A strengths-based approach to promoting prosocial behavior among African American and Latino students.

This article presents an overview of a strengths-based school discipline initiative that was developed in response to the high suspension and expulsion rates of African American and Latino male students at a racially diverse, urban high school in California. A school task force made up of adult and youth stakeholders devised a series of interventions that included student-led efforts to improve discipline policies and procedures. The initiative builds on the Strengths-Based School Counseling framework explicated by Galassi and Akos (2007), which stimulates and promotes personal accountability, leadership, resiliency, self-management, and social competence in students as opposed to merely reducing student deficits.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

A large corpus of scholarship concerning African American and Latino students relies heavily on deficit paradigms that emphasize concerns about familial stressors, disengagement from school, academic underachievement, and inappropriate behavior (Hipolito-Delgado & Lee, 2007; Smith, 2006; Tucker, 1999; Villalba, 2007). Although these issues represent veritable realities for a host of African American and Latino students, a scant amount of scholarship emphasizes these students' resiliency or strengths, despite recommendations within the professional literature to build on the strengths students possess (Galassi & Akos, 2007).

Numerous studies have revealed the disproportionate rates of discipline referral, suspension, and expulsion experienced by African American students in particular (Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Mendez, Knoff, & Ferron, 2002; Morris & Goldring, 1999; Schiraldi & Ziedenberg, 2001). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2003), African American students are more than 2 times as likely to be suspended from school as Caucasian students. Skiba, Michael, Nardo, and Peterson (2002) examined the referral rates of middle school students during a one-year period and concluded that compared to their Caucasian peers, African American students received a disproportionately high number of suspensions and expulsions from school for subjectively defined acts of defiance that were often difficult to substantiate. In marked contrast, Caucasian students were more likely to receive referrals for more clearly defined disciplinary infractions that were easier to quantify such as truancy, smoking, and vandalism.

Research documenting the discipline rates of Latino students tends to be more equivocal. Whereas some data indicate that the suspension and expulsion rates of Latino students appear consistent with their representation in the population, other data demonstrate that Latino students have disproportionately high discipline rates (Bay Area School Reform Collaborative, 2001; Schiraldi & Ziedenberg, 2001). For instance, according to the NCES (2002), Latinos make up 16% of students in the United States but 20% of all suspensions. When researchers disaggregated data by state, a more glaring set of discrepancies surfaced. To illustrate, in a large Florida school district, Latino females comprised 9% of the student population yet 35% of suspensions for inappropriate behavior. In Texas, Reyes (2006) found that Latino students were two times more likely to receive long-term suspensions during the 2003-2004 school year. Ironically, her findings indicated that only 5% of all school suspensions occurred for mandatory school infractions such as committing felonies, possessing drugs, lewd behavior, or retaliation against a school employee. That 95% of out-of-school suspensions resulted from persistent misbehavior led Reyes to conclude that school removal procedures are left largely to the discretion of administrators.

Punitive disciplinary practices have created consternation for many educators, especially since suspension and expulsion do not improve student conduct, achievement, or relationships with teachers (Gregory & Weinstein, in press; Reyes, 2006; Skiba & Knesting, 2001). Previous research demonstrates that, if anything, mounting suspension rates actually erode the school climate and exacerbate discipline problems (Mendez et al., 2002; Skiba et al., 2002). This finding has led a growing number of researchers to consider efforts to facilitate improved relationships between students and teachers. As an example, Cothran, Kulinna, and Garrahy (2003) examined students' perceptions of teacher actions which contributed to effective student behavior. Students asserted that improved behavioral outcomes resulted from clearly articulated classroom management systems that teachers enforced consistently and student-teacher relationships that exuded warmth, nurturing, care, respect, and open communication. Similarly, Gregory and Weinstein (in press) studied African American students who received disciplinary referrals for defiance. Comparisons between referring and non-referring teachers demonstrated that students trusted teachers' authority when teachers exhibited caring attitudes and maintained high academic expectations.

