Rand Study: Reducing Suspensions Doesn’t Improve Academic Performance

Maciej Bledowski / Getty Images

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Here’s some unwelcome news. The usual caveat applies: it’s just one study in one place, so don’t take it too seriously. But in a large-scale test of “restorative practices” in the Pittsburgh Public School District, the results were disappointing. Half the district participated in a program to reduce disciplinary suspensions—especially the disproportionate use of suspensions among minority students—in an effort to improve both the atmosphere of the school and academic achievement. PPSD implemented a program from the International Institute for Restorative Practices called SaferSanerSchools Whole-School Change, and it did indeed reduce suspensions and improve school climates (as rated by teachers). However, there was also this:

Don’t worry too much about all the jargon in these tables. What’s important is that nearly all the numbers are negative. Student achievement (on the left) fell in all subjects and among all demographic groups. At the same time, student evaluations of teachers (on the right) declined on every single variable.

This was a large-scale test, so its results have to be taken seriously. At the same time, it ran for only two years, and that might not have been enough time for restorative practices to show any impact. The important thing, probably, is to take the results seriously enough to try to figure out how programs like this can be improved. We should give up on them only if we do that and they continue to fail.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate