Zero Tolerance Policies in Schools: Abject Failure

As a follow-up to a  blog entry on zero tolerance policies, I thought I would post the abstracts of some research and commentaries on the effectiveness (or lack thereof, to be more accurate) of such policies:

A Retrospective Study of School Safety Conditions in High Schools Using the Virginia Threat Assessment Guidelines Versus Alternative Approaches
Dewey Cornell, Peter Sheras, Anne Gregory, and Xitao Fan
School Psychology Quarterly 2009, Vol. 24, No. 2, 119–129

Threat assessment has been widely recommended as a violence prevention approach forschools, but there are few empirical studies of its use. This nonexperimental study of 280 Virginia public high schools compared 95 high schools using the Virginia threat assessment guidelines (Cornell & Sheras, 2006), 131 following other (i.e., locally developed) threatassessment procedures, and 54 not using a threat assessment approach. A survey of 9th grade students in each school obtained measures of student victimization, willingness to seek help for bullying and threats of violence, and perceptions of the school climate ascaring and supportive. Students in schools using the Virginia threat assessment guidelines reported less bullying, greater willingness to seek help, and more positive perceptions of the school climate than students in either of the other 2 groups of schools. In addition, schools using the Virginia guidelines had fewer long-term suspensions than schools using other threat assessment approaches. These group differences could not be attributed to school size, minority composition or socioeconomic status of the student body, neighborhood violent crime, or the extent of security measures in the schools. Implications for threat assessment practice and research are discussed.

In the Eyes of the Beholder: Urban Student Perceptions of Zero Tolerance Policy
Laura McNeal and Christopher Dunbar, Jr
Urban Education 2010; 45; 293

The law originally drafted by Congress focused on truly dangerous and criminal behavior by a student(s), such as gun possession, on school property. Whereas, zero tolerance policies are school district policies that require predetermined consequences for specific violations (Sughrue, 2003). The policies were designed to punish those who engaged in egregious acts that potentially put themselves and others at risk of harm or danger (Dunbar & Villarruel, 2002; Villaruel & Dunbar, 2006). However, many states, including Michigan, extended these laws to include weapons such as daggers, dirks, stilettos, knives with blades more than 3 inches, pocketknives opened by a mechanical device, iron bars, or brass knuckles (Advancement Project and Civil Rights Project, 2000; Dunbar & Villarruel, 2002). In addition, zero tolerance policies have been extended to include more types of punishable behavior that have ranged from possession of drugs that include Midol and Aspirin to possession of toy guns, insubordination, and disruption (Schwartz & Rieser, 2001). Although many of these items pose little or no threat to school safety, students throughout the country have been expelled for having one of these items in their possession (Dunbar & Villarruel, 2002, 2004; Henault, 2001; Sughrue, 2003; Villaruel & Dunbar, 2006).

[...]

Much has been written about children who have been adversely impacted by zero tolerance policy. Infractions ranging from possession of aspirin to possession of toy guns have led to school suspensions or expulsions of students (Dunbar & Villarruel, 2002, 2004; Henault, 2001; Sughrue, 2003; Villaruel & Dunbar, 2006). Yet there is paucity of literature on zero tolerance policy from the voices for whom the policy was designed to keep safe—that is, children who behave appropriately. A doctoral dissertation study titled “School-Wide Discipline in Urban High Schools” was conducted in an effort to provide insight on school staff and students’ perceptions of violence prevention strategies, including zero tolerance policies. In this study, the data revealed significant differences between security guards and urban students’ perceptions regarding zero tolerance policy in relation to fairness, impact on school safety, and overall utility (Thornburg, 2001). Hence, the findings in this study highlighted the need to conduct additional research on the impact and effectiveness of zero tolerance policy by soliciting the reactions and responses of urban school students. Therefore, the focus of this article is to provide a vehicle for the voices of inner-city students on their sense of safety in schools and the effectiveness of zero tolerance policy.

[...]

Zero tolerance policy was designed to promote students’ sense of safety, but as indicated by the findings in this study students still feel unsafe in their school environment more than 10 years after the policy’s initiation. Thus, it appears that in practice zero tolerance policy has not produced the substantive impact intended. The findings in this study illuminate the need for changes in the implementation of zero tolerance to transition it into a more robust policy that achieves its legislative intent.

