Zero Tolerance
Pro and Cons
Salbetha Patterson
Arkansas State University
Introduction Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. I would like to begin by thanking the parents and stakeholders in this community for their hard work and dedication to the students in our district. Today’s topic of discussion is concerning the implication of the school policy Zero Tolerance and how it relates to the students in our school district. For those of you who are unfamiliar with this policy, you need not to worry. It is my mission to provide you with the pros, cons, and my stance on this policy, all within this speech. Before we continue any further, let us first establish a better understanding of “Zero Tolerance”.
…show more content…
26) . Let’s ponder on this definition. If the child commits a certain offense, then there is a predetermined form of discipline. Since most Zero Tolerance policies are district-wide, it establishes a uniform level of expectation. As a parent and/or guardian, you will be informed as to what these disciplinary actions are prior to the start of the school year via the school handbook. These actions include, but are not limited to, the …show more content…
Because of the policy, he is sent to the office and this results in an expulsion. Now in this example, can we say without a doubt that Jonathan is fully responsible for his actions and deserve this type of punishment? The application of zero tolerance policies tend to support a philosophy of punishment rather than a philosophy of rehabilitation (Zirkel, 1997). Which leads into my next con of that expelled students could be denied educational opportunities and be put at greater risk for becoming a drop out due to the fact that they may never be able to catch up academically. This con could lead to an even greater negative outcome such as the students developing an alcohol or drug addiction or unemployment. Personal Position
Over the course of this speech, you have heard the pros and cons regarding the zero tolerance policy. My personal stance on zero tolerance is that it is needed in our district to ensure the safety of all community stakeholders, staff and students. The uniformity creates a safe atmosphere on the premises that the infractions are universally accepted and predetermined, eliminating the chance of bias from our administrators I do understand that the cons can be discouraging to parents who children may be affected in the future. However, we want all of our campuses to be a safe haven for our children to learn, grow, and become productive citizens in our
This decision makes it clear the most important thing for a school to do is to protect the students. It also states that the board of education, whose role is to oversee the schools, must make sure that the staff of the schools is protecting those children. This case highlights that long-term abuse can happen in schools if there are not clear policies or, if there are, that there is no one ensuring that those policies are
A new policy is needed and most certainly should start out with holding schools to handle their own discipline situations, rather than relying on school security and police (Wilson, 2014). School administrators must be able to differentiate between what is a true discipline situation and when a student simply made a mistake. The rate of school suspensions have skyrocketed over the last thirty years from 1.7 million nationwide to 3.1 million and growing today (ACLU, n.d.). Each school needs to create policies of when to get school security involved and what the school’s security job involves. Unless there is a true threat to the safety of the school and/or its student’s law enforcement should never be called (Wison, 2014). The instinct to dial 911 at every infraction has to stop. Furthermore the schools must develop a gender and racial fairness; black children should not be receiving harsher punishments for similar infractions of white students (Wilson,
I feel that there are many circumstances in which expulsion is extreme and unnecessary, especially when it has to do with tolerance of an honor code violation. Fallout: What is the difference between There is no answer that is going to satisfy all. If the code is changed, those who lived and died by it are going to be upset. No matter what happens, the media is going to point to different answers.
I believe schools are a reflection of their communities. Our schools are no longer segregated due the US Supreme court decision handed down in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. However, a schools makeup is similar to the communities they serve. A majority white school belongs in a majority white community. A diverse community such in large cities like New York will have diverse student body in their schools. Schools in the United States have been desegregated for over a half-century or have they. A film called “Little Rock Central- 50 Years Later” says differently. Little Rock Central is the famous high school where the Little Rock Nine students went to school. The school was forced by the federal government to desegregate. This film now captures this same high school fifty years later and finds a new type of segregation. The new type of segregation is now about social economic class and academic class.
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).
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.
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.
A science teacher in Mississippi asked her students to take a picture with their completed DNA Lego model. John Doe took his picture with a smile and a hand gesture in which his thumb, index, and middle finger was raised. This was enough to earn him an indefinite suspension with a recommendation for expulsion because his school administrators believed he flashed a gang sign although he was simply putting up three fingers to represent his football jersey number. (NPR Isensee, 2014). This kind of criminalization of young people contributes to suspension, dropout, and incarceration, and too often pushes students into what is referred to by many education scholars and activists as the “school-to-prison pipeline,” a term that refers to “the policies and practices that push our nation’s schoolchildren, especially our most at-risk children, out of classrooms and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems” (ACLU 2013). The School-to-Prison Pipeline is one of the most urgent challenges in education today. This paper will focus on the following circumstances and policies contributing to the school-to-prison pipeline: 1) resource deprived schools, 2) high-stake testing and 3) zero-tolerance discipline policies. However, it is important to note that the school-to-prison pipeline is a broad problem not limited to these three components and has been influenced by historical inequities (segregated education), concentrated poverty, and racial disparities in law enforcement (NAACP, 2005). They have each served to isolate and remove a massive number of people, a disproportionately large percentage of whom are youth of color, from their communities and from participation in civil society (NAACP, 2005). I argue for attention to the school-to-pr...
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 zero tolerance policy is strict and devises rules for students and faculty alike. It is a policy that doesn't ask questions when a rule is broken which often results in suspension and expulsion. The policy also addresses the possession of weapons, drugs, and alcohol. Many schools have adopted this policy and have observed both positive and negative results.
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).
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
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
Students who are disruptive in class and refused to do their work were sent down to discipline where they received the consequences for their actions. More often than not, in school suspension was the end result. The concept of in school suspension was new to me because it was not something that I had seen when I was growing up.
Zero tolerance laws initially were introduced as a means to discipline drug offenses of students while attending school. Due to increased gang violence, the policy spread nationwide after the 1994 signing of the “Gun Free Schools Act” where zero tolerance policies were coupled with the mandated reporting of a student to the police if they are carrying a gun or acting violence to other students or school