Zero Tolerance Policy Review On The Us Education System

Since the establishment of public education in the United States, schools have provided a sense of security and belonging to their students. Although sitting through lectures and doing homework may not be the most exciting thing in the world, students will always have a lunch to eat, a roof over their head, and a supportive teacher or counselor that they can talk to. Despite the “safe” environment and presence of authoritative figures on school campuses, trouble always finds a way to break out. Simple misbehaving and occasional fights are a common occurrence on most school campuses, however a new breed of troublesome and violent students has hatched. The

Through my teaching experience I have found that school violence encompasses many forms such as verbal harassment, non-verbal harassment, cyber-bullying, intimidation and any act that devalues a student’s self-worth. According to Detroit Public Schools, “it is the intention of the District to provide as safe and nonviolent learning environment for its employees, students, parents, and visitors as is possible. To this end, the District strives to maintain an environment free of threats, harassment, intimidation, physical and verbal abuse, and coercion” (Detroit Public Schools, 2009). The purpose of this policy is create a safe environment where students are free from any tape of harassment. The policy goes on to state it is the staff's responsibility to, “be educated and aware of potential signs and signals of violent or threatening behavior in students”(Detroit Public Schools, 2009). In other words, it is necessary for the school staff to remain vigilant of these signs and address them as soon as appear. Based off the nature of the action the school will follow a course of discipline suited to the accused

Even though the public education field is determined to end violence in schools, the continuing pressure of the negative effects of zero-tolerance policy engulfs students’ records undesirably. More than three decades have passed and zero-tolerance approaches in schools have failed. Whereas cases should be judged on an individual basis, zero-tolerance policy negatively affects the relationship of education with juvenile justice given that zero-tolerance policies do not accommodate adolescent development.

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,

In the 1980 's , there were "tough on crime" laws and "zero tolerance" programs that were enforced to foster a healthy education environment for children and adolescents; specifically targeting repeat juvenile offenders. As a result, we have learned that instilling laws such as No Child Left Behind and enforcing Zero Tolerance programs in school settings are too rigid and cause more issues than benefits for children, caretakers, and the school systems. When researchers from helping professions analyze this issue from parts of Bronfenbrenner 's ecological approach, we can understand some harmful contributing factors in the relationships between the student, the caregiver, the educators and law enforcers.

Most school districts these days have initiated Zero Tolerance Policies against a variety of different substances, items, and actions. These include anything from drugs and alcohol to weapons and bullying. In this specific incident a New Jersey School District’s Zero Tolerance Policy derailed a third grade classroom party and traumatized a nine year old boy. In May, the school along with the local police and the county prosecution office agreed that incidents would now be turned over to the police. The Superintendent of the New Jersey School District estimated that police officers may have been called in about five times per day to handle issues in the school of just under two thousand students (Platoff, 2016). At the end of the school year,

In school zero-tolerance policies are intended to eliminate behaviors deemed as intolerable, such as violence, bullying, or having a weapon. But these policies are useless and unneeded because they cannot be used until after the damage has been done. Often times the intolerable behavior becomes more prevalent when the types of policies are put into place.

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.

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.

Who hasn’t heard of the Columbine shooting, where in the spring of 1999 in Littleton, Colorado over a dozen people where killed and many others were wounded at the hands of two students? Or even more recently, who does not know about the Virginia Tech massacre where a single student killed thirty-two people and wounded over twenty more? University of Texas, California State University, San Diego State University, the list of school violence is long and heart-breaking. Students and teachers have lost their lives by the dozens to gunmen that carried a grudge for some reason or another. These are extreme cases, for sure, and there is without a doubt a need for discipline in schools every where. However, zero-tolerance policies are not the

During the past decade, school safety has been at the forefront of many school districts safety polices and plans. With recent high profile school shootings, the question school districts continue to ask is how do we keep our schools safe? Administrators face heavy scrutiny when weighing approaches to school safety and student discipline. Likewise, school employees have the right to work in safe environments devoid of life-threatening behaviors (Fenning and Bohanon, 2006; Skiba and Rausch, 2006). America’s founding fathers understood the importance of a public school education. They believed educating its citizens would allow them the opportunity to learn new skills while becoming successful and productive people in society. However, our founding fathers did not predict the severe behavior changes our schools face in educating disruptive and dangerous students. America’s school districts are charged with providing solutions for disruptive and dangerous students (Fenning and Bohanon, 2006; Skiba and Rausch, 2006). School officials must address these issues with research-based interventions and collaborative resources that provide a safe learning environment for all stakeholders (Elliott and Mihalic, 2004; Schoenwald and Hoagwood, 2001). Boards of education continue to support school efforts to rethink best practices for disciplinary alternative middle schools (DAMS). Many school districts focus on research-based interventions and resources that manage aggression and

School violence has become of the most pressing educational problems in the United States. Gang violence and high profile shootings across the nation cause concern within schools. Communities struggle to understand why these events take place and how they can be prevented. The overwhelming response to solve the issue of violence in schools is the increasing societal pressure to execute zero tolerance. Zero tolerance is driven by the educational philosophy, policies, and practices of school communities. Stakeholders expect schools to be a safe place for staff and for students. Stakeholders assume that a positive classroom environment, safe students, and school enjoyment are conditions necessary to create a positive climate where learning takes place. This assumption can be backed with research. A calm classroom environment, teachers’ management of disruptive behavior, and students’ view of school safety are factors that have been found to directly correlate with student achievement in the classroom (Ma & Willms, 2004). Safety and a feeling of not being threatened during school hours have been found to be important to students’ achievement. Failure to remove a disruptive or an unruly student from school has been found to have a negative impact on achievement and creates a great risk to school staff and students (Garbarino et al., 1992). Teachers cannot teach and students cannot learn in an

Zero Tolerance policies were enacted with the intent of decreasing the level of violence that was occurring within our nation’s schools. The policy required that schools pursued expulsion and suspension based upon severity of the offense committed by the student. Studies have been conducted to ascertain the effectiveness, or not, of the policy and the ramifications it has had across the educational community. In deciphering the effectiveness of the policy, it is pertinent to analyze the consistency of how policy mandates are implemented, what alternatives to education are provided (if any), and a review of any disparities that revolved as a result. It is also important to consider what changes could be applied that would heighten the learning potential for students who fall prey to ramifications of the policy.

Violence in our schools is an issue that has become more prominent in the last few years. News articles about violent deeds within the school setting are on the increase. Our society demands that schools are safe for our children. In order to maintain a peaceful environment for all, we must address and inform our schools, children, and parents as well as the neighboring communities about the issue of school violence. As David W. Johnson, the author of Reducing School Violence states, “To eliminate violence and resolve destructive conflicts, schools must first admit that such conflicts are out of control.” (Johnson 7) Schools in general must identify with these issues in order to deal with them.

School violence, in recent history, seems to have taken the United States by storm. Be it a shooting, such as the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, the inappropriate relationships between teacher and student, such as Stephanie Figueroa whom initiated one such relationship with her 11-year-old karate student, or the multiple fights we see on social media that take place in schools. With each passing week, we see a new story that falls in one of these categories. Today, we look at the types of, causes of and how to prevent violence in what should be a safe place and second home for our youth.