Positive Effects Of A Zero-Out Policy

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 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).

According to the Criminal Justice Fact Sheet, the U.S. has 25 percent of the world's prisoners. Wilsons purpose for writing this article is to explain that “zero-tolerance practices of exclusionary discipline fuel school failure and push students into the justice system. Wilson did a great job explaining” (Wilson). The four steps to cut off the school-to-prison pipeline, but Wilson could have went more into detail about the fourth step which explain youth engagement because just youth telling stories

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 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

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,

Schools are institutions where acquisition of knowledge is fostered in a nurturing milieu. In 1994, when Congress passed “The Gun-Free Schools Act”, also known as the “Zero Tolerance Policy” by many, it was intended to provide students and educators with a safe environment conducive to learning. Nonetheless, “the real result of these policies is not safer schools, but significant adverse effects, such as severe disruption of students’ academic progress in ways that have lasting negative consequences” (Juvenile Law Center, 2014). However, over the past 25 years, opponents of the Zero Tolerance policy has decried it as a “school-to-prison pipeline believing that it does more harm than good.

I also believe that zero tolerance policies either need to be revised or replace with programs that allow for growth when a student misbehaves. The future of zero tolerance policies looks bleak because the history has shown that it isolates students from

There are hundreds if not thousands of students in any given school. The sheer size and magnitude of the student population encompassed in these schools leads to complications of school safety. Zero tolerance is a policy which was brought about enforcing school safety more firmly, and aimed to better protect students. However, the way in which these students are protected is highly debatable, making the zero tolerance ideology very controversial. Exactly which approach is most effective in protecting a student, let alone, thousands? Is strictness more effective than leniency? Overly strict policies aim to protect the majority, however, severally punish those who have to deal with the wrath of zero tolerance, those who violate the rules. Overly lenient policies can lead to dreadful events, however, give students a sense of reason, in turn creating an understanding of what they have done wrong. In the long run which method is most effective in protecting students? These type of questions, along with the excess amount of questionable cases, compose a highly controversial topic.

However, not all theories this subject offers can be applied with a sociological standpoint due to the psychological effects a student undergoes experiencing a harsh policy. Literature provided in support constantly reminds the community about the disparities, the gender factors, minorities, socioeconomic levels, and the ever-growing barriers. Recently, research is further exclaiming the crisis America’s public education system is undergoing. It is becoming apparent how the rise of suspensions and expulsions in middle schools, further affects the future decisions a student makes (Losen, Skiba 2010); further in, the role reversal from being a student to becoming criminal/prisoner. Hence, the research is pure. It further examines and exclaims the damage, zero-tolerance policies have in the education system and students; further on, the penetration into the criminal justice system. Overall, there is a deficit on the in-depth explanations why and what are the internal/external factors that continuously push a student to fail, and further on becoming a number in the criminal justice

“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.

When a student gets suspended it is usually because, a teacher did not want to deal with the problem the student had caused. So instead of handling this problem they kick that student out of school for a few days. If teachers were to actually deal with the problem and find out why the student had caused it then maybe the student would not become a problem again. People who like suspension will say that it helps that child know what they did wrong but, it really does not. Do you think the child goes home, sits and cries about what they did wrong? I doubt it. We do not want to create anymore enemies for the children than they are already going to get so we should not use suspension as a

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.