Restoring Order and Respect in the Classroom: Key Takeaways from Daniel Buck

Who is Daniel Buck?

Daniel Buck is a research fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), director of the Conservative Education Reform Network (CERN), and an affiliate of AEI’s James Q. Wilson Program in K–12 Education Studies. His work focuses on K–12 education, charter schooling, curriculum reform, and school safety and discipline.

Before joining AEI, Buck served as a senior fellow at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an assistant principal at Lake County Classical Academy, and a classroom teacher at Hope Christian Schools, Holy Spirit Middle School, and Green Bay Area Public Schools.

His writing has appeared in outlets including The Wall Street Journal, National Affairs, and National Review. He is the author of What Is Wrong with Our Schools? (2022).

A warning from Capitol Hill

On April 28, 2026, Buck testified before Congress on ‘The Demise of Academic Excellence.’ He described a pattern he witnessed in Title I schools: expectations steadily lowered—often justified in the name of ‘equity.’

During my time as a teacher in Title I schools, I watched as year after year expectations for students got only lower and lower, all in the name of “equity.” Every standard to which we used to hold students—from memorizing basic math facts to writing a simple paragraph with proper punctuation—was deconstructed by progressives.

He argued that these policies have produced what he called the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations,’ leaving educators and families to deal with the consequences.

Why teachers are considering leaving

One of the most striking parts of the presentation was the data on teacher morale and retention. Buck highlighted that student behavior is now the top reason teachers consider leaving the profession.

• Student behavior is the #1 reason teachers consider leaving the profession.

• 97% of public school teachers say they wish people understood how demanding it is to be a teacher.

• Even above pay, teachers say their top challenge is discipline/behavioral issues.

What’s driving the escalation in student behavior?

Buck emphasized that this is not simply ‘kids these days.’ Multiple national data sources point to a significant post-pandemic increase in misbehavior.

• Nationwide surveys indicate 84% of educators believe students are developmentally behind in self-regulation and relationship-building.

• Severe classroom disruptions and violent incidents have more than doubled since the onset of COVID-19.

• Nearly 80% of educators cite student behavior as a top concern, compared to roughly 61% during the 2018–2019 school year.

Students missed crucial early socialization and in-person peer interaction, and many returned to school with heightened stress, weaker emotional regulation, and fewer tools for managing conflict. Teachers report more frequent defiance, emotional outbursts, and physical aggression—often at levels that significantly reduce instructional time.

Buck also noted a persistent disconnect: classroom teachers experience the immediate impact, while district leaders face staffing and budget constraints that can slow or dilute system-wide responses. (Sources: EAB Report; American Psychological Association, and Institute of Education Sciences)

Don’t ignore the problem—understand it

A key theme was that problems don’t get solved by pretending they aren’t real. Buck argued that people who raise concerns can be sidelined, while the underlying issues persist. If we want to fix discipline challenges, we have to acknowledge them and try to understand the ‘why.’

That ‘why’ can include many factors—phones, lasting pandemic effects, gentle parenting, cultural attitudes, broader societal instability, family breakdown, or shifting discipline policies. But Buck’s point was practical: schools must focus on what they can control.

What the research says about discipline policy

Buck pointed to research suggesting that discipline policy changes can create real trade-offs—especially when systems reduce exclusionary discipline without replacing it with effective alternatives.

Study 1: ‘Suspending Suspensions’

This research found that exclusionary discipline creates complex educational trade-offs. Suspensions can harm the suspended student’s academic trajectory, but sharply reducing suspensions district-wide can also produce negative spillover effects.

• Reducing suspension rates can inadvertently decrease overall math and English scores.

• Absenteeism can rise in more lenient environments.

• Teacher turnover can increase when educators lose effective tools to address chronic disruption.

Study 2: ‘Rolling Back Zero Tolerance’

In Philadelphia’s 2012–2013 discipline reform, limiting suspensions for nonviolent behavior coincided with modest declines in minor suspensions—but also increases in serious misconduct, truancy, and academic declines in Math and English Language Arts.

The takeaway is not that schools should embrace harsh, inflexible discipline. It’s that removing consequences without building strong replacement systems can make classrooms less safe and less teachable.

What works: structure—done well

A 2023 meta-analysis on teachers’ provision of structure found that classroom structure is strongly associated with better engagement and improved achievement.

• Academic achievement: positive correlation (r = .11); intervention effect size 0.33.

• Student engagement: correlation .28; intervention effect size 0.46.

• Disengagement: interventions reduce passiveness/withdrawal (g = -0.34).

Importantly, the research suggests structure works best when it is not overly controlling. The most effective classrooms pair clear expectations and predictable routines with autonomy support—helping students understand the ‘why,’ offering actionable feedback, and creating an organized environment that prevents chaos before it starts.

Closing thought

Restoring order and respect isn’t about nostalgia or punishment—it’s about protecting instructional time, supporting teachers, and ensuring every student can learn in a safe, focused environment. Buck’s presentation challenged us to be honest about what’s happening in classrooms and serious about implementing solutions that work.

If we want better outcomes for students—especially those most impacted by disorder—we have to rebuild the conditions that make learning possible.