NCSSD Blog Interview with Judge J. H. Corpening focusing on Involving Agencies, Diversion Tactics, and Classroom Strategies and Professional Development

As part of the expert blog series, Judge Corpening has responded to additional questions from readers and visitors to the Supportive School Discipline website regarding the School Discipline and Juvenile Justice reform efforts in North Carolina. 

Question from Reader/Visitor: What were all of the agencies, organizations and stakeholder groups invovled in the development of the inter-agency agreement? 

Response from Judge Corpening: The foundation of the success we have achieved in New Hanover County, North Carolina was the composition of the working group we convened to develop a memorandum of understanding to address the School-to-Prison Pipeline.  My Superintendent of Schools and I spent a considerable amount of time discussing the makeup of our team.  We recognized that the team needed to have significant representation from schools, law enforcement, and courts, but we also recognized that we needed representation from other disciplines.  We actually agreed on “categories” or “disciplines” that needed to be represented before we discussed individual names.  We also agreed that in some circumstances it might be better to ask an agency head (decision maker) to send a specific senior assistant who might have more “boots on the ground” experience and have more to offer in a working group like ours. 

To continue reading Judge Corpening's response to the question regarding the involvement of agencies, organizaitons, stakeholder groups click here: Judge Corpening on Invlolving Agencies, Organizations, and Stakeholders

Question from Reader: What are the specific diversion tactics? What types and levels of collaboration are necessary for these tactics to be effective? 

Response from Judge Corpening: Our agreement is a graduated response model.  Diversion is one part of this model.  We currently use one diversion strategy, and are working to develop others.  It is important to remember that the hardest work begins after the agreement is reached, and is centered in the development of appropriate graduated response models.  One of the greatest challenges is that the same model may not work in more than one school because of varied resources and personnel.  Our agreement was signed on November 2, 2015, and we are still working to develop disciplinary strategies, diversions, and to implement site based training.

To continue reading Judge Corpening's response to the question regarding diversion tactics click here: Judge Corpening on Diversion Tactics

Question form Reader: What are some of the specific classroom strategies for teachers? Was/is there a need for teacher professional development around these strategies? 

Response from Judge Corpening: A change in policy of this magnitude requires a re-examination of techniques that have been used in the classroom, and the development of new tools. To some extent, we have to learn to teach behavior, as well as math, science, and English. Professional development will be an ongoing process as we implement our procedures, and analyze the results.

To continue reading Judge Corpening's response to the question regarding classroom strategies and professional development for teachers click here: Judge Corpening's on Classroom Strategies and Professional Development 

To view Judge Corpening's expert blog series in its entirety click here: NCSSD Blog Interview with Judge J. H. Corpening: Inter-Agency Governance Agreements and Addressing The School-to-Prison Pipeline

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.