In the past two decades there has been a question all through the country – do zero tolerance policies actually work? There has been conflicting research and even more controversial incidents. The policies known as Zero Tolerance were adopted in the early 1990’s to combat drugs and weapons. Those in favor of the policies say that they are needed; those opposed to them say that they are too strict on children for minor offenses. The policies are hotly debated. Some want them, some do not, and others believe it should be considered on a case by case basis. To begin with, viewpoint one is that zero tolerance policies do more to help students than to harm them. For starters, some say that despite any missteps, the policies are still needed. Firstly, …show more content…
Second for the pro side, Zero Tolerance is helped out by other polices put in place. Firstly, schools have put in many policies to help Zero Tolerance. For example, William Cellis, author for The New York Times, shares that a high school has eliminated lockers and only allows students to carry “mesh or clear bags” in order to keep others safe (Cellis). Thus, the schools have other policies aside from Zero Tolerance so that their students can be safe. Secondly, Zero Tolerance does not only cover students in possession of dangerous weapons. For instance, The New York Times reports that a girl was suspended after she refused to change out of her clothes that violated the school’s dress code (New York Times). Therefore, even if the policies do not work for weapons, the policies are good at upholding the other rules. Thirdly, bullies are being held accountable under the rules of the Zero Tolerance policies. To illustrate, Greg Toppo, author for USA Today, tells that, after a gay teenager’s suicide, his bullies were tried and convicted because of laws put in place by Zero Tolerance. Other bullies have since been tried as criminals (Toppo). Hence, the policies work when holding people accountable for their actions. For all these reasons, it could be reasoned that schools across the country need the Zero Tolerance …show more content…
Firstly, a student was suspended over literally nothing. For example, Allen Abel, author for Calgary Herald, shares that a second grader was suspended because his vice principal thought he bit his Pop-Tart into the shape of a gun, when in reality it was supposed to be a mountain (Abel). Thus, students do not even need proof in order to be suspended. Secondly, another student was suspended for an absurd reason. The New York Times reported that a girl was suspended because it was her birthday and she brought a cake, along with a knife to cut the cake. The teacher used the knife and then suspended the girl, despite the fact that the girl never touched the knife (New York Times). Therefore, schools are too quick to suspend. Thirdly, another student was suspended with little to no cause. To illustrate, Sara Rimer, writer for The New York Times tells that a boy was suspended for drawing a picture of two stick figures pointing guns at each other (Rimer). Hence, a school suspended the boy over a harmless drawing. For all these reasons, Zero Tolerance has done more harm than
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
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
They help keep schools and students safe and provide a positive learning environment. This has idea has just been taken too far by school administrators (Wison, 2014). We live in a society where more and more rights have been given to juveniles which have also back fired on us. In days past schools could hand out discipline as well as parents, which in turn could put an end to minor behaviors, where now they are often allowed to advance into things worse, where school administrators see no other choice but to suspend and expel (Wison, 2014). Likewise, we cannot be suspending and expelling students at the drop of a hat because what they did may fall into a gray area, yes there are times when it is needed, but school administrators need to take the time to step back and look at the situation and stop overreacting (Wison, 2014). Suspension and expulsion results in missed classroom time, causing some students to fall so far behind they stop caring about the school work and drop out. Other students are being forced into the criminal justice system ending up with records that can haunt them for life. Eliminating the school-to-prison pipeline will allow these students who are likely to fall into its trap to be able to have a change at a successful life (Wison,
In the current days, we have a problem with our youth, they aren’t finishing school. Majority of middle school and high school students will not graduate because of a problem called the “School to Prison Pipeline”, this zero- tolerance policy that has been adopted by many schools, police officers, and judges. In my research, I tend to find “How is School to Prison Pipeline affecting juveniles around the United States?”. This topic is very interesting to me because how are juveniles being treated like criminals at a very young age, when they have done nothing wrong.
The majority of prisoners incarcerated in America are non-violent offenders. This is due mainly to mandatory minimum sentencing laws, which is a method of prosecution that gives offenders a set amount of prison time for a crime they commit if it falls under one of these laws, regardless of their individual case analysis. These laws began in the 1980s, when the use of illegal drugs was hitting an all time high (Conyers 379). The United States began enacting legislature that called for minimum sentencing in an effort to combat this “war on drugs.” Many of these laws give long sentences to first time offenders (Conyers). The “three strikes” law states that people convicted of drug crimes on three separate occasions can face life in prison. These laws were passed for political gain, as the American public was swept into the belief that the laws would do nothing other than help end the rampant drug crimes in the country. The laws are still in effect today, and have not succeeded to discourage people from using drugs. Almost fifty percent...
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.
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.
Dress codes can reduce violence in many different ways. “The National School Board Association estimates that approximately 135,000 guns are brought to America’s 85,000 public schools each day.” (Larry Wilder, Pros of the Dress Code, pg. 1) “Some dress codes require students to have the belt line exposed at all times for fear of guns concealed under clothing.” (Wilder 1) “Educators reported a decrease in violence when dress codes were implemented.” (Wilder 1) Every day so many guns are brought to school. If dress codes were implemented in all schools that number should go down. If this dress codes requires students to show a belt line. Students who bring guns will have a harder time concealing them, and most likely will not bring them.
“More than half of federal prisoners are incarcerated for drug crimes…” (Branson, 2012). Nonviolent drug offenses in America are unrightly over punished, causing more harm than good to those charged and all American citizens. Drug arrests and imprisonments are far too common and are taking focus off of more important crimes. The sentences for nonviolent drug crimes are far too long and harsh for the crime. Punishment against nonviolent drug crimes are not working and is causing more harm than good. The harsh punishment for nonviolent drug offenses might not seem like a problem at first, but it causes a huge toll on everyone involved. A simple nonviolent drug arrest could ruin an otherwise law abiding citizens’ life. The war on drugs is damaging
The Exclusionary Rule made its first appearance in the judicial system when it was put there by the Supreme Court thanks to Weeks v. United States. At first the Exclusionary Rule was only used in federal cases, only after fifty years of being adopted by the Supreme Court was it used in state cases as well. Before Weeks v. United States, any and all evidence that was acquired illegally or that violated the peoples constitutional rights was still used, if it was practical to the circumstance. The definition of the Exclusionary Rule is, “a rule that forbids the introduction of illegally obtained evidence in a criminal trial (The Free Dictionary, 2014).” The Fourth Amendment reads “…the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Law, 2008).”
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).
Students’ rights in schools are limited or just taken away. Kids are forced to do whatever the officials at their school, either the principal or the teachers, tell the students to do. One of the main right that gets taken away or limited is students’ first amendment rights, which is the freedom of expression. Students can gets suspended by just doing things the staff at the school does not like, including saying things that they don 't like or supporting a religion that the school does not support. Also, if something is said about the school or the people attending the school is said on social media that student can also get in a lot of trouble. Students should be able to have more first amendment
When people think of the term “juvenile delinquency” they may think of the extreme regulations some schools have begun to enact upon individual students in response to major issues such as bullying and school shootings. Criminal prosecution seems to have become the normality in many bullying cases these days as some students can find themselves being suspended for making guns out of paper, or even drawing a gun. Though these “no tolerance” policies that some schools have come up with in order to prevent delinquency from happening may help deter these negative behaviors in some circumstances they are in no way a practical solution, overall.
By definition, in school suspension is “a program to which a student is assigned because of disruptive behavior for a specific amount of time.” (Effective Program, 156) Many schools that have in school suspension programs have a zero-tolerance policy. This deters bad behavior by having swift and serious consequences for breaking school rules.