| 
June, 2000
By the Advancement Project and
The Civil Rights Project
In the aftermath of a number of high profile, extremely
violent incidents at public schools, many state and local education
entities have adopted the same harsh and mandatory, "take-no-prisoners"
approach to discipline currently being used in this country’s
criminal justice system.
Opportunities Suspended: The Devastating Consequences
of Zero Tolerance and School Discipline, is the culmination
of the shared efforts of The Civil Rights Project (CRP) at Harvard
University and the Advancement Project (AP). By consulting with
attorneys, psychiatrists, academians, educators, and children’s
advocates, CRP and AP embarked upon a multi-disciplined approach
to review this subject matter. This is the first comprehensive national
report to scrutinize the impact that the brutally strict Zero Tolerance
approach to discipline, currently being used in public schools,
is having on American children. The report illustrates that Zero
Tolerance is unfair, is contrary to the developmental needs of children,
denies children educational opportunities, and often results in
the criminalization of children.
Take No Prisoners Discipline
This report documents the over-zealous approach to
promoting safety being assimilated in public schools in many districts
across the country. Principals and administrators are no longer
using literal interpretations of their state’s and district’s
Zero Tolerance policies, and they are no longer willing to use the
discretionary clauses found in many of these provisions. Instead,
they are inventing highly creative interpretations of the ill-conceived
laws and using them to suspend and expel children based on relatively
minor, non-violent offenses. In 1998, more than 3.1 million children
in America were suspended and another 87,000 were expelled.
A great deal of statistical and anecdotal evidence
supports the conclusion that children are being unfairly suspended
and arbitrarily kicked out of school for incidents that could have
been very easily handled using alternative methods. As a result,
everyday Zero Tolerance Policies force children to be suspended
or expelled for sharing Midol, asthma medication (during an emergency),
cough drops, and for bringing toy guns, nail clippers, and scissors
to school. Even the common schoolyard scuffle has become a target,
regardless of severity and circumstances.
Zero Tolerance Policies Disproportionally Impact
Minority Children and Children with Disabilities
Decades of research has shown that students of color
are disproportionately disciplined in school. The evidence is highly
suggestive of discrimination. Instead of trying to speculate on
the motives responsible for this alarming trend, this report focuses
on the fact, that for whatever reason, according to the U.S. Department
of Education’s report, The Condition of Education 1997, 25%
of all African American students, nationally, were suspended at
least once over a four-year period. No matter how one may choose
to attribute the causes, the numbers of students of color suspended
and expelled is disturbing.
Based on the findings of a new report by Professor
Russ Skiba, The Color of Discipline: Sources of Racial and Gender
Disproportionality in School Punishment, when all socio-economic
indicators are held constant, African-American children are still
suspended and expelled at much higher rates than white students
within the same schools. Moreover, the major use of the racial disparities
appears to be higher rates of referral of black students for subjective
offenses, such as "disrespect."
Statewide data from South Carolina reveal a similar
pattern. While black children represent only 42% of the public school
enrollment, they constitute 61% of the children charged with a disciplinary
code violation. African-American and white students have equal referral
rates for weapons; white students have a much higher rate of referral
for illegal drugs; and African Americans are referred at much higher
rates for subjective offenses, such as "disturbing schools."
While Title VI of the Civil rights Acts of 1964, proscribes both
intentional discrimination and policies which produce an adverse
racial impact and are not justified as "educationally necessary,"
it has been largely ineffective and rarely enforced.
Furthermore, the amended Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act provides extensive procedural protections for children
with disabilities. These provisions were meant to ensure, that under
the appropriate circumstances, the impact of their disabilities
are taken into considered when meting out punishments. It is clear
that in many circumstances, school officials are ignoring the law
and that parents and students are probably unaware of their rights
or unable to enforce them.
Psychological Impact of Exclusionary Disciplinary
Policies: A Developmental Perspective
Zero Tolerance policies, by their nature, do not provide
guidance and/or instruction. Frequently, because these policies
focus directly on harsh forms of punishment, which are inherently
unjust, they breed distrust in students toward adults, and nurture
an adversarial, confrontational attitude.
One of the developmental needs of school-aged children,
which many leading psychologists believe must be met, is their need
to develop strong, trusting relationships with key adults in their
lives, particularly those in their school. Zero Tolerance Policies
foster an environment where there are no opportunities to bond with
adults and provide troubled students with an unlimited amount of
unsupervised free time. It is during this time that some experts
believe, " . . . suspensions may simply accelerate the course
of delinquency by providing a troubled youth with little parental
supervision and more opportunities to socialize with deviant peers."
Additionally, it is essential for children to form
positive attitudes toward fairness and justice. By subjecting students
to automatic punishments that do not take into account extenuating
or mitigating circumstances, zero tolerance policies take a "do
as I say, not as I do," approach to discipline. Students are
taught that adults are not being sincere when they speak of the
need for justice and fairness, then, do not take those elements
into consideration when the child’s punishment is callously
and subjectively meted out.
Zero Tolerance: Is it worth it?
Students who are suspended suffer academically. In
most instances they receive failing grades or do not have opportunities
to make up missed schoolwork. They fall irretrievably behind, and
there is a moderate to strong indication that they will eventually
dropout of school. More than 30% of sophomores who drop out have
been suspended and that high school dropouts are more likely to
be incarcerated.
