There are many misconceptions about the prevalence of youth violence in our society and it is important to peel back the veneer of hot-tempered discourse that often surrounds the issue.... While it is important to carefully review the circumstances surrounding these horrifying incidents so that we may learn from them, we must also be cautious about inappropriately creating a cloud of fear over every student in every classroom across the country. In the case of youth violence, it is important to note that, statistically speaking, schools are among the safest places for children to be.
Final Report, Bi Partisan Working Group on Youth Violence
106th Congress, February 2000
Public policy towards children has moved towards treating them more like adults and in ways that increasingly mimic the adult criminal justice system. The most recent version of this movement is so-called "zero tolerance" in schools, where theories of punishment that were once directed to adult criminals are now applied to first graders.1
"Zero tolerance" is the phrase that describes America's response to student misbehavior. Zero tolerance means that a school will automatically and severely punish a student for a variety of infractions. While zero tolerance began as a Congressional response to students with guns, gun cases are the smallest category of school discipline cases. Indeed, zero tolerance covers the gamut of student misbehavior, from including "threats" in student fiction to giving aspirin to a classmate. Zero tolerance has become a one-size-fits-all solution to all the problems that schools confront. It has redefined students as criminals, with unfortunate consequences.
While zero tolerance policies target the serious risk of students bringing guns to school, they also go after other weapons or anything, like a Swiss Army knife, that can be used as a weapon. Zero tolerance responds to student violence (covering a wide range of activities) or threats of violence. Zero tolerance is theoretically directed at students who misbehave intentionally, yet it also applies to those who misbehave as a result of emotional problems, or other disabilities, or who merely forget what is in their pocket after legitimate non-school activities. It treats alike first graders and twelfth graders.
Zero tolerance results in expulsion or suspension irrespective of any ...
... middle of paper ...
... is gaining currency. In mid-June, a new report noted:
In the aftermath of a number of high profile, extremely violent incidents at public schools, many state and local education entities have adopted the same harsh and mandatory, "take-no-prisoners" approach to discipline currently being used in this country's criminal justice system.
Hair et al., Opportunities Suspended: The Devastating Consequences of Zero Tolerance and School Discipline, Advancement Project/Civil Rights Project at Harvard University, June 2000.
2. Tebo, M.G., Zero Tolerance, Zero Sense, ABA Journal, April 2000.
3. Brooks, K., Schiraldi, V., Zeidenberg, J., School House Hype: Two Years Later, Justice Policy Institute/Children's Law Center, March 2000.
4. Richart, D., Civil Religion & Other People's Children: An Illustration of Zero Tolerance in Action, April 2000.
5. Hair et al., Opportunities Suspended: The Devastating Consequences of Zero Tolerance and School Discipline, supra.
6. May, M., Blacks Likely to Lose Out in School Crackdown, San Francisco Chronicle, December 18, 1999.
7. _____, Zero Tolerance - A Critical Analysis, Hamilton Fish Institute on School and Community Violence, April 2000
Advocates of the Zero-tolerance policy claim that the enforcement of the policy has led to a decline in school violence, as well as, discipline problems. A study conducted by Auxman (2005) stated that from 1992-2002, violence crime declined by a margin on fifty percent. However, Auxman was unable to provide the source of his research nor if the decline in school violence was attributed to the use of the Zero-tolerance policy (Martinez, 2009). On the other hand, thorough statistical and analytical research has highlighted the negative consequences of the use of the Zero-tolerance policy in
Martinez, S. (2009). A system gone berserk: How are zero-tolerance policies really …..affecting schools? Preventing School Failure, 53(3), 153-157. Retrieved from …..http://search.proquest.com.ezproxylocal.library.nova.edu/docview/228530113?acco…..untid=6579
If you did not know, the zero tolerance policy is when students break school behavior rules and strict regulations created by the district or school and get severe consequences for it. Carla Amurao, the author of the article, “Fact Sheet: How Bad Is the School-to-Prison Pipeline?”, stated that “statistics reflect that these policies disproportionately target students of color”. Students of color are being affected so badly by this policy, that statistics show black students are 3 times more likely to get expelled than white students. Since these students are being expelled or arrested for breaking zero tolerance policy rules, they are missing valuable information in classes due to court hearings. But, some people argue that the zero tolerance policy is unfair to all students, making the education system equal for all to succeed. For example, a “2007 study by the Advancement Project and the Power U Center for Social Change says that for every 100 students who were suspended, 15 were Black, 7.9 were American Indian, 6.8 were Latino and 4.8 were white”. As you can see, the zero tolerance policy affects all races, making them miss their education because of certain consequences. Because the mindset of these people is that, if the zero-tolerance policy does not affect just one race or group of people, then the education system
Perry, Imani. "Five myths about Brown v. Board of Education" The Washington Post. May 16, 2014. Web. 25 May 2015.
Schools inevitably must deal with disciplinary action when it comes to misconduct in students. However, at what point should the courts and law enforcement intervene? “Zero tolerance” policies started as a trend in the school setting during the 1990s in “response to the widespread perception that juvenile violence was increasing and school officials needed to take desperate measures to address the problem” (Aull 2012:182-183). However, national statistics indicated a decrease in juvenile’s share of crime during the influx of zero tolerance policies in schools (National Crime Justice Reference Service 2005).
