The School-to-Prison Pipeline: Are We Failing Our Most Vulnerable Students?

As a Doctor of Psychology with experience working and serving underserved populations, I have developed a strong interest in exploring the psychological traits and environments (family and school) that contribute to social-emotional and behavioral challenges. During my dissertation in graduate school, I extensively studied the school-to-prison pipeline, a topic that many reputable scholars have widely researched. Notably, youth with elevated Callous-Unemotional (CU) traits may proactively seek severe aggression toward others and not care about potential punishment (Elowsky et al., 2022). They tend to have significantly poorer responses to harsh and punitive parenting and poor affiliation with teachers (Baroncelli et al., 2022). Without having positive relationships with adults, their behavioral problems often increase their teachers' and parents' dissatisfaction and negative feelings toward them. Unfortunately, individuals with Conduct Disorder (CD) usually carry CU traits (Elowsky et al., 2022). Studies show that 12% to 46% of youth with conduct disorder (CD) and 25% to 30% of those with severe conduct problems have significant callous-unemotional (CU) traits (Pisano et al., 2017; Robertson et al., 2020).

What is the School-to-Prison Pipeline?

The school-to-prison pipeline (STPP) refers to the process in which school exclusionary and disciplinary practices disproportionately affect students from marginalized backgrounds (e.g., racial, gender, sexual, and disabled minorities), ultimately pushing them toward the criminal justice system (Liston, 2022). Instead of addressing the underlying causes of students' behavioral issues, exclusionary discipline policies remove them from the classroom, increasing their likelihood of disengagement and incarceration (Quinn, 2017). Not properly educated students often turn to outside influences for knowledge and behaviors. What are those outside influences? Do these influences benefit the youths? Rather than providing every child with an education that nurtures their growth into responsible citizens, are we prematurely resorting to adult-like punitive measures for children with behavioral issues, effectively determining their futures too early?

Who is Affected the Most?

The following statistics may be surprising to some, as the media typically focuses on adult criminals and often overlooks the impact on children and their families. The United States incarcerates more youth than any other country, with racial disparities in this system being significantly pronounced. Black students account for two-fifths of confined youth, while Hispanic students make up one-fifth (Quinn, 2017). Among African American males under age 40, those who drop out of high school face an incarceration rate 25 times higher than those who complete their education (National Research Council, 2014, p.66).

While the U.S. population represents only about five percent of the world's total, the number of U.S. prisoners constitutes approximately 25% of the global prison population (National Research Council, 2014, p.1). This issue continues to grow, with the United States holding the highest number of prisoners per capita in the world (Fair & Walmsley, 2021). These statistics highlight how school failure is deeply intertwined with criminal justice involvement, emphasizing the broader issue of mass incarceration in the U.S.

How Do School Policies Contribute?

Traditional disciplinary practices, such as zero-tolerance policies, often escalate minor infractions into criminal consequences. Students exhibiting disruptive or defiant behavior are frequently subjected to suspensions, expulsions, or referrals to law enforcement—punitive measures that disproportionately affect minority students (Cloth et al., 2014).

Disciplinary decisions are often left to teachers and school administrators, whose conscious or unconscious biases can influence how students are punished. Although it is common for teachers or parents to assert, "Students who break the school rules must be punished regardless of the underlying reasons for their disruptive behaviors—IF THEY VIOLATE THE RULE, THEY VIOLATE THE RULE," statistics show that some factors influence their disciplinary actions. For example, Black students are more likely to be disciplined for subjective infractions such as talking back, using cell phones, or being perceived as "disrespectful" (Quinn, 2017). Meanwhile, their white peers are often disciplined for more objective infractions, such as bringing weapons or drugs to school (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018). This inconsistency in discipline further exacerbates racial disparities in school exclusion.

The Hidden Dilemma: Education vs. Discipline

While disruptive behaviors undeniably impact students' learning, the way schools address them is crucial. Historically, the easiest way to maintain order has been to remove the "problem"—the disruptive student—but this approach never addresses the root causes of the behavior. As a result, the disruptive student never learns how to display socially acceptable behaviors.

Society often views schools as places solely for academic achievement. For example, many online websites rate schools based on students' academic success. They may prompt parents to select schools that will benefit their children academically. In some cultural traditions, such as among Chinese families, this even leads to relocating closer to a desirable public school. However, this overemphasis on academic achievement often neglects the students' need for emotional and behavioral development, especially for those whose families may be unable to provide adequate support.

Many students who exhibit challenging behaviors are struggling with trauma, mental health issues, or a lack of parental and community support. Instead of receiving help, they are pushed further from education through repeated suspensions and expulsions. At the beginning of this article, I mentioned that students with CU traits tend to respond poorly to harsh and punitive parenting and have weak connections with teachers (Baroncelli et al., 2022). This raises an important question: Does punishment actually work for educating our youth? Over time, this pattern leads to academic disengagement, higher dropout rates, and a greater likelihood of involvement in the juvenile justice system.

