Let’s talk about punishment – that tried-and-true societal tradition of using negative consequences to “teach lessons.” Detention, the schoolyard classic, is the perfect example. Take a kid with unprocessed emotions, sensory overload, or communication deficits, stick them in a room with a desk, and magically expect improved behavior. Makes sense, right? Spoiler alert: it doesn’t. And it’s emblematic of a bigger problem with discipline in general.
Grab a coffee, and let’s break it down – sarcasm fully engaged.
Punishment: The Illusion of Effectiveness
Punishment doesn’t teach skills. Whether it’s detention, a fine, or a jail sentence, the focus is on making people feel bad enough to change. But feeling bad doesn’t equal learning. For students, maladaptive behavior isn’t random chaos; it’s communication. Maybe it’s sensory overload, unmet needs, or executive functioning challenges – whatever it is, there’s a reason for it. What if we addressed the reason instead of slapping on a punishment?
Functional Behavioral Assessments (FBAs) actually help us understand why a behavior occurs so we can create a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP). Yet, we keep duct-taping problems instead of fixing them.
School Discipline: A Case Study in Punitive Failure
Detention isolates students without addressing root causes. Suspension takes it further by removing students from learning altogether. Expulsion? That’s just giving up.
For students with cognitive or social/emotional disabilities, these measures are especially harmful. Punishing behaviors tied to disabilities – like impulsivity, emotional dysregulation, or sensory overwhelm – without offering tools to improve is like blaming someone for being caught in the rain without an umbrella.
Punitive discipline amplifies challenges, creating a cycle of exclusion and frustration. Skiba et al. (2016) found these measures disproportionately harm students with disabilities, leading to systemic marginalization.
Behavioral Science: BACB and ABA’s Take
The Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) and Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) warn against punishment as a primary strategy. Punishment suppresses behavior without teaching replacement skills. The BACB’s ethical code emphasizes using positive reinforcement and functional approaches first.
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), a framework aligned with ABA, proactively reduces maladaptive behaviors by reinforcing positive ones. It’s effective and doesn’t rely on detention slips.
Punishment as a Societal Shortcut
Punishment is a Band-Aid. It may stop behavior temporarily, but it doesn’t teach skills, repair relationships, or address the root cause. Restorative practices, on the other hand, focus on empathy, accountability, and relationship-building. Imagine applying that logic broadly – less punishment, more growth.
Legal and Ethical Implications
Ever heard of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)? It requires schools to provide a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and ensure disciplinary actions don’t deny education. Punishing disability-related behaviors without considering accommodations? That’s a legal risk.
Section 504 and the ADA protect students with disabilities by requiring accommodations for their needs. Over-reliance on detention, suspension, or expulsion could land your school in hot water.
Positive Interventions: Because Science
If detention is duct tape, PBIS is the sleek, well-engineered fix. PBIS focuses on proactive strategies, positive reinforcement, and teaching replacement skills. Horner et al. (2009) showed PBIS reduced discipline referrals by 50% and increased academic achievement. Effective and less cringy.
The Takeaway: Punishment Isn’t the Answer
Punishment is the educational and societal equivalent of throwing spaghetti at the wall and hoping it sticks. For students with disabilities – and everyone else – it’s harmful, exclusionary, and legally risky. Instead of punitive measures, let’s lean into evidence-based strategies like PBIS, restorative practices, and explicit teaching of replacement skills.
It’s time to rethink punishment. Our students and society deserve better – and we can deliver it. No sarcasm necessary (this time).
References
Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB). (2020). Professional and ethical compliance code for behavior analysts. Retrieved from https://www.bacb.com
Horner, R. H., Sugai, G., & Anderson, C. M. (2009). Examining the evidence base for school-wide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(8), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17161/fec.v42i8.6861
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794.
Skiba, R. J., Arredondo, M. I., & Williams, N. T. (2016). More than a metaphor: The contribution of exclusionary discipline to a school-to-prison pipeline. Equity & Excellence in Education, 49(4), 551-564. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2016.1205129