The findings cited herein provide a compelling rationale for school counselors to implement interventions that promote developmental assets such as personal accountability, leadership, resiliency, self-management, personal empowerment, social competence, while simultaneously cultivating students' ability to work effectively with adults and other authority figures (Galassi & Akos, 2007; Rausch & Skiba, 2006; Tucker, 1999). Interventions that promote developmental assests are important, especially since over the long run mounting disciplinary referrals, suspensions, and expulsions do not generally improve behavior and sometimes result in negative outcomes such as school dropout, illegal behavior, and incarceration (Edelman, Holzer, & Offner, 2006; Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Schiraldi & Ziedenberg, 2001). Moreover, the ASCA National Model[R] (2005) urges school counselors to use their skills in advocacy, leadership, collaboration, and systemic change to promote equity and access for all students in an effort to promote school success. In the discussion that follows, we present a strengths-based school discipline initiative that was developed in response to the high suspension and expulsion rates of African American and Latino male students at a racially diverse urban high school in California.

STUDENT-LED EFFORTS TO IMPROVE SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

In the late 1990s, Skyline High School in Oakland suffered from a crisis in school discipline. Located in the affluent Oakland Hills, the school served a diverse student population, with a racial/ethnic composition that was approximately one-half African American, one-fourth Asian American, one-eighth Latino, and one-eighth White. The busing of low-income students of color largely contributed to Skyline High's diversity. Like in many diverse schools, academic tracking into high ability and low ability classrooms segregated students racially within the school, with White and Asian students tracked disproportionately into high ability classrooms, and African American and Latino students tracked disproportionately into the low ability courses (Oakes, 2005). Although teachers of students in high ability classes rarely concerned themselves with classroom discipline, a significant proportion of teachers in the lower ability classes struggled regularly with maintaining order in the classroom. Consequently, some teachers chose to adopt zero tolerance policies for student misbehavior, giving out referrals for suspension to students whom they perceived to be out of line.

Although on the surface, discipline policies at Skyline High School appeared to be race and gender neutral, they were not. Consistent with the professional literature (Gregory & Weinstein, in press; Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Skiba et al., 2002), African American boys and, to a lesser extent, Latino boys received most of the referrals for suspension. In the 1998-99 school year alone, school staff administered over 900 referrals for suspension. Although some students received multiple referrals, this figure was nonetheless alarmingly high for a school that enrolled 2,350 students. Particularly troublesome was the fact that non-Asian boys of color received four fifths of the referrals although they comprised just under one third of the student population. In other words, African American and Latino boys were eight times more likely than the rest of the student population to receive a referral. At the same time, the overrepresentation in suspension referrals was more severe for African American boys than for Latino boys.

Among the first to voice a concern about the high suspension rates among males of color were students involved in Youth Together, a multiracial youth leadership and violence prevention program housed at Skyline and other schools in Alameda and West Contra Costa Counties (Youth Together, n.d.). The following account is based on Youth Together's written documentation of student-led efforts and the reflections of the second author, who worked as an evaluator of Youth Together from 1998 to 1999 and then joined the staff from 2000 to 2002.

The Youth Together program convened groups of diverse students during lunchtime and after school hours. During meetings, students shared stories of unfair disciplinary procedures in the classroom. Many believed that some teachers regularly sent African American and Latino males out of the classroom without a formal disciplinary referral, while others suspended them for minor infractions such as questioning directives, talking out of turn, or chewing gum. Meanwhile, students felt that teachers did not subject girls and White and Asian students to the same disciplinary procedures. Students expressed concern that teachers felt easily intimidated by African American and Latino males, and would therefore prefer to send them out of the classroom than develop constructive classroom management techniques. Essentially, student perceptions and observations corroborated much of the research literature (Cothran et al., 2003; Skiba et al., 2002).

With the support of teachers, a school counselor, and other adult allies, Youth Together students initiated meetings with the school administration, teachers, individual school counselors, parent organizations, and other student groups to discuss the problem. They also conducted a survey of teachers and students to identify the strengths and areas of improvement of current policies and procedures. Although the survey sample was small (N = 100), it revealed teacher and student consensus about the need for more equitable treatment of students, uniformity in the application of disciplinary procedures across classrooms, and training and support for teachers on classroom management. The resulting efforts led to the development of the school discipline committee, composed of Youth Together students, student representatives from other organizations, teachers, school administrators, parents, a counselor, community representatives (including Youth Together staff), and the school police officer.

