Defying The Haircut Policy

A consistent approach to behaviour helps pupils learn right from wrong and to appreciate that rules exist for the good of everyone.

behaviour policy – in order for effective learning to take place, good behaviour in all aspects of school life is necessary. By adhering to this policy we aim to recognise and promote positive behaviour and in doing so will help to promote self-esteem,

The schools policy for behaviour will give information on how you should manage more difficult behaviour as a teacher or TA. It is also important that pupils understand the behaviour policy of the school so that they have a clear idea of how bad behaviour will be dealt with if they choose to go against school rule or behave in an inappropriate manner.

They are given complete discretion on how they want to implement rules in their district. School safety is one of the main reasons for adopting a zero tolerance of violence policy and educational leaders are focused on handling these types of situations with safety in mind. Moreover, this was the basis for which the nine students were punished. Regardless of the reasons students become involved in negative situations, they may be held responsible and face the consequences of their actions. That is, students may still be disciplined in spite of their motives. In this regard, the zero tolerance of violence policy does not preclude making decisions about student intent and motivation of individual students. Conversely, students are allowed their due process rights, where they are able to dispute any accusations or problems they have with the decisions made against

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).

Out of school suspensions (OSS) are often enforced with the assumption that students receiving the suspension are less likely to repeat the problem behavior in the future. However, this has been proven to be false. Suspending a student for engaging in a certain behavior does not in fact serve as a deterrent from the behavior but as a deterrent from attending school instead. In actuality, receiving just a single suspension can increase the probability of a student experiencing academic failure, school dropout, and involvement in the juvenile justice system. Knowing this, some educators still believe that for many students, suspension can serve as an effective lesson. One of the greatest concerns that educators and administrators face is the matter of classroom management. It is part of their job to ensure a safe, productive and supportive classroom allowing students to learn and grow to their greatest potential. Though there are several strategies gauged towards managing a classroom, the most severe offences often lead to either in or out of school suspension. Some of the largest concerns faced with out of school suspensions is that they are often ineptly applied, used unfairly against students of color and seemingly ineffective at producing better behavior. Also known as exclusionary discipline, the majority of offenses that led to OSS have not been centered around violence but instead emphasised issues of classroom insubordination and defiance. In some rather extreme cases

The school to prison pipeline continues to be one of the huge issues in an education system. In 1990s, zero-tolerance policies, which is “a strict enforcement of regulations and bans against undesirable behaviors or possession of items” (“zero”), have been adopted in various education system in the U.S. The purpose of these zero-tolerance policies was to prevent minor crimes that could become serious crimes, such as violation, murder, negligence, terrorism and more. Thus, many students get prosecuted and sent into the juvenile justice system because of this policy. Under this circumstance, schools should accept exception and consider the reason why they broke the rule. Also, students should not be given heavy punishments

This includes prohibitions against assault and theft or respect for leaders (Source G). Given that students are at an age where they are extremely moldable, it is imperative that they learn these rules in school.

“Zero-Tolerance Policy” is the leading cause of most disobedient students, the reason why most students drop out of school and the cause of insubordination among students. The Zero-Tolerance Policy is a policy that, like the name states, has zero-tolerance for anything. Anything seen as a threat or anything that sends an inappropriate message towards the community is considered bad and the student could get arrested, suspended and/or expelled. The Zero-Tolerance policy applies to any student, regardless if a student has any health problems and falls to any student between the ages of 4-18. It could also apply to a student who could have the lowest amount of infractions possible. They say that removing students is necessary for learning, but, in doing that, they hurt the student as well. Some places don’t provide alternative places for students to learn at, really taking away their education. If it really ensures a safe and orderly environment for children, then there should be proof. There is no actual proof that it makes students feel safer (Wahl, "School Zero Tolerance Policies Do Harm" par. 1). It alienates the student and makes the student feel as if they are the “odd-one out”. Due to the injustices that this creates, the Zero-Tolerance Policy is ineffective, because it teaches students injustice, lowers students academic rates and minor offences are punished.

Sometimes, the SROs programs have negative impacts on student’s life. Before, student misconduct was held by the teachers, but now it is controlled by the law enforcement in school (Beger 2002). For example, “five students were suspended and charged with crime for tossing peanuts at each other on a school bus” (Beger 2002:123). Schools have accepted the strict and high-security measures to protect students, but would result in diminishing the rights of students (Beger 2002). Students are searched without suspicion, especially the minority communities (Beger 2002). The unreasonable searches diminish the rights of students, which protect them from unreasonable search under the Charter of Rights and Freedom. It is clear that police in schools may impact negatively if the police officers conduct an unreasonable search based on class, racism, and gender. The result of zero tolerance in school leads more students’ school-to-prison pipeline, which results in more youth in prison. The zero-tolerance policy accepted in school to expel any students who involved in any illegal or misconduct behavior (Beger 2002). However, if the students feel that the police in schools and rules of school are fair and just, then eventually students will follow the rules and provide safer school surroundings (Beger 2002:127). Because the main reason of SRO is to prevent the drug issue, violence, shooting, threat, and maintaining law in school.

Consequences have to be set for those students that get involved in bad behaviors. As leaders this take a lot of creative thinking to where students can really learn from their mistakes, this helps the students make the decision that they don’t want to do them anymore. Constant OSS days doesn’t affect students nowadays, so coming up with a program for the constant offenders to help them get back focused on what is important.

When it comes to facial hair in our school, for some reasoning outside the realm of even our principal, the issue is a heinous act punishable to the fullest extent. Facial hair is a form of self expression and self identification in a young man’s life. When we see half the male population, and the ones we look up to have facial hair. It becomes a social construct in our lives that in essence affects how we see ourselves. It can create a self confidence in one who before had none. With this in mind our school has enforced holistic regulations upon the male gender that take away self-expression and infract upon our God given right to present ourselves as we see fit. When a school takes this away from you it turns from being unethical to an

Students struggle throughout high school and go through a great deal of stress. Whether it be making friends, or working hard to pass a difficult class. To make things more pressuring, they are not allowed to wear what they want. The administration made the decision that it is best to suspend a student for their choice in clothing. If they go against the rule of dress code, there will be serious consequences. What students wear should not affect their class work. If a student gets sent home for their outfit, it is affecting their grades and attendance. Punishment disrupts the students education more than what they are wearing. High school students should feel free to embrace their individuality without being pressured by dress codes; therefore, it should be eliminated from all schools indefinitely.

One of the rules and regulations in the school is the haircut policy. Government makes and implemented laws and policy to ensure the safety of every students. They implemented School policies that can reach a long term goals in protecting students life inside the school grounds . Haircut policy in school is very important because it is one policy that can build discipline among students. The Department of Education (DepEd) has a long-standing policy that governs good grooming. This includes prescribing a so-called proper haircut for male pupils in both private and public schools “the prescribed haircut for boys is at least one inch above the ear and three inches above the collar line.” (Quijano , 2011).

You, school officials should not be able to dictate these normal hairstyles. We have our rightly given amendments like the first which gives