Exclusionary discipline receives considerable scholarly attention, but the concept homogenizes practices that rely on the physical detainment of youth, such as in-school suspension, and practices that do not, such as out-of-school suspension. In this article, I argue that school discipline should be evaluated not only on the basis of whether it is exclusionary but also whether it is detainment-based. Whereas a practice such as in-school suspension relies on students’ physical detention, out-of-school suspension releases them from the school’s carceral control. I draw on three years of ethnographic observations and 108 interviews in a public high school to explore why and how students and adults differently evaluated detainment-based versus non-detainment-based practices. Although both groups drew parallels between detainment-based discipline and carcerality, adults insisted that detainment-based discipline was less “severe.” Students, however, strongly preferred non-detainment-based discipline because it released them to relative “freedom.” I explore the implications of these findings for both researchers and practitioners.

中文翻译：

---

被送出，被留在：公立高中基于拘留的纪律


排他性纪律受到了学术界的极大关注，但这个概念将依赖于对青少年进行身体拘留的做法（例如停学）和不依赖的做法（例如停学）同质化。在这篇文章中，我认为学校纪律的评估不仅应该基于它是否具有排他性，还应该根据它是否基于拘留。虽然校内停课等做法依赖于学生的身体拘留，但校外停学使他们摆脱了学校的监禁控制。我借鉴了三年的民族志观察和在一所公立高中的 108 次访谈，探讨了学生和成年人为什么以及如何以不同的方式评估基于拘留和非基于拘留的做法。尽管这两个群体都对基于拘留的纪律和监禁进行了相似的描述，但成年人坚持认为基于拘留的纪律没有那么“严厉”。然而，学生们强烈倾向于非拘留纪律，因为它让他们获得了相对的“自由”。我探讨了这些发现对研究人员和从业者的影响。