The Pros And Cons Of Zero Tolerance Policies

Juvenile adolescents in discipline trouble are being cycled from public education to prison more and more today. There are school districts in South Carolina that have continued to expel students, suspend students out of school, and remove students to alternative settings. Moreover, South Carolina law identifies students that are seventeen years old as an adult. Consequently, many at risk students are kicked out of school at this age or they drop out. Therefore, once a student starts on this discipline track they head down the path of drop out usually with some criminal charges attached. Many schools in South Carolina also continue to have zero tolerance discipline items that have a one strike and you’re out format. Research has suggested

Therefore, Schachter continues by saying, “Starting in 1994 with the requirements of the federal Gun-Free Schools Act and propelled by the shootings at Columbine High School five years later, districts began implementing zero-tolerance policies not just on possessing weapons but on a variety of student behaviors-from bringing in drugs and alcohol to cursing, disrupting class or even violating the dress code” (p.26). Research has shown the unwanted outcomes of zero-tolerance policies but yet many states still practice using zero-tolerance policies. Philip Mongan and Robert walker discusses the impact of the Gun Free Schools Act and says, “While they had good intentions with the introduction of the G.F.S.A., several unintended consequences have emerged, and as Judge Hamilton eloquently stated in his concurring opinion in support of zero-tolerance policies (Ratner v. Loudoun County Public Schools, 2001), ‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions’ (p.5)” (p.232). Reform of zero-tolerance policies are slowly taking place according to the research, however, there are still a vast majority of districts across the country (to include South Carolina) that still rely heavily on zero-tolerance policies and exclusionary practices that continue to reinforce the public

Silverman discusses the implications of the zero tolerance approach on minorities and the national attention it has created. Silverman and others agree that there needs to be consequences for students that are out to hurt others, but that there needs to be room for administrators to use sound judgement or in most cases good ole common sense. Zero tolerance policies currently do not distinguish between a 5-year-old bringing a nerf gun to school and a 15-year-old bringing a loaded .45 caliber with the intention of doing harm to