Lincoln, Eugene. “Searches and Seizures in Public Schools: Going Beyond the Supreme Court’s Ruling in New Jersey v. T.L.O.” The Journal of Negro Education 57 (Winter 1988): 3-10.
Jones, Ed. “Is affirmative action necessary? NO: It’s time to judge on merit.” Denver Post 24 July 2003: B,07.
In all grades of education, from kindergarten to college, there is a form of discipline known as a zero tolerance policy. While the exact wording is different from school to school, basically a zero tolerance policy means that a student is immediately suspended, asked to attend an alternative school, or expelled if they are suspected or caught doing certain things. These policies are in place to hopefully deter students from doing drugs or being violent, but the ethics behind them are questionable. Some research has shown that these policies may not even work, and other forms of discipline would be better suited to help students. The three main activities that result in the zero tolerance policy are being caught with drugs or alcohol, being caught with a weapon, and bullying.
He makes some very valid points pertaining to the zero tolerance policy practiced by schools and how it has a negative effect on children in our school systems and essentially pushes them into our juvenile and prison systems. I am a firm believer that the zero tolerance does nothing good for students in school. In my mind it completely goes against everything our schools supposedly stand for. We tell kids to go to school to learn, but the first time they break a rule we suspend them and send them home or even worse we expel them for the entire year. I just don’t see how that isn’t setting kids up for failure down the road and neglecting them of a quality education. One statistic the author presented that really caught me off guard was when they said that when someone is suspended or expelled even once in their entire time in school their chances of ending up behind bars is increased at a rate of five times than that of someone who doesn’t get suspended or expelled. This made me really reflect on how many friends I had in high school that were suspended and ultimately flunked out. It made me wonder if the system truly wasn’t there for them to help them get an
However, zero tolerance policies are not the only cause of this school-to-prison pipeline. The addition of school resource officers also feeds the pipeline. As school resource officers are added to the environment, the number of criminal citations in schools increased dramatically (Shah 14). Students often find themselves being harassed by police officers in the halls for minor offenses (Middleton 1). This also increases the arrest rate in schools and paves a path to the juvenile justice system (“What is the School-To-Prison Pipeline?”). “The very policies that schools adopted to manage behavior and increase achievement are fostering failure and feeding the school-to-prison pipeline” (Wilson 50). The school-to-prison pipeline pushes students, especially African Americans and special needs children, out of schools through suspensions and expulsions leading them down a path to the juvenile justice system, which then fosters a culture of incarceration in the United States. As the pipeline becomes more of a national trend, legislatures and school administrators need to come together to eliminate the effects of the
This injustice is commonly referred to as the school-to- prison pipeline. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, “zero tolerance” policies in schools criminalize minor violations of school rules, resulting in resource officers placed in schools lead students to be criminalized for situations that should be handled within the school. Moreover, students of color are three times more likely to be severely punished for their behavior than white students. This discrimination follows the student into young adulthood where they are more likely to be incarcerated. This continuous cycle of entering the prison system and then continuously going in and out of it was discussed in the documentary. Possible solutions that have been discussed to end the school-to-prison pipeline include: police being the last resort in fixing conflict, improving the student to staff ratio, and providing more alternative discipline practices. Recently, more schools are noticing the damaging effects related to taking students out of class for disciplinary reasons and have since came up with alternatives to suspension such as restorative justice, which allows students to resolve conflict through conversations that may include the student, the person the student hurt and their
Another major reason why juveniles are ending up in the juvenile justice system is because many schools have incorporate the zero tolerance policy and other extreme school disciplinary rules. In response to violent incidents in schools, such as the Columbine High School massacre, school disciplinary policies have become increasingly grave. These policies have been enacted at the school, district and state levels with the hopes of ensuring the safety of students and educators. These policies all rely on the zero tolerance policy. While it is understandable that protecting children and teachers is a priority, it is not clear that these strict policies are succeeding in improving the safety in schools.
The research done in 2005 revealed that the Black American students who studied at white dominated schools were very low than in any year since 1968 (Thomas 57).” According to Thomas (102), many factors contributed to rapid re-segregation of schools since 1991. The court turned against the desegregation plan adopted earlier by denying new petitions to desegregate schools, the executive arm reduced the initiatives to enforce the Civil Rights Act and Brown right that was so successful in the 1970s (Donnor and Dixson 2013).
The issue of school safety has become a controversial topic in the United States, due to tragic acts of violence occurring on a daily basis. American citizens should never have to cope with the negative impact of school violence, no matter how often they hear about the tragedies (Jones, "Parents" 1). In the past, schools were viewed as a safe place for children to get an education. Recently, the concern over violence in schools has taken a toll on many parents, school administrators, and legislatures (Eckland 1). Studies have shown that there are over 3 million acts of violence in American public schools each year. Not all occurrences are serious and deadly, but they occur on a daily basis throughout our country (Jones, “School” 6). This has caused many parents to worry about the well-being of their children while they are in class. This has also led to an increase in questions and concerns by parents and guardians. Many people have asked, “What are you doing about safety and security on my child’s campus” (Schimke 2). School violence is the cause of elevated worry and fear for their children, and school districts should enforce better security.
This week’s class discussed disproportionality. By giving sample statistics of Lower Merion School District that shows disproportionality, I also found statistical data to reflect the same concept. According to the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, Black children constitute 18 percent of students, but they account 46 percent of those suspended more than once.