Alternatives to Suspension in School Discipline: Restorative Justice and PBIS

Schools have a growing menu of alternatives to suspension in school discipline, including restorative justice conferences, positive behavioral interventions and supports (PBIS), in-school consequences like detention and Saturday school, peer mediation, and counseling referrals. Each one addresses misbehavior without sending the student home, and the better programs show measurable drops in suspension rates while keeping students connected to class. At least fifteen states and the District of Columbia now restrict exclusionary discipline for younger students, and federal law under the Every Student Succeeds Act requires every state to plan for reducing suspensions and expulsions.¹

Why Schools Are Moving Away From Out-of-School Suspensions

Sending a student home sounds like a straightforward consequence. The evidence points the other way. Students who get suspended fall behind academically, lose connection to teachers and classmates, and often spend the day unsupervised. Research in the American Economic Journal found that students at schools with high suspension rates are 15 to 20 percent more likely to be arrested and incarcerated as adults, with the sharpest effects for male students and students of color.

The disparities are stark. Federal Civil Rights Data Collection figures for 2020–21 show Black boys made up 8 percent of K–12 enrollment but received 18 percent of out-of-school suspensions and 18 percent of expulsions.² Those numbers are a large part of why federal and state policy has pushed schools toward alternatives.

Restorative Justice Practices

Restorative justice shifts the question from “what rule was broken and what’s the punishment?” to “who was harmed and what needs to happen to repair it?” A trained facilitator brings together the student who caused harm, the people affected, and sometimes other community members for a structured conversation. The format goes by different names: restorative circles, victim-offender conferences, community group conferences. What they share is that participants develop the resolution themselves rather than having an administrator impose one.

Each person describes the impact of what happened. The student who caused harm explains their perspective. The group works toward a concrete agreement, which might involve a written apology, specific service hours benefiting the person harmed, or behavioral commitments with follow-up check-ins. A growing number of states now require schools to consider restorative approaches before turning to suspension for most offenses.

Schools that have adopted restorative justice at scale report significant drops in suspension rates. Districts in multiple states have documented reductions in out-of-school suspensions ranging from 40 to over 80 percent after implementing whole-school programs. Researchers caution that success depends on consistent facilitator training, administrative commitment, and adequate staffing. A program that trains two teachers and then stops rarely produces the same results.

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports

PBIS is a prevention framework rather than a single program. Instead of waiting for students to misbehave and reacting, schools build an environment where expectations are explicit, good behavior is regularly acknowledged, and escalating levels of support catch problems early. The framework operates on three tiers.³

Tier 1 covers all students. Schoolwide expectations are taught like academic content, with posted norms in hallways, cafeterias, and classrooms, and staff actively reinforce positive behavior. When done well, Tier 1 alone is enough for 80 percent or more of students.
Tier 2 serves roughly 10 to 15 percent of students who need more than universal supports. That means small-group social skills instruction, regular check-ins with a mentor, extra academic structure, and closer school-home communication.
Tier 3 is the most intensive, reaching around 1 to 5 percent of students. Schools conduct functional behavioral assessments to understand what is driving the behavior, then build an individualized plan that may include wraparound services coordinating school, family, and community resources.

The underlying logic is that most discipline problems are preventable. A school that teaches expectations clearly and reinforces them consistently needs to use consequences far less often. The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs funds the national Center on PBIS, and ESSA specifically references multi-tiered systems of support as a model for reducing disciplinary incidents.³

In-School Consequences That Keep Students Learning

Not every situation calls for a restorative circle or a behavioral intervention plan. For routine infractions, administrators often reach for consequences that cost the student time without pulling them out of the learning environment.

Detention. Before-school or after-school supervised study periods remain one of the most common alternatives. The student sits in a designated room, completes schoolwork, and loses free time.
Saturday school. A longer block of supervised time, typically three to four hours on a weekend morning. Activities vary by district and may include completing homework, doing campus maintenance, or structured reflection exercises.
Campus community service. Organizing the library, cleaning common areas, or assisting staff gives the student a concrete way to contribute to the school. Assignments are monitored and time-limited, with hours tied to the seriousness of the infraction and district policy.

The common thread is that the student stays connected to school. They still attend class, still interact with teachers, and still have access to meals and support services. The consequence lands on their personal time, not their education.

Peer Mediation

Some of the most effective interventions don’t involve adults at all. Trained student mediators help classmates resolve interpersonal conflicts before they escalate to the point an administrator has to step in. The mediator follows a structured process: each party describes what happened, identifies how they feel, and works toward a solution both sides can accept. Sessions happen in a neutral, private space. The mediator keeps things fair rather than taking sides or imposing a resolution.

