The Pros And Cons Of School Conmissions

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

Zero tolerance policies are the catalyst for the School-to-Prison pipeline. The problem with zero tolerance policies rely on several different factors. Even though, the vision for zero tolerance policies is clear in the sense that safety is a main priority, A ten year study of zero tolerance policies conducted by the American Psychological Association concluded that the use of these overly harsh policies "did not improve school safety." Since these policies are not increasing school safety it is a clear indicator that change in disciplinary methods is necessary. Additionally, these overly harsh policies create racial disparities mainly focused on minorities. The reason for these racial disparities particularly arise from implicit bias. Unfortunately, student of color and minorities are disportionately represented in suspensions, expulsions, and arrests. Exclusionary discipline principles disproportionately lead the youth, particularly minorities, from classrooms to court and prisons. Racial disparities within school’s disciplinary actions is clear when looking at discipline rates. The Civil Rights Data Collection, gathered by the US Department of Education, graphed suspension rates and disparities in a national test sample during 2012. Figure 1 portrays the ratio of white students that constitute for a little more than half of students enrolled in school while black and hispanic students constitute for less than

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,

Students are being handcuffed, arrested and expelled for possession of a butter knife or water gun, punishment that disproportionately targets African-American students, students being alienated and never returning to school after being suspended or expelled are all byproducts of the zero tolerance policies adopted by their school district. School administrators have abandoned common sense due to their adherence to zero tolerance policies by applying the same discipline to students that are guilty of minor offenses and non-violent rules violations, or just poor judgment as they due to

Schools should leave their old ways and get rid of school suspension because this makes the student feel as though there voice is being heard in the matter. Cindy attends Turner Falls High School , Cindy has gotten herself into trouble because two boys were making racist jokes therefore she felt threatened so she throws two lunch trays at them causing her to be in the restorative justice room.Cindy has the chance to explain her point of view to the teacher without feeling pressured or frightened.One might say that it would be more efficient if

When using expulsion and suspension the school administrators are excluding students from educational instruction, which is contradictory to the mission of education. In addition, when further behavior incidents were added to school districts' zero-tolerance policies, it gave permission to school administrators to apply suspensions more frequently and freely. If zero-tolerance were truly an effective deterrent, then it would be an expected reduction in the use of suspension, but in reality, there has been an increase in the use of suspension. Drug policy organizations like the Drug Policy Alliance supports replacing failed zero tolerance policies with honest, reality-based drug education and programs. Recommended Changes As mentioned before the Drug Policy Alliance wants to do away with the zero tolerance policy and offer reality-based drug education. The reality-based model is described as including education, intervention/assistance, and restorative

According to Black (2015), “Approximately three million students per year have been excluded from school and deprived of their statutory and constitutional rights to education.” (p.81). The zero-tolerance policy was made in efforts to protect all students' safety and to maintain an effective learning environment that is free from drug, weapons, violence, and school disruption. However, Black’s research indicated that, as implemented, zero tolerance policies are related to a number of negative consequences and are ineffective in the long run (2015). Besides students receiving harsh discipline for minor infractions in school, the crucial downfall of the policy is the increasing rates of school dropout and juvenile prison admissions. Where do

One factor that has led to discrepancies is the use of zero-tolerance policies in schools. Zero-tolerance policies picked up traction in the 1990’s and focused on the possession and use of drugs and weapons on school property. (Noll, Clashing Views on Controversial Education issues p.309) The Guns Free School Act of 1994 placed a one-year expulsion and referral to the juvenile court system for any student caught on campus with a weapon. (same as above) The debate on zero-tolerance has been centered on whether the policy has reduced violence in schools and if the policy is being used for the severest of offenses. In a 2014 address, Arne Duncan, then U.S. Secretary of Education, stated as many as 95 percent of school suspensions were for nonviolent

It is estimated that 3.3 million children annually are expelled or suspended for violent or non violent offenses while attending school school. The majority of the offenses are nonviolent offenses that are handled just as harshly as violent school infractions due to zero tolerance laws. This essay will show how how zero tolerance laws, bad schools and policing in schools is failing millions of minority students and fueling the school to prison pipeline.

Fields and Emshwiller authors of “Policing the Halls: For More Teens, Arrests Replace School Discipline” report “In 2012 92,000 students were subject to school-related arrests” (Fields and Emshwiller A.1). Zero tolerance policies are a strict set of rules that certain school districts are starting to follow regarding weapons, drugs and more. These policies are relating to an extreme amount of juvenile arrests. Some argue that these rules are too strict because teens and kids are getting unreasonable charges. Another issue people have against this policy is that the principal and other school administrators are not involved with punishments. Some schools believe this policy is

Schools districts have had to really balance the interest of the whole school, the student body, teachers and faculty . . . as well as the rights of individual bad actors. The ability to strike that balance, and to do it fairly, more than likely influences the effectiveness of the zero-tolerance policies. Whether or not zero tolerance is effective brings about more argumentative material. Statistical data reports a significant drop in school homicides following the 1999 school shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton,

Many have researched to see if zero tolerance policies actually work. When looking at these policies we have to recognize the tough decisions made by teachers and school administers when it comes to school violence, but it is important to recognize the gaps that exist within these policies that negatively affect students and their communities. It is true that these policies aim to protect against intra-school violence, but the truth is that these policies often work in major punishment for trivial offences (Skiba and Knesting 2001). The implementation of these policies has become civil rights issues for both sides of the political spectrum, organizations like the ACLU and the Rutherford Institute have both criticized the policies and have defended students who are being negatively affected by this era of discipline. Still, defenders of the policy believe this will still be the one cure all for the growing trend in violence across America. Even though it is a common belief about zero tolerance, it has been around for a couple of decades now and the evidence does not support the common belief. With the question of: do zero tolerance policies make schools safer? The answer is not necessarily. There is this common misconception that booting “problem” students benefit the school. But it has been tested that with the increase of zero tolerance discipline such as suspension and expulsion does

“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.

In the 1980s, there was a policy shift toward laws that were tougher on crime. The public perceived that violent and serious juvenile crime was rising and that the system in place was not effective. Mostly, this was due to a misunderstanding regarding the increase of juvenile crime. Regardless of that, many states passed laws that mandated tougher punishments.4 This shift in public and political perception created a phenomenon that has continued to develop since the early nineties– zero-tolerance policies. The adoption of these policies in school discipline practices has considerably increased the number of children and adolescents suspended, expelled, and arrested for minor offenses in school.5 In recent years, we have seen public schools

First off students will continue to act the same. A lot of students would rather get out of schools anyways. They want to not do work and play at home. In school suspensions help the student keep