The group met monthly to develop solutions to the high rates of African American and Latino male suspensions. Their first task was to track referrals for suspension by race and type of offense using data compiled by the school administration. The school discipline committee immediately detected a pattern in referrals for suspension. They noted that teachers gave out very few referrals for serious infractions such as fighting, reckless and threatening behavior, or substance abuse. Instead teachers administered most referrals for an infraction labeled "defiance of authority." Consistent with the professional literature (Cothran et al., 2003; Mendez & Knoff, 2003; Reyes, 2006), school discipline committee members recognized that school discipline policies and procedures did not clearly define behaviors that fell under the "defiance of authority" category, giving individual teachers discretion on the types of student activities that they refuse to tolerate. In fact, students and teachers on the school disciplinary committee reported that behavioral expectations varied from classroom to classroom and that teachers had different perceptions of what student defiance entailed.

The school counselor played an important role in this initiative. She drew on her experience working one-on-one with students to validate, expand upon, and sometimes constructively challenge students' perspectives. She was also key in connecting other school counselors to the efforts of the school discipline committee. Similarly, Galassi and Akos (2007) asserted that given the revised contexts in which school counselors now work, their roles have evolved such that instead of initiating individually oriented interventions that reach a small segment of the school population, school counselors are called upon now more than ever to work collaboratively with school personnel and community stakeholders to optimize students' strengths and strength-enhancing environments.

The school discipline committee developed several interventions to ensure more equitable disciplinary policies and procedures. The first was to ensure that all faculty and students were aware of the schoolwide rules and consequences as detailed in the student handbook. The school administration mandated that teachers visibly post the student rules and consequences in their classrooms and uphold them. The school discipline committee believed that the posting of rules and consequences could help contribute to greater consistency in the administration of disciplinary referrals among school faculty.

Second, Youth Together students, with the support of Youth Together staff and Skyline teachers, hosted several lunchtime workshops on student rights and responsibilities. To attract their peers to these workshops, students invited all those concerned about unfair disciplinary practices to attend these meetings. They distributed fliers and made announcements about the workshops over the school intercom. During these workshops, diverse student leaders shared statistics about the high rates of African American and Latino suspensions, outlined school rules and procedures, and discussed proper channels to challenge a suspension referral. They also invited student participants to share their experiences of unfair disciplinary treatment.

Participation in this initiative helped Youth Together students refine their problem solving, personal advocacy, self-management, empowerment, and social competence skills. As leaders and role models in the school, they worked conjointly with school personnel and community representatives to address inequitable disciplinary practices, enhanced their public speaking skills by articulating their concerns to school personnel, created safe and inviting climates in which their peers could articulate concerns about the school's discipline policies, and communicated behavioral expectations and school rules to their peers. Youth Together students also learned invaluable skills for using data to make logical and coherent arguments. Youth Together students were thrust into new roles that emphasized their competencies in lieu of their deficits.

A third intervention consisted of an after-school faculty and staff in-service facilitated by students, teachers, and other adult allies on how to promote a positive school climate. During the workshop, teachers, counselors, and other adults were divided into groups of five to seven and were joined by two to three students. Student participants included Youth Together members and other Skyline students who had experienced a disciplinary referral. Most of the student participants were males of color. During the in-service, students teamed up with adult facilitators (including Youth Together staff, school counselors, teachers, parents, and representatives from other local community-based organizations) to lead small-group discussions that helped participants identify the types of teaching strategies and discipline procedures that enabled positive student behavior. Ground rules required that names and specific information about negative disciplinary experiences not be shared. Instead, discussions focused on strategies that promoted effective classroom management.

While students shared strategies that led to their own cooperation with teacher directives, teachers shared practices that had proven effective in their own classrooms. In some instances, teachers asked for suggestions on how to deal with challenging situations. At the end of the workshop, each small group shared what they had learned from the discussion. Although a handful of teachers felt that the burden of improving the school climate fell on the students, most counselors, teachers, and other school staff found the in-service effective, and were especially impressed by the positive disciplinary strategies shared by students who were considered by some as trouble-makers. Students benefited by learning more about teachers' points of views regarding discipline issues in the classroom. Their participation also fostered their self-esteem, enhanced their leadership skills, and increased their personal investment in improving the school's climate.