The Real-World Impact

For frequently disciplined students, school may feel less like a place of learning and more like a training ground for incarceration. Some students with disruptive behaviors even begin to view prison as an inevitable destination (Liston, 2022). Without structured support in school, many turn to illegal activities, reinforcing the cycle of incarceration (Dodge, 2011; Monahan et al., 2014). People may ask, "Where is the parenting?" Based on my experience working with under-resourced communities in schools, these students' families often face various challenges, including mental health issues, substance abuse, and other social problems. When parents are unable to effectively educate and support their children, who can help them?

As the saying goes, "It takes a village to raise a child." While parents are the primary influence in a child's life, the support of society as a whole is equally crucial. Schools and educators can provide structured learning environments, mental health professionals can help children overcome emotional and behavioral challenges, and community members can offer additional care and guidance through extracurricular activities and mentorship programs. When schools, mental health experts, social resources, and the broader community work together, children can receive the support they need to grow and succeed.

A Better Approach: Balancing Discipline and Support

Schools must adopt a more balanced approach emphasizing prevention and intervention. This approach should include evidence-based interventions, such as PCIT-CU: Parent-Child Interaction Therapy for Callous-Unemotional Traits, TCIT-U: Teacher-Child Interaction Training - Universal, and restorative practices. The empathic training program forms the foundation to support students with CU traits in developing empathy before participating in restorative practices (Fragkaki et al., 2016). I aim to publish further articles to elaborate on these interventions, providing educators and parents with the necessary insights to implement them effectively.

Conclusion

The school-to-prison pipeline is not just a disciplinary issue—it is a systemic failure that disproportionately harms vulnerable students and places a significant strain on society's resources, particularly within the prison system. While maintaining classroom order is essential, removing students without addressing their needs only fuels a cycle of exclusion and incarceration. Schools are responsible for educating children academically while supporting their social, emotional, and behavioral development, nurturing the next generation to become responsible citizens. Sadly, the challenges will undoubtedly become more severe if government funding for public education declines. Reductions in funding can exacerbate the already strained resources that schools have to manage, impacting the quality of education and support services available to students, especially those from vulnerable backgrounds. This raises a critical question: How might the elimination of the Department of Education impact the school-to-prison pipeline, particularly for students already at risk due to poverty or behavioral challenges?

The answer to this question requires serious reflection, as it holds profound implications for the future of our nation.

About the Author

Ryan Yam, Psy.D.

Licensed Educational Psychologist and founder of Dual Minds Psychology. Dr. Yam specializes in ADHD treatment, executive functioning skill development, and culturally sensitive care for children and adolescents.

References:

Baroncelli, A., Facci, C., & Ciucci, E. (2022). Sensitivity to teachers’ punishment and social affiliation with teachers: Unique and interactive effects to callous-unemotional traits among preadolescents. Journal of Research in Personality, 99, N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2022.104247

Cloth, A. H., Evans, S. W., Becker, S. P., & Paternite, C. E. (2014). Social maladjustment and special education: State regulations and continued controversy. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 22(4), 214–224.

Dodge, K. A. (2011). Preventing conduct disorder in children at high risk: Congressional

briefing on raising healthy children: Recent evidence from developmental science, Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). https://doi.org/10.1037/e540882012-001

Elowsky, J., Bajaj, S., Bashford-Largo, J., Zhang, R., Mathur, A., Schwartz, A., Dobbertin, M., Blair, K. S., Leibenluft, E., Pardini, D., & Blair, R. J. R. (2022). Differential associations of conduct disorder, callous-unemotional traits and irritability with outcome expectations and values regarding the consequences of aggression. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 16(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-022-00466-x

Fair, H. & Walmsley, R. (2021). World prison population list. 13th ed. Institute for Crime & Justice Policy Research. https://www.prisonstudies.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/world_prison_population_list_13th_edition.pdf

Liston, L. (2022). ‘Prepped for prison’? Experiences of exclusionary school practices and involvement with the justice system. Irish Journal of Sociology, 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/07916035221108989

Monahan, K. C., VanDerhei, S., Bechtold, J., & Cauffman, E. (2014). From the school yard to the squad car: School discipline, truancy, and arrest. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(7), 1110–1122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0103-1

National Research Council. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18613

Pisano, S., Muratori, P., Gorga, C., Levantini, V., Iuliano, R., Catone, G., Coppola, G., Milone,

A., & Masi, G. (2017). Conduct disorders and psychopathy in children and adolescents:

aetiology, clinical presentation and treatment strategies of callous-unemotional traits. Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 43(1), 84. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13052-017-0404-6

Quinn, D. J. (2017). School Discipline Disparities: Lessons and Suggestions. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 29(3), 291–298.

Robertson, E. L., Frick, P. J., Walker, T. M., Kemp, E. C., Ray, J. V., Thornton, L. C., Wall

Myers, T. D., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2020). Callous-unemotional traits and risk of gun carrying and use during crime. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 177(9), 827

833. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2020.19080861

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2018, March). Discipline disparities for Black students, boys, and students with disabilities. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-258