Abstract
Purpose. The purposes of this study were: (1) to investigate the extent to which California comprehensive public high schools use alternative approaches to suspending or removing from school those students who have committed suspendable infractions; (2) to describe the structure, administration, and operating procedures in alternative programs; (3) to analyze differences among the four alternative models; and (4) to identify those models perceived as effective most in reducing recidivism among individuals and discipline infractions generally. Procedure. A two-step mail-out survey procedure was employed to gather information for this study. The first step consisted of a preliminary postcard survey to all comprehensive public high schools in California with a student population of 1,000 or more, a total of 532 schools. The second step consisted of an in-depth survey questionnaire of those responding schools that utilized one or more in-school alternatives to suspension. Principal findings. Seventy-eight percent of the schools indicated that they use some form of alternative program. The most common alternative consisted of students being kept on school grounds, removed from their regular classes, but with assigned school work and no provision for guidance counseling. Programs that do not provide counseling outnumber those that do almost two to one. There was a significant difference between high and low socioeconomic schools in the type of alternative used. High socioeconomic schools were more likely to keep students in regular classes but require additional Saturday school. There were no significant differences among the models studied regarding the degree to which they reduced recidivism with individual students or discipline problems in general. Conclusions and recommendations. The practice of using alternative-to-suspension models as a disciplinary procedure in California comprehensive public high schools is widespread. Thoughtfully designed, in-school alternative programs that offer a way to keep students in school learning, while working out their problems, may prove to be one of the best vehicles to achieve this. It is recommended for future study to see why models utilizing counseling and guidance strategies are not having an impact in reducing recidivism and discipline more than those models that don't.