Mo’ Data, Mo’ Problems: Making Sense of Racial Discipline Disparities in a Large Diversifying Suburban High School

Abstract

This article explores the effects of sensemaking interventions on a group of educators' race-conscious problem analysis of racial discipline disparities. Research Method: I conducted this research in a predominantly White diversifying suburban high school that served roughly1,600 students. To understand how sensemaking interventions shaped teachers' racial ways of knowing, I conducted an ethnographic content analysis of 14 transcribed teacher focus group and data retreat exchanges to identify conversational patterns related to their problem framings. Findings: I found that providing diverse data types reflecting a range of racial perspectives offered cues that enabled organizational members to notice and (partially) disrupt the personal and organizational racism and race-evasive tendencies that drive the reproduction of racial inequities in school discipline. Implications for Research and Practice: Offering teachers sensemaking opportunities that prompt collective racial awareness and critical self-reflection can instigate shifts in racial ways of knowing that are critical to understanding and addressing discipline culture and climate problems in racially diversifying schools.

High School Teachers’ Perceptions of Restorative Discipline Practices

“…Rather, training around restorative approaches must also include culturally relevant professional development opportunities that address educators' attitudes and beliefs. White supremacy, racism, and implicit biases must be challenged and transformed to strengthen the fidelity of program implementation and consequent organizational change (Irby, 2018;Lustick, 2017).…”

“…Comparing teachers' perceptions based in identity intersectionalities, such as race/ethnicity, gender, and class, is an important area for further inquiry. Irby's (2018) work on teachers' sensemaking around collective racial awareness and critical self-reflection would be an important guide for us.…”

“…Relatively recently, attention has shifted to alternative discipline practices to address the problem of disproportionality; that is, the overrepresentation of particular subgroups in disciplinary referrals and exclusionary punishment, especially students of color, males, and those identified for special education services DeMatthews, Carey, Olivarez, & Saeedi, 2017;Golden, 1993;Irby, 2018;Lustick, 2017;Ryan, Katsiyannis, Peterson, & Chmelar, 2007;Williams et al, 2015). For at least a decade, we have recognized that this pattern of disproportionality is liable, at least in part, to the incarceration of Black men and youth as well as former special education students Lustick, 2017).…”

Implementing Restorative Justice in an Urban Elementary School: A Principal’s Commitment and Experiences Eliminating Exclusionary Discipline

“…Consequently, some teachers and families expressed concern about restorative justice and its overall impact on the school. Prior research suggests that principals need to be mindful of context and how their actions might be interpreted when implementing reforms associated with addressing inequities, such as racial discipline gaps (DeMatthews et al, 2017; Irby, 2018; Lustick, 2017; Mansfield et al, 2018; Wadhwa, 2015).…”

Incentivizing improvement or imposition? An examination of the response to gubernatorial school takeover and statewide turnaround districts

“…Prior studies have used sensemaking theory to investigate how teachers construct meaning from reading policy (Coburn, 2001), evidence use in central district offices (Honig & Coburn, 2008), and how sensemaking is a key element of effective policy implementation with regard to recent educational accountability reforms (Spillane et al, 2002). Sensemaking theory has also been applied to school discipline disproportionality to better understand how teachers make sense of data related to school discipline (Irby, 2018). Whether trying to make sense of data use or evidence (Honig & Coburn, 2008), or of impending changes to their workplace (Jensen et al, 2009), practitioners rely on their past experiences, their own working knowledge, and the information immediately available to them to determine their response (Marsh et al, 2005;Spillane et al, 2002).…”