the focus away from democratic political discourse and decision making, onto the blunt economic rationality of neoliberal subjectivity. Moreover, in the face of suggestions that such methods do not even, necessarily, contribute to “closing the gap” in academic success for marginalized students (Golann and Torres 2018), it seems pertinent to continue a rigorous critique of the NE model.…”

Charter School Leadership and Exclusionary Discipline: Navigating the Intersection of Autonomy, Equity, and Accountability

“…As such, charter school principals at times have to reconcile competing priorities that come from within (e.g., school board, teachers, parents) and outside of the organization (e.g., state policy, charter authorizers). For example, in recent years, a number of no-excuses charter schools—those that have extended learning time, use data to drive instruction, employ an intensive selection and development process for teachers, and have a highly structured disciplinary system (Golann, 2015)—have come under fire due to exclusionary discipline policies that make frequent use of suspension and expulsion (Golann & Torres, 2018). Those calling for discipline reform in no-excuses charter schools often point to concerns around equity, particularly, as students of color tend to be disproportionately suspended and expelled (Skiba, Arredondo, & Williams, 2014; Steinberg & Lacoe, 2017).…”