The chair of the school discipline committee, a school administrator, took charge of a fourth intervention. He worked with other administrators to identify teachers with the highest numbers of disciplinary referrals, observed their classrooms, and offered them guidance on classroom management techniques. Needless to say, the names of teachers identified for observation and guidance were kept confidential.

Finally, the school discipline committee developed another survey to identify additional measures for improving school discipline. Youth Together students administered the school discipline committee's survey to 245 students, faculty, and staff. Survey results were used for developing recommendations for alternatives to out-of-school suspension and services for students who are consistently disruptive or who engage in unhealthy behaviors. This initiative was especially important because time out of school disrupts the learning process (Reyes, 2006; Skiba et al., 2002).

As a result of the combined effects of these interventions, the number of suspensions at Skyline High School declined by over 75% during the 2000-2001 school year. Additionally, the school discipline committee's recommendations paved the way for the development of the Skyline One Land One People Youth Center, which opened in the 2002-2003 school year, offering mental health services, academic tutoring, and youth development programs.

Various factors enabled the success of the school discipline committee's interventions, including the leadership of students; the validation of student concerns and viewpoints by adult stakeholders; acknowledgement of the unjust disparity in the suspension rates of males of color; the leadership of the school administration in addressing the problem; and a commitment by teachers, counselors, school security offers, parents, and community representatives to improve the school's dismal disciplinary statistics.

DISCUSSION

In far too many school districts across the United States, the school failure and poor behavior among African American and Latino males are regarded as inevitable. Such an orientation focuses undue attention on student deficits to the exclusion of their strengths (Smith, 2006; Tucker, 1999). This article described an intervention that incorporated an advocacy strength-based approach in an effort to resolve school related disciplinary problems that threatened to undermine the learning environment. The intervention draws largely upon the collective efficacy of school personnel including classroom teachers, administrators, and school counselors; family members such as parents; and community stakeholders such as community activists and student leaders involved in Youth Together, a youth leadership and violence prevention program. This particular partnership worked collaboratively and cohesively to create a dynamic interaction between all stakeholders, which helped to reduce the suspension rate by more than 75%.

Most notably, the success of this program rested on the synergy created by the multifaceted membership of the school discipline committee. For instance, school personnel were receptive to family and community engagement in an effort to ameliorate the school climate. In turn, community activists maintained a strong commitment and understanding of the contextual dimensions of race, ethnicity, and culture as they pertain to the schooling of African American and Latino students and used their passion to work cohesively and reciprocally with school personnel to help reduce and eliminate oppressive conditions for students. Adults within the school and community (e.g., Youth Together) enlisted students as arbiters within the school discipline process.

The most salient component of the program involved the substantive involvement of students as stakeholders within the school discipline committee. More specifically, school personnel in conjunction with adult leaders from the Youth Together organization empowered youth to use data to devise persuasive, compelling, and empirically supported arguments to articulate grievances about disciplinary practices within the school. Essentially, adult allies did what Delpit (1988) referred to as teaching students the code of power by stimulating and promoting students' interpersonal and communicative competencies in order to help them negotiate conflict successfully with authority figures in the school in healthy, pro-social ways. Students in turn acquired self-management skills (Tucker, 1999), developed their leadership and personal advocacy skills, and served as role models for their peers. These actions correspond to emerging strength-oriented scholarship in school counseling.

For example, Hipolito-Delgado and Lee (2007) asserted the importance of school counselors' use of empowerment theory to help ethnic minority students engage in activist interventions that develop critical consciousness, healthy identity functioning, and social action in an effort to reduce and eliminate the oppressive forces in students' lives. Further, Galassi and Akos (2007) provided an extensive review of an SBSC framework that seeks to promote resources, maximize strengths, reinforce resiliency, instill intrinsic motivation, and optimize human functioning in students within a school counseling context.

