Beyond Black and White

• Date: 01 December 2018
• Author: Mark Alden Morgan,John Paul Wright
• DOI: 10.1177/0734016817721293
• Published date: 01 December 2018
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

Beyond Black and White:

Suspension Disparities for

Hispanic, Asian, and

White Youth

Mark Alden Morgan

1

and John Paul Wright

1,2

Abstract

Studies have consistently found a significant gap between Black and White students in various forms of

school discipline. Few studies, however, have examined disciplinary differences between other racial and

ethnic groups. Focusing on out-of-school suspensions, a punishment closely linked to the “school-to-

prison pipeline,” we investigate the disparities betweenHispanic,Asian,andWhiteyouth.Datafromthe

Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class are used to control for contemporary socio-

economic variables, the context of the school environment, and the parent-reported behavior of the

student. Through a series of logistic regression models, we found that White students were significantly

more likely to be suspended than were Hispanics or Asians. However, while the disparity between His-

panics and Whites was eliminated after controlling for student misbehavior, the gap persisted between

Asians and Whites. These results question the contention that systemic racial discrimination is a leading

contributor to group differences in school discipline. Moreover, we add to a limited but growing literature

showing Asian students are significantly less likely to experience school punishments including suspension.

Keywords

suspension, school discipline, exclusionary discipline, racial disparity, school-to-prison pipeline

Concern over racial disparities in school discipline within the United States has been a long-

standing issue, spanning over four decades of research (Children’s Defense Fun d, 1975; Rocque

& Paternoster, 2011; Wu, Pink, Crain, & Moles, 1982). According to reports by the U.S. Depart-

ment of Education, the percentage of children suspended differs substantially across racial and

ethnic groups (KewalRamani, Gilbertson, Fox, & Provasnik, 2007). For example, in a nationwide

survey from 2007, parents of children in the 6th to 12th grades were asked whether their child had

ever received a suspension, whether in school or out of school. Approximately 43%of Blacks,

1

School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

2

Center for Social and Humanities Research, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Corresponding Author:

Mark Alden Morgan, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati, ML 210389, 660 Teacher-Dyer Hall, Clifton Avenue,

Cincinnati, OH 45221, USA.

Email: morganmk@mail.uc.edu

Criminal Justice Review

2018, Vol. 43(4) 377-398

ª2017 Georgia State University

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0734016817721293

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjr

22%of Hispanics, 16%of Whites, and 11%of Asians had been suspended (Aud, Fox, &

KewalRamani, 2010). Most research efforts, however, have focused on the disparity between

Black and White youth. These studies converge to find that Black students are 2 to 3 times more

likely than their White peers to be suspended (Skiba, Michael, Nardo, & Peterson, 2000).

Although studies have also investigated office referrals, expulsions, and even corporal punish-

ment (J. F. Gregory, 1995; Rocque, 2010), the emphasis placed on suspensions has been regarded

as especially important. Suspensions occur with greater relative frequency, are sometimes asso-

ciated with zero-tolerance policies, and are an integral part of the alleged “school-to-prison

pipeline” (Wald & Losen, 2003).

Consequently, the school-to-prison pipeline has become an organizing framework from which

disciplinary differentials are understood. While no single definition of the pipeline exists, several

recurrent themes have begun to develop in the literature (Skiba, Arredondo, & Williams, 2014).

According to this line of research, students are often met with the widespread and systematic use

of exclusionary school discipline (e.g., suspension and expulsion) as punishment for school

infractions which removes them from the classroom environment or involves them with the

juvenile justice system (Gordon, Della Piana, & Keleher, 2000; Krezmien, Leone, & Wilson,

2014). Direct contact with the court system may result from the commission of serious crimes

but can also be influenced by the increasing presence of school resource officers and their ability

to arrest students for a wide range of minor offenses (Wolf, 2014). Furthermore, it has been

demonstrated that the school-to-prison pipeline disproportionately involves students of color and

that school officials may treat the misbehaviors of Black and other minority students more harshly,

in part, because they hold negative stereotypes of non-White youth (James, 2012; Lewis, Butler,

Bonner, & Joubert, 2010; Rudd, 2014; Skiba et al., 2011). Critical theorists have also argued that

the pipeline is simply an extension of the “prison–industrial complex” intended to empower

Whites while disenfranchising people of color (Fasching-Varner, Mitchell, Martin, & Bennett-

Haron, 2014; McGrew, 2016). However, once marginalized, the long-term repercussions for

students on the pipeline path are grim, resulting in, “a host of negative developmental conse-

quences, including diminished academic success and disengagement from school” (Rocque &

Paternoster, 2011, p. 637). Adjudicated youth, upon being released from juvenile placement, will

yet again face serious procedural obstacles that can stifle their ability to reintegrate into school,

inevitably leading to dropout (Feierman, Levick, & Mody, 2009).

Beyond this, at-risk youth disconnected from the school environment may turn to crime and

delinquency, funneling them down the “prison track” where they serve to reinforce negative racial

stereotypes in society (Payne & Welch, 2010; Wald & Losen, 2003). Indeed, racial disproportion in

suspensions has been linked to racial disproportion in juvenile court referrals, and exclusionary

discipline itself has been associated with higher incidences of arrest even for youth without a history

of behavioral problems (Monahan, VanDerhei, Bechtold, & Cauffman, 2014; Nicholson-Crotty,

Birchmeier, & Valentine, 2009). Recent longitudinal studies have also found that suspended stu-

dents are significantly more likely to engage in illegal activity during adulthood, including serious

violent crime, to experience criminal victimization and to be incarcerated (Katsiyannis, Thompson,

Barrett, & Kingree, 2012; Wolf & Kupchik, 2016). Noting these statistical associations, the U.S.

Department of Justice and the Department of Education issued a joint declaration to examine school

disciplinary practices, to ensure compliance with civil rights legislation, and to promote a climate for

safe learning (Holder & Duncan, 2011).

Explanations for the School Discipline Gap

Factors to account for the school discipline gap have generally focused on three major areas of

inquiry: (1) the socioeconomic status of the student or their school; (2) the context of the school

378 Criminal Justice Review 43(4)