Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Development of school policies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Development of school policies
This article discusses new policies for the Los Angeles school system in order to reduce arrest rates. Students have been getting arrested for on-campus fights and damaging school property for years in Los Angeles. Recently, school officials adopted a new set of policies to decrease the number of students feeding into the juvenile court system. The goal of these new policies is to reduce the arrest rates in Los Angeles’ schools. Once these policies are implemented, students who deface school property, are involved will not be given citations from the Los Angeles School Police Department but will instead receive disciplinary action from within the schools. Given that the Los Angeles school system is the second largest in the nation it is concerning that researchers have found students at these schools are far more likely to receive a criminal citation than students in other areas infamous for delinquency such as Chicago, Philadelphia or New York. In addition, black and Latino students are more often subject to harsh disciplinary procedures. …show more content…
Both the Attorney General and Education Secretary have condemned the “zero tolerance” policies that these new policies will be replacing. Zero tolerance policies have been shown to be ineffective at reducing crime but are causing an overflow of students in the juvenile court system. The goal of these new policies is to prevent students being arrested or given citations for small infractions of rules or schoolyard fights. Citations are issued by the county Probation Department and can prevent teenagers from obtaining a driver’s license. Arrests most often involve mandatory appearance in
Juvenile Court for the student and his or her parents, and often a fine which can be a hardship for lower income
The article titled “ Juvenile Justice from Both Sides of the Bench”, published by PBS, and written by Janet Tobias and Michael Martin informs readers on numerous judges’ opinions on the juveniles being tried as adults. Judge Thomas Edwards believed that juveniles should not be tried as adults because they are still not mature enough to see the consequences of their actions and have a chance to minimize this behavior through rehabilitation programs. Judge LaDoris Cordell argues that although we shouldn’t give up on juveniles and instead help them be a part of society, however, she believes that some sophisticated teens that create horrible crimes should be tried as adults. Bridgett Jones claims that teens think differently than adults and still
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.
School-to-prison pipeline embodies an unescapable and intimidating horror for juveniles today, because they are being put into the criminal justice from minor offenses (Messinger, 2016). It is punishable by a ticket, court appearance, and even put away in prison or a juvenile detention center. Also, this includes the presence of a police officer at the schools, School Reference Office (SRO), which included harsh tactics, physical restraint, punishments that result in suspensions, expulsion, or “push out” of class (Elias, 2013). With this research, I tend to find why are low income, racial minorities are being targeted and how are they are being
The intent of this argumentative research paper, is to take a close look at school systems disciplinary policies and the effect they have on students. While most school systems in the nation have adopted the zero tolerance policies, there are major concerns that specific students could be targeted, and introduced into the criminal justice system based on these disciplinary policies. This research paper is intended to focus on the reform of zero tolerance policies, and minimizing the school to prison pipeline.
In the most recent years, the relationship between educational institutions and the juvenile justice system, which was once created to protect children, has displayed an ultimatum for minors through “zero tolerance” policies that result in sending individuals from school to prison to pipeline. Studies have shown that these policies are not beneficial to students or the educational environment that should be guaranteed to children. Opponents argue that the policies promote safety, but through this research it can be concluded that the policies actually increase danger. Studies demonstrate the factors that affect the enforcement of these policies which include media, the sociopolitical atmosphere, and the racial disproportionality, yet there are valid solutions for this issue that can be explored.
Following the Columbine tragedy in 1999, “school systems across the nation introduced the zero-tolerance policies aimed at the curtailment of harmful student behaviors” (Noll, 2014, p. 295). The original focus of the policies was to eliminate the use/carrying of weapons but soon after spread to restricting drugs and medication (2014). By 2006 95% of the U.S. public schools had adopted the zero-tolerance policies and more than half of them reported taking significant action against students, many of which resulted in expulsion (2014). While the zero-tolerance polices were originally welcomed by all members of a community as a means of promoting and keeping a safer environment-- as of late many individuals are questioning the relevance of some actions and some school officials (2014).
Schools are safe places. However, the American public has become increasingly concerned with crime in schools and the safety of students. In part, this concern has been shaped by the highly publicized acts ...
The zero tolerance policy has become a national controversy in regards to the solid proven facts that it criminalizes children and seems to catch kids who have no intention of doing harm. Although, there has been substantial evidence to prove that the policies enforced in many schools have gone far beyond the extreme to convict children of their wrongdoing. The punishments for the act of misconduct have reached a devastating high, and have pointed students in the wrong direction. Despite the opinions of administrators and parents, as well as evidence that zero tolerance policies have deterred violence in many public and private schools, the rules of conviction and punishment are unreasonable and should be modified.
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).
This paper will analyze the different theoretical issues pertaining to the modern juvenile court, determine their origin, and suggest a course of action for resolving these issues to the best extent possible. It is important to note, however, that the juvenile justice system alone cannot ever prevent all juvenile crime, respond perfectly to every situation or treat every suspect fairly. Furthermore, an effective antidote to modern juvenile crime would necessitate far broader action, addressing underlying social structure inequalities that breed poverty and social disorganization.
The historical development of the juvenile justice system in the United States is one that is focused on forming and separating trying juveniles from adult counterparts. One of the most important aspects is focusing on ensuring that there is a level of fairness and equality with respect to the cognitive abilities and processes of juvenile as it relates to committing crime. Some of the most important case legislation that would strengthen the argument in regard to the development of the juvenile justice system is related to the reform of the justice system during the turn of the 19th century. Many juveniles were unfortunately caught in the crosshairs of being tried as adults and ultimately receiving punishments not in line with their ability
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.
This term paper will examine the history of the Juvenile Justice System and the different types of correctional facilities.
This paper describes the various legislations and movements that were established in 19th century to address the issue of juvenile justice system. It outlines the challenges faced by the legislation and movements and their implications in addressing the issues of the juvenile justice system.
The original jurisdiction for prosecution in juvenile court depends on the state, typically with an upper age of fifteen, sixteen, and/or seventeen. In the juvenile courts, violations of criminal law are referred to as delinquency cases. In 2009, US. courts with juvenile jurisdiction handled more than 1.5 million delinquency cases (Hockenberry & Puzzanchera, 2014). In a 2012 landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court struck down laws that mandate a life sentence for convicted juvenile offender which was Miller v. Alabama. The Court held that mandatory life without parole for those under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of “cruel and unusual punishments” and that a “judge or jury must