Broken Windows Theory In School

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

Zero-tolerance policies developed to prevent drug abuse and violence in school in 1990 in the U.S. Even if those behaviors or small things minor offenses were done by accident or unconsciously, students get prosecuted and sent into the juvenile justice system as a punishment. Schools create disciplines for suspending and expelling students when they break certain rules. For example, if a student brings a weapon to school, including items that may not hurt anyone like nail clippers and toy guns, if a student has drugs, including medications or alcohol on campus, if a student says anything that someone could get as a threat, if a student does not obey teacher’s instruction, if a student fights with other students, the student would be given punishment with no choice. After adopting this policy, the number of school suspensions and dismissals increased, and the number of students who send into the prison also increased as well. Therefore, the school to prison pipeline became an issue in the education system.

The school-to-prison pipeline in the United States is a figure of speech used to describe the increasing patterns of interaction students have with the juvenile and adult criminal justice systems as a consequence of procedures used by many school systems. A specific procedure would be the zero tolerance policies and the use of officers in schools. Currently in today’s American schools many children of color are being unfairly judged and treated by the public school systems zero tolerance policies. Zero tolerance policies have been implemented in schools in the last 20 years that include inserting school resource officers in schools and cracking down on all behavior that any authority figure may deem as a form of bad behavior. The policy is based upon deterring future misbehavior and is central to the philosophy of zero tolerance, and the effect of any punishment on future behavior is what defines effective punishment (Skinner, 1953). Zero tolerance policies causes the school environment to feel more like a prison and ultimately leads to black and Latinos being judged and guided to the prison system. A zero-tolerance policy orders predetermined penalties or punishments for specific wrongdoings.

The School-to-Prison Pipeline is a “national trend wherein children are funneled out of public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems” (“School-to-Prison Pipeline”). This phenomenon brings children into the juvenile justice system at a very young age. An article published in the journal Urban Education explains that, “The school-to-prison pipeline contributes to the atmosphere of increased surveillance of schools including police presence in schools, zero-tolerance policies, physical restraint tactics, and automatic consequence policies, resulting in suspensions from school” (Martin, Beese 2015). By increasing police presence in schools, children are more likely to be searched, questioned, or targeted by police than they would be without police present. And as a result, “children are far more likely to be subject to school-based arrests—the majority of which are for nonviolent offenses, such as disruptive behavior—than they were a generation ago” (“School-to-Prison Pipeline”). For example, if a child was misbehaving in class in a school that had a police presence, they could possibly get arrested and sent to prison. But if a child was acting the same way in a school that did not have any police presence, they would not be arrested. Police would most likely be present in a school in an urban environment or poor neighborhood because more crime occurs in urban and poor places, so in theory, by placing police in schools, they would be preventing any crimes

The School-to-Prison Pipeline presents the intersection of a K-12 educational system and a juvenile system, which too often fails to serve our nations at risk youth. For most students, the pipeline begins with inadequate resources in public schools. Overcrowded classrooms, a lack of qualified teachers, and insufficient funding for "extras" such as counselors, special education services, even textbooks, lock students into second-rate educational environments. This failure to meet educational needs increases disengagement and dropouts, increasing the risk of later court involvement (Bennett-Haron, Fasching-Varner, Martin, & Mitchell 2014). Even worse, schools may actually encourage dropouts in response to pressures from test-based accountability regimes such as the No Child Left Behind Act, which create incentives to push out low-performing students to boost overall test scores (Cramer, Gonzales, & Lafont-Pellegrini 2014). Lacking resources, facing incentives to push out low-performing students, and responding to a handful of highly-publicized school shootings, schools have embraced zero-tolerance policies that automatically impose severe punishment regardless of circumstances. Under these policies, students have been expelled for bringing nail clippers or scissors to school (Christle, Jolivette, & Nelson 2005). Rates of suspension have increased dramatically in recent years from 1.7 million in 1998 to 3.1 million in 2010

The ever-growing problem that is occurring in public schools around the country is the school to prison pipeline epidemic. The school to prison pipeline is a term used to describe how students are being pushed out of public school and into the criminal justice system. This epidemic is a result of the education system’s zero tolerance policy that enforces harsh punishments for misbehaving students. Although its goal was to eliminate misbehavior, studies have shown that the increased disciplinary actions have resulted in a modified school environment, police in school

Often times it’s the student’s needs and the school being unable to meet the student’s needs that lead to the student being disciplined. Kids who are behind academically, and unable to perform at the same level as their peers often act out in frustration or humiliation (Noguera, 2003). Once these students are labelled as difficult, incorrigible, and unteachable they tend to believe these things about themselves and act out more in class which leads to a cycle of discipline that can ultimately lead to permanent expulsion. For some of these students, these continued rule violations lead to run-ins with the police and the criminal justice system. School administrators who are at times frustrated themselves from failed attempts to steer children from a “bad path” don’t realize that in throwing their hands up and giving up on these students, are in a way helping shuttle students from school to the penitentiary (Noguera, 2003).

