Exploring Retributive School Discipline Practices in Ontario: Voices of the Suspended and Expelled
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through an analysis of 7, semi-structured, one-on-one, open-ended interviews and relying on methodological principles from interpretive social science (ISS) and critical social sciences (CSS) this graduate thesis uncovers the voices of youth who have been suspended and/or expelled from a public secondary school in Ontario. Youth in this study spoke to the impact that being suspended and/or expelled had on school climate through describing the adverse changes that they experienced in regards to their relationships with their peers, and school professionals. A unique contribution from my study is a participant’s description of an experience of suspension, which I interpreted as being caused by, the behavioural targeting of a student living with a disability. Many of the participants also explained how the use of disciplinary procedures that rely on sending a student home from school for x amount of days can affect students’ academic progress and success. Furthermore, the similarities between the treatment of disciplined students in the education system, and the treatment of criminal offenders in the justice system found in this study, included: the use of punitive discipline, increased surveillance, and the involvement of the police in disciplinary processes. The youth in this study recognize that the use of suspension and expulsion does not dig beneath the surface and address the root of the problem, and agree that this approach to school discipline is ineffective in regards to correcting behaviour. Finally, all of the youth in this study suggested the development and implementation of more supportive approaches to addressing and preventing unsafe and inappropriate behaviour in schools that aim to keep students in school while resolving the problem.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".