A study of the perceptions of community/court school students regarding the effectiveness of restitution as a discipline procedure

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to identify and compare the perceptions of high school aged community/court school students regarding the effectiveness of a restitution model, as opposed to an exclusionary model, as a discipline procedure and deterrent to future misbehaviors. The study further sought to determine specific reasons why restitution would be perceived to be more effective than exclusion or vice versa. Finally, the study sought to determine whether the students' gender influenced their perceptions.;Methodology. The researcher used descriptive research. The population consisted of high school aged students currently enrolled in California community/court schools. A questionnaire was utilized to collect data to answer six research questions. For each item on the questionnaire descriptive statistics, percentages, range, and means were determined. The data were tabulated and analyzed by comparing the statistics for each item.;Findings. After a statistical analysis of both the Likert scale and written responses, it was determined that the students involved in the research considered suspension ineffective in reducing recidivism and restitution more efficient in reducing repeat misbehaviors. The Likert scale responses showed no statistical significant differences between perceptions of exclusion and restitution. When the written responses were calculated, a significant statistical difference was found in the perceptions pertaining to the use of exclusion and restitution. When viewing the results as a whole, they supported the use of restitution over that of exclusion as a method of reducing recidivism. Suspension was viewed as ineffective in reducing future misbehavior and restitution as a discipline methodology was seen as having potential for reducing the same behaviors. There was no difference in perceptions between genders.;The community/court school population is unique. It consists entirely of students who have not succeeded in school for various reasons. Of the sample population 36 percent had between suspended at least once, 22 percent had been suspended ten to fifteen times, with 16 percent having been suspended more than twenty times. Additionally, 63 percent had been expelled from at least one school for their misbehavior. The findings associated with this population may be valid with others groups. If this is true, restitution should have a significant impact on the typical high school population.;Recommendations. Further study on the effects of restitution dealing with high school students in comprehensive high schools is warranted. It would be valuable to know if the findings from this study are valid with other populations.