When an agreement is reached, both parties typically sign a written document outlining their commitments. The school tracks completion as a successful intervention, which means the conflict gets resolved without any formal disciplinary entry on the student’s record. Schools generally use peer mediation for verbal disputes, social conflicts, and minor disagreements that haven’t crossed into physical territory. Research shows these programs reduce discipline referrals and improve school climate, though the long-term effects on future behavior are less clear.

Counseling and Social-Emotional Support

When a student’s behavior signals something deeper than a bad day, such as recurring outbursts, withdrawal, or conflict with multiple peers, the most useful response often isn’t disciplinary at all. Schools can refer students for mental health assessments, individual or group counseling, and social-emotional learning programs that build skills like managing anger, reading social cues, and resolving disagreements before they escalate.

These referrals typically involve a school counselor, social worker, or psychologist who develops a support plan tailored to the student. The plan becomes part of the student’s file as a support intervention rather than a punishment. Social-emotional learning programs also operate at the classroom level, teaching emotional regulation and interpersonal skills as part of the regular curriculum. Research consistently shows these programs reduce conduct problems and increase prosocial behavior.

Alternatives Don’t Skip Due Process

Any discipline, even an alternative one, still has to meet the basic fairness standard the Supreme Court set in Goss v. Lopez (1975). For suspensions of ten days or fewer, the student must receive oral or written notice of the charges, an explanation of the evidence, and a chance to tell their side. The notice and the hearing can happen almost immediately after the incident, and schools do not need to provide a lawyer or allow cross-examination for short suspensions. When a student poses an immediate physical danger or threatens serious disruption, the school can remove the student first and hold the hearing as soon as practicable afterward.⁴ For longer suspensions or expulsions, most districts provide more formal hearings with additional protections, though specifics vary. Alternatives replace the consequence, not the investigation.

Extra Protections for Students With Disabilities

Federal law adds another layer for students who receive special education services or have a Section 504 plan. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, school personnel can remove a student with a disability from their current placement for up to ten school days using the same consequences available for any student.⁵ Once a removal would exceed ten consecutive school days, or a pattern of shorter removals adds up to more than ten days in the same school year and involves substantially similar behavior, federal rules kick in.⁶

At that point the school must hold a manifestation determination review within ten school days. The school, the parents, and relevant members of the IEP team review the IEP, teacher observations, and parent input to answer two questions. Was the behavior caused by or directly and substantially related to the student’s disability? Was it a direct result of the school’s failure to implement the IEP?⁵ If the answer to either is yes, the school must return the student to the original placement unless parents agree to a change, and it must either create a new behavioral intervention plan or revise the existing one. If the behavior is found not to be a manifestation, standard discipline can proceed, but the student must continue receiving educational services so they can progress on their IEP goals.⁶ For many students in this category, alternatives to suspension become not just preferable but legally required.

Why the Choice Shows Up on a Student’s Record

One practical reason to prefer alternatives is what ends up in the student’s file. Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, disciplinary records are part of a student’s education records and carry the same privacy protections. Schools generally cannot disclose them without parental consent, with limited exceptions for health and safety emergencies and transfers between schools.⁷

Federal law also requires each state to have a procedure for transferring disciplinary records related to suspensions and expulsions when a student enrolls in a new school. A suspension follows the student. Schools can share information about discipline for conduct that posed a significant safety risk with teachers and officials who have a legitimate educational interest in the student’s behavior.⁷ Parents have the right to inspect their child’s records and request corrections if those records are inaccurate or misleading, and schools must provide a hearing process if they refuse to amend a challenged record.

When a behavioral incident is resolved through peer mediation, restorative justice, or counseling rather than formal suspension, the record reflects a support-based resolution instead of exclusionary discipline. For a student approaching college applications or a school transfer, that difference is the practical payoff of choosing an alternative in the first place.

1
U.S. Department of Education. ESSA: Key Provisions and Implications for Students with Disabilities
2
U.S. Department of Education. 2020-21 Civil Rights Data Collection: Student Discipline and School Climate Report
3
Center on PBIS. What Is PBIS?
4
Justia. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975)
5
U.S. Department of Education. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act – Section 1415(k)
6
eCFR. 34 CFR 300.530 – Authority of School Personnel
7
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 20 USC 1232g – Family Educational Rights and Privacy