Only 26 states require alternative education assignments
for students suspended or expelled. Anecdotal evidence illustrates
that many of these schools fail to provided an adequate education.
There is little data revealing the quality of the instruction that
occurs in these centers or if any is given at all.
As a result of Zero Tolerance Policies, children are
being increasingly subjected to criminal or juvenile delinquency
charges. Actions that were once considered non-violent, childhood
pranks have resulted in five young men being charged with felony
assault for throwing peanuts, two ten year old boys facing felony
charges for putting soap in a teacher’s water, and an 11 year-old
girl being arrested and dragged away in a police car for bringing
a plastic knife to school in her lunch box to cut her chicken. Forty-one
states require schools to report students to law enforcement agencies
for various conduct committed in school. Some of these referrals,
specifically in Jefferson Davis County, Mississippi have resulted
in students being fined $150-$500, given 6 months to 1 year probation,
placed on curfew, and/or being required to perform 40-80 hours of
community service.
Case Studies Illustrating The Philosophy of Zero
Tolerance
Federal and state disciplinary laws permit school
officials to use their discretion when doling out punishments. How
principals choose to exercise that discretion determines both the
extent to which Zero Tolerance will be used, and subsequently, the
rate at which children either will be allowed to take advantage
of educational opportunities, suspended, or expelled. The various
philosophies used by different principals in four Miami Dade County
Middle schools were examined for this section. The suspension rates
of these schools ranged from below 2% to more than 42%. More than
75% of the students at three of the schools receive free or reduce
school lunches; the rate at the fourth is 22%.
In schools where the principal has set the standard
that no child should be suspended, except under extreme circumstances,
teachers are less apt to refer a child for suspension for minor
misconduct. Under these circumstances, teachers understand that
their recommendations for suspensions are unlikely to be upheld
by the principal. These schools also exhibit the most positive learning
environment. In contrast, where the principal believes in strict,
harsh discipline, the number of suspensions and expulsions reflects
this philosophy.
Almost all the administrators agreed that if students
are academically challenged, they are less likely to engage in disruptive
behavior in the classroom. One principal asserted, "if teachers
would learn how to teach," suspension rates would be lower.
A teacher in another school stated, "if you keep them busy,
they're good." In fact, even the brightest students, one principal
explained, get into trouble when they get bored. Thus, in schools
that lack resources such as highly qualified teachers, textbooks
and other instructional materials, computers and other resources,
it is probable that students may be more prone to engage in misconduct.
Additionally, many administrators complained that more counselors
are needed.
The case studies found general consensus that teachers
need to be trained in classroom management and conflict resolution.
Because teachers are the first link in the disciplinary process,
they should be better equipped to deal with behavioral problems
using innovative strategies that do not shut out students for typical
adolescent misbehavior. Of the four schools studied, only one provides
this type of professional development training.
Finally, the case investigations suggest that schools
should monitor disciplinary referrals by teachers to ensure fair
application of disciplinary codes. Monitoring may expose problems
such as poor classroom management, discriminatory treatment, or
singling out of particular children. Where teachers overuse disciplinary
referrals, additional training should be provided. As a result,
students will not be singled out, and they will ultimately have
faith that the system of punishment is just.
Bucking the Trend: Schools That Reach Out Instead
of Push Out
With the increasing use of suspension and expulsions,
some schools are defying the status quo. Three organizations, the
Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice of the American
Institute of Research, the Justice Matters Institute, and Milwaukee
Catalyst/Design for Change, have all published reports on how a
number of schools are finding that it is possible to have achievement,
safety and a low number of disciplinary referrals.
Essential elements of these schools include positive
approaches to discipline, opportunities for teachers and students
to bond, training for teachers classroom management techniques,
clearly understood codes of conduct and discipline focused on prevention
of problems. However, the work involved in successfully transforming
a school’s culture is a daunting task that requires a steadfast
commitment from the principal, teachers, staff, parents and community.
To achieve this transformation, adults must analyze their own behaviors
as well as the behaviors of their students, and be open to changing
practices that may no longer fit with the school’s overall
mission.
While these schools do not provide any magic formulas,
they do offer hopeful blueprints for how progress in this direction
can be made. Their experiences, along with those of other schools
undergoing similar transformations, can be tremendously instrumental
in helping other school and communities in their efforts to achieve
similar goals.
In collaboration with the Advancement Project, the
following report was developed from research commissioned for our
conference Opportunities
Suspended: The Devastating Consequences of Zero Tolerance and School
Discipline Policies
held in June 15-16, 200, in Washington D.C.
NOTE: The following report has been divided in
sections for easier access. Most of the files are available in PDF
Format ( )
and might take a while to download. Please allow a couple of minutes
for them to appear on your screen.
Cover, Table of Contents, Acknowledgments
In PDF Format
Executive Summary
In PDF Format
In HTML Format
Introduction and report contents
In PDF Format
Appendix I: Zero Tolerance in the News
In PDF Format
Appendix II: Legal Protection for Students Facing
Zero Tolerance Policies
In PDF Format
Appendix III: Disciplinary Measures Required
Under State Law
In PDF Format
Appendix IV: Reporting of Student Misconduct
to Law Enforcement
In PDF Format
Appendix V: Discipline Data Collection
In PDF Format
Appendix VI: Miami-Dade County Schools Profiles
In PDF Format
Appendix VII: Promising Programs
In PDF Format
|
