Zero-Tolerance Policy
“The epidemic of school violence has reached into the very heart of America.It is no longer the story of the big city or the ghetto.The infection of violence has found its way into our small towns and rural communities. It is everywhere in our country.” (Seldes, 1996)
Sheldon critically examines the school-to-prison pipeline as well as the zero-tolerance policy in respects to one another. The Zero-tolerance policy reflects that the school system is tough on crime. This increases the rates in which youth become criminalized at alarming rates than needed. “More minor offenses (or no offenses at all) are now processed formally by the police and the juvenile court.” (Sheldon, 2006) Examples include: (1) A five-year prison sentence for a 17-year old Texas high school basketball player who “threw an elbow” to the head of an opposing player in a basketball game; (2) two six-year old children suspended for three days for playing “cops and robbers” (pretending their fingers were guns and going “bang, bang” toward other children); (3) Suspension of a girl who gave a friend a Nuprin, for ‘dealing drugs’; (4) A 14-year old boy was charged with by school police with a felony for throwing a deadly missile, which turned out to be a Halloween “trick” of throwing an egg. He was taken away in handcuffs and put in juvenile detention.” (Sheldon, 2006) (5) In September 2010 Grant County, Wisconsin, authorities accused a 6-year old boy of first-degree sexual assault of a
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 started as a way to keep guns out of schools until the staff at school started to use it as a way to report and punish non serious offences (Heitzeg, 2009).
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 which results in sending individuals through the school to prison to pipeline. Studies have shown that these zero tolerance 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 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.
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 School-to-Prison Pipeline refers to the school policies and procedures that drive many of our nation’s schoolchildren into a pathway that begins in school and ends in the criminal justice system. Behavior that once led to a trip to the principal’s office and detention, such as school uniform violations, profanity and “talking back,” now often leads to suspension, expulsion, and/or arrest. Today, largely as a result of “zero tolerance” policies that mandate harsh punishments for even minor misbehavior in
According to Wilson (2014), “zero tolerance refers to strict, uncompromising, automatic punishment to eliminate undesirable behavior.” There is a link between the criminalization of youth and zero tolerance policies (Wilson, 2014). Zero tolerance policies have been associated with the term “school-to-prison pipeline and are found in schools across the nation. These policies lead to school failure and exclusion which in turn result in bad life outcomes and mass incarceration of boys and young men of color (Wilson, 2015). “Superpredators” became the label for juveniles during the late 80’s and early 90’s because there was a rise in high-profile violent and drug-related crimes. Boot camps became popular during this period
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.
This study examines the effect zero-tolerance policies have on minority girls in public and private school districts. The zero-tolerance policies intended to protect students, faculty, and staff have unintended negative consequences due to overuse or abuse of the policies. According to the literature, some schools use the policy as social control over minor incidents as a reason to expel or suspend students unnecessarily. Many causes of the overuse stem from federal funding needed for things such as academic performances. The purpose of this research is to bridge the gap in knowledge and show how strict zero-tolerance policies can have unintentional life-changing consequences. This is important because some incidents can be handled at the school
There are many advantages of having the zero tolerance policy in schools such as students having a better reason to learn. If students realize that when they do something wrong and they get punished it ruins their grades and lowers their academic level from missing so much school from suspension or missing a certain class because of in school suspension. It also helps them in the future, it allows them to understand how important it is following the rules and shows that they get punished for not following rules. Students learn to take responsibilities for their actions because in the future if you get into trouble the law enforcement or your boss is not gonna listen to your excuses on why you did something. It also helps as long as you don't
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
Zero tolerance policies mandate were initially aimed at making schools safe. Zero tolerance laws require the use of police sanction which include arrest for certain types of crimes. Normally, domestic violence crimes, gun-related crimes, and particular drug crimes which fit into the category.
In years past, we have heard and seen a multitude of so called " School horror stories". School shootings, students participating in recreational drug use on school grounds, and students causing serious injury to another classmate when they brought a weapon to school. Because of these incidents, many U.S. Schools have adopted the " Zero Tolerance Policy", a largely debated topic.
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.
Most school systems have a relax to a zero tolerance policy when it come to dealing with controlled substance of prescription drugs on their school campus. Depending on the school system most school do have an on campus nurse that is certified and trained to provided medical attention or provided prescription drugs if needed to students or stuffs. (School District Drug Policies, 2016). Nurse are certified and trained to treat patient, educate patients and family member of the patients about any medical related topics and perform the basic medical tests and procedures on their patient at that time. Most of the training an nurse have to perform are; patient care, advanced cardiac life support, acute care, case management, clinical experience
“The US Department of Education based on their recent surveys has reported that at least ten percent of the schools in the entire United States of America are faced with problems associated with violence and in these schools there is at least one serious case of crime other than thefts and physical attacks”(School Violence...). The article, School Violence-a Survey, on the School Violence, Weapons, Crime, and Bullying website clearly states a rising problem within the US. It seems as if the news has a constant flow of new school violence cases, and there is no indication of slowing down. It is truly shocking to think that teens could cause so much destruction in their own schools. Nevertheless, school violence cases occur quite