Search

Peers' negative police encounters may have collateral consequences and shape adolescents' relationship with authority figures, including those in the school context. Due to the expansion of law enforcement in schools (e.g., school resource officers) and nearby neighborhoods, schools include spaces where adolescents witness or learn about their peers' intrusive encounters (e.g., stop-and-frisks) with the police. When peers experience intrusive police encounters, adolescents may feel like their freedoms are infringed upon by law enforcement and subsequently view institutions, including schools, with distrust and cynicism. In turn, adolescents will likely engage in more defiant behaviors to reassert their freedoms and express their cynicism toward institutions. To test these hypotheses, the present study leveraged a large sample of adolescents (N = 2,061) enrolled in classrooms (N = 157) and examined whether classmates' police intrusion predicted adolescents' engagement in schoolbased defiant behaviors over time. Results suggest that classmates' intrusive police experiences in the fall term predicted higher levels of adolescents' engagement in defiant behaviors at the end of the school year, regardless of adolescents' own history of direct police intrusive encounters. Adolescents' institutional trust partially mediated the longitudinal association between classmates' intrusive police encounters and adolescents' defiant behaviors. Whereas past studies have largely focused on individual experiences of police encounters, the present study uses a developmental lens to understand how the effects of law enforcement-perpetuated intrusion on adolescent development may operate through peer interactions. Implications for legal system policies and practices are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intended purpose of exclusionary discipline is to improve the learning environment by removing disruptive students; however, emerging evidence has suggested that these practices may have the opposite effect. Exclusionary discipline--especially policies that use suspensions as punishment for minor, developmentally normative behavioral infractions--is a known threat to suspended students' academic achievement, but few have examined whether and how these suspensions may vicariously affect nonsuspended classmates' academic achievement. This article uses a two-study approach to examine the mechanisms linking suspensions for minor infractions and educational outcomes in science (N-student = 558; N-classroom = 41; Mage = 12.83; age range = 10-16; 40% Black, 55% White, 5% other race; 51% girls; 62% eligible for free/reduced-priced lunch) and math (N-student = 1,302; N-classroom = 64; Mage = 13.00; age range = 10-16; 41% Black, 53% White, 6% other race; 50% girls; 64% eligible for free/reduced-priced lunch) classrooms among both suspended and nonsuspended students. Results showed that students who received a suspension for a minor infraction were more likely to have poorer academic achievement in both studies. In classrooms where suspensions for minor infractions were used more frequently, students had lower academic achievement, with student engagement partially mediating this relation. These results add to a growing body of school discipline literature that advocates for replacing exclusionary discipline with more developmentally responsive policies and practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]