As detailed by the American Civil Liberties Union (2013), the circumstances and policies contributing to the school-to-prison pipeline include: 1) failing public schools, in which inadequate resources in public schools create second-rate educational environments, thus decreasing engagement and increase dropout, 2) zero tolerance and other school ‘discipline’ policies impose unnecessarily harsh punishments, which leave students unsupervised and more likely to fall behind in school work, and which most dramatically impact children of color, 3) high-stakes testing creates a less engaging student environment and creates incentives for schools to push out low preforming students, 4) disciplinary alternative education programs for suspended or expelled students lack accountability, quality services, and leave students struggling to return to their regular schools, and 5) despite decreased resources, there has been an increased reliance on police who increase school-based arrests.

In the article, “Is Broken Windows a Broken Theory of Crime?” Kevin Drum defines the Broken Windows theory as a theory which “suggests that tolerance of small acts of disorder creates an environment that leads to rising amounts of serious crime. So if police crack down on small offenses – petty vandalism, public lewdness, etc. – crime reductions will follow” Though this theory has been around for a long time, it is still not a sound theory of crime.

Rebecca London, a research professor at UC Santa Cruz, explains about how the zero tolerance policy plays a critical role in developing the school-to-prison pipeline. The zero tolerance policy was implemented in 1990 in hopes to reduce the amount of criminal related activity in schools (London 2017). Because of the policy, many minor or small infringement of the school rules criminalized at-risk students. For example, students were punished heavily for carrying nail clippers, having over the counter medications, and even cutting the lunch line (London 2017). Students who partake in any of the examples or anything similar will be suspended or face tougher consequences than normal discipline actions compared to a privileged school. By punishing

Schools that are low performing have the highest rates of suspension and expulsion and the lowest graduation rates. According to Mississippi Today, “the dropout rate for students fell slightly to 11.8 percent in 2016, the lowest in five years.” If I were to eliminate funding as a barrier, zero tolerance policies would still exist- especially in public school systems in the South, amidst people of color. Zero tolerance policies are obstacles put in place for small infractions performed by students, which can lead to disciplinary actions such as: corporal punishment, detention, and suspension. These small infractions may be in the form of getting up without permission, excessive talking, etc. Schools should offer more alternative measures, which counsel students on their misbehavior and give the student an opportunity to amend his or her actions. These methods fall under a restorative justice model. Community organizations, like Nollie Jenkins Family Center, have proposed alternatives such as peer mediation and conflict resolution to help keep youth in a learning environment, off the streets, and away from a life of crime. A case study performed by Philadelphia Police School Diversion Program, discovered that after counseling students for infraction their number of juvenile arrests and suspension “dropped by 54%.” This could potentially be a catalyst in bending the moral arc in the direction of justice,

In recent years, public schools have been accused of participating in the school to prison pipeline. The school to prison pipeline refers to the growing incarceration of youths, resulting from the zero tolerance policies implemented in schools. Therefore, I decided to do my research based on the school to prison pipeline to understand what these accusations mean and their consequences. My research will be divided into three main categories; what is it and how the pipeline became common practice, how it affects the United States, and some solutions to the problem. So far, my claim is that the public schools unintentionally started to connect more students with the judicial system because of growing concern over crime. But when it became known

In conclusion, some of the solutions included in this paper to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline are to create non-punitive approaches, minimize investment in costly correctional systems to direct funds to under-resourced schools to create programs that would increase educational attainments. Programs such as Reconnecting Youth, intend to help students who face aggression, substance abuse and depression get through school and increase their educational performance. Further solutions included in this paper are: to restore discipline responsibilities to educators, reduce the use of police officers in schools and mandate alternatives to harsh discipline. The alternatives to harsh discipline include non-punitive approaches, which refers

School to prison pipeline is an upcoming challenge for today's schools on deciding what the punishment should be for students. “a disturbing national trend wherein children are funneled out of public schools and into the juvenile and criminal justice systems.”Daniel J. Losen & Gary Orfield eds., 2002)

Most often, school is not seen as an enjoyable place to be to begin with, and when that school environment is paired with difficulty learning, bullying, and lack of integration due to a disability, it becomes a toxic environment. Teachers have the ability to make school an enjoyable place to be. For high school students, graduating needs to be an exciting goal. When students with disabilities are expected to have a low paying job and low success whether they graduate or not, many students find that there is little ambition to graduate. Teachers have the responsibility of teaching their students that this is not the case, and that graduating is a great and powerful accomplishment. Testing that holds teachers responsible for their students test scores also has effects promoting the school-to-prison pipeline. When test scores are below acceptability, students occasionally get “pushed out”. Teachers can do something about this by advocating to their students that they are not a test score, and being supportive of their students regardless of scoring. An important aspect is that teachers use a positive behavioral approach to discipline (Coggshall, J. G., Osher, D. & Colombi, G., 2013). Through looking at the zero tolerance policy, it is evident that punishment only strengthens the pipeline. According to recent studies, most teachers are supportive of removing students with behavioral disorders from classrooms,