We surmise that professional school counselors can incorporate tenets associated with empowerment theory, developmental advocacy, or Strengths-Based School Counseling (Galassi & Akos, 2007) in order to replicate similar actions that enhance successful school outcomes for African American and Latino males in accordance with the expectations for advocacy, leadership, collaboration, and systemic change prescribed by ASCA (2005). Given the scope and magnitude of this intervention, opportunities abound for school counselors to share their training and expertise with constituents (e.g., school personnel, students, community representatives, families). For instance, school counselors can use their multicultural counseling competencies to help teachers and other school personnel recognize and respond appropriately to the cultural correlates of behavior; empower students by emphasizing their strength and resilience as opposed to their deficits (Hipolito-Delgado & Lee, 2007); help students advocate on their own behalf by teaching them prosocial strategies to challenge inequitable school practices (Delpit, 1988; Hipolito-Delgado & Lee; Tucker, 1999); and provide leadership in the use data to drive decision making (Dahir & Stone, 2003), to name a few. The possibility for working collaboratively with stakeholders in an effort to stem the growing tide of disproportionate suspension rates among African American and Latino students is not formulaic but rests largely upon the school counselors' ability to work collaboratively with other stakeholders and customize programmatic strength-oriented interventions to fit the specific and unique circumstances within their schools.

References

American School Counselor Association. (2005). The ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Author.

Bay Area School Reform Collaborative. (2001). The color of discipline: Understanding racial disparity in school discipline practices. San Francisco: Author.

Cothran, D.J., Kulinna, R H., & Garrahy, D. A. (2003). "This is kind of giving a secret away ...": Students' perspectives on effective class management. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 435-444.

Dahir, C. A., & Stone, C. B. (2003). Accountability: A M.E.A.S.U.R.E. of the impact school counselors have on student achievement. Professional School Counseling, 8, 214-222.

Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-298.

Edelman, R, Holzer, H. J., & Offner, R (2006). Reconnecting disadvantaged young men. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Galassi, J. R, & Akos, R (2007). Strengths-Based School Counseling: Promoting student development and achievement. Mahwah, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (in press).The discipline gap and African Americans: Defiance or cooperation in the high school classroom. Journal of School Psychology.

Hipolito-Delgado, C. P., & Lee, C. C. (2007). Empowerment theory for the professional school counselor: A manifesto for what really works. Professional School Counseling, 10, 327-332.

Mendez, L. M. R, & Knoff, H. M. (2003).Who gets suspended from school and why: A demographic analysis of schools and disciplinary infractions in a large school district. Education and Treatment of Children, 26, 30-51.

Mendez, L. M. R, & Knoff, H. M., & Ferron, J. M. (2002). School demographic variables and out-of-school suspension rates: A quantitative and qualitative analysis of a large, ethnically diverse school district. Psychology in the Schools, 39, 259-277.

Morris, J. E., & Goldring, E. (1999). Are magnet schools more equitable? An analysis of the disciplinary rates of African American and White students in Cincinnati magnet and nonmagnet schools. Equity and Excellence in Education, 32, 59-65.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). Statistical analysis report September 2002, public alternative schools and programs for students at risk of education failure: 2000-2001. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Status and trends in the education of racial and ethnic minorities. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. (2007). Expanding and improving early education for Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Author.

Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Reyes, A. H. (2006). Discipline, achievement, and race: Is zero tolerance the answer? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

Schiraldi, V., & Ziedenberg, J. (2001). Schools and suspensions: Self-reported crime and the growing use of suspensions. Washington, DC: The Justice Policy Institute.

Skiba, R. J., & Knesting, K. (2001). Zero tolerance, zero evidence: An analysis of school disciplinary practice. In R.J. Skiba & G. G. Noam (Eds.), New directions for youth development, No. 92 (pp. 17-43). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. L. (2002). The color of discipline: Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment. Urban Review, 34, 317-342.

Smith, E. J. (2006).The strength-based counseling model. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 13-79.

Tucker, C. M. (1999). African American children: A self-empowerment approach to modifying behavior problems and preventing academic failure. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Villalba, J. A. (2007). Culture-specific assets to consider when counseling Latina/o children and adolescents. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 35, 15-25.

Youth Together. (n.d). Youth Together evaluation outcomes 2000-2001. Retrieved May 1, 2008, from http://www. youthtogether.net/funders/YTOutcomes0001.pdf

Norma L. Day-Vines, Ph.D., is an associate professor at Virginia Tech University, Falls Church, VA. E-mail: [e-mail]

Veronica Terriquez is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of California at Los Angeles.