Ten Years after Columbine: the tragedy of youth deepens
Henry A. Giroux
Policy Futures in Education
Volume 7 Number 3 2009

The city of Chicago, which has a large black student population, implemented a take-no-prisoners approach in its use of zero tolerance policies and the racially skewed consequences are visible in grim statistics which reveal that ‘every day, on average, more than 266 suspensions are doled out during the school year’. Moreover, the number of expulsions has ‘mushroomed from 32 in 1995 to 3000 in the school year 2003-2004’ [17], most affecting poor black youth.

Zero Tolerance Policies and the Public Schools: When Suspension Is No Longer Effective
Evenson, Amber; Justinger, Brooklyn; Pelischek, Elizabeth; Schulz, Sarah
Communique, v37 n5 p1, 6-7 Feb 2009

The emphasis in school discipline has shifted from a prevention and correction model to a reactive and punitive model in recent years. This major shift has occurred in response to fears among legislators and the public who are under the impression that school violence has increased. As a result, crisis response teams have been created and a zero tolerance approach to discipline has been adopted by many school districts. Zero tolerance can be defined as school-wide or district-wide policies that mandate typically harsh consequences or punishments such as suspensions and expulsions for a wide range of rule violations. The original intention of zero tolerance policies was to ensure appropriate consequences for serious and illegal behaviors. However, these policies have been implemented too broadly and too often for minor incidents, resulting in negative outcomes and demonstrating little benefit for students, schools, or the surrounding community. The current implementation practices of zero tolerance policies have led to indiscriminate suspensions for all infractions, which disproportionately affects minority students and those with disabilities. Therefore, school districts need to adopt a prevention/correction model to discipline instead of the current reactive/punitive model to remediate this troubling situation.

Denver Public Schools’ Restorative Justice Program: Suggested Changes for Enhancement and Expansion
Jenna Currin Whittington
University of Denver University College
Capstone Project
http://ectd.du.edu/source/uploads/21963248.pdf

A zero-tolerance discipline policy posits that removing the disruptive students from the classroom will improve the classroom environment and potentially discourage other students from such behavior (Skiba et al. 2008). Results show that the opposite is actually true in schools with zerotolerance policies. Those schools with higher suspension rates have a lower rating of acceptable school climate (Skiba et al. 2008). Many also have a less satisfactory school discipline structure and spend a large amount of time on disciplinary issues (Skiba et al. 2008). As Macready (2009) explains, an authority figure will enforce a punishment that is based on impersonal judgment of the action. Through this type of discipline system, students learn to be fearful of the consequences and no time is taken to create a learning experience or repair the harm done (Macready 2009; Suvall 2009).

While the zero-tolerance discipline policies are supposed to deter students from such misbehavior, studies show it increases the rate of future misbehavior among those students who have been suspended (Skiba et al. 2008).

Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations.
Skiba, Russell, Cecil R. Reynolds, Sandra Graham, Peter Sheras, Jane Close Conoley, and Enedina Garcia-Vazquez
American Psychologist 2008, 63, no. 9 (December): 852-862.

Article based on APA Task Force report from 2006 at http://www.jdaihelpdesk.org/Docs/Documents/1%20BINDER%20Tab%207%20Zero%20Tolerance.pdf

An important new resource on OCD in school

Parents and educators looking for information on Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and its impact on school functioning, do check out this new book by Dr. Gail B. Adams: Students with OCD: A Handbook for School Personnel.  Dr. Adams draws upon her decades of professional experience and provides a comprehensive yet down-to-earth presentation of this important topic.

For other resources on OCD, see the OCD Resources page of my companion blog, ChallengingKids.com

New Documentary on Tourette Syndrome to Premier Thursday, September 15th

The Brad Cohen Tourette Foundation sent out this announcement:

Different is the New Normal will premier on Thursday, September 15th at 8pm (EST) on THIRTEEN (WNET, public television in NY) and then again on Saturday, September 17th at 3:30am (EST)

It will air on Tuesday, September 20th at 10 pm (EST) on NJTV (public television in NJ) then again Thursday, September 22nd at 4 am (EST), Sunday, September 25th at 5 am (EST) ) and Sunday, September 25th at 11 pm (EST), Tuesday, September 27th at 10:30 pm (EST) on WLIW21 (public television in metropolitan and suburban NYC and NJ)

After the broadcast, it will be on this website for a limited time: http://watch.thirteen.org/

The one hour film is about the life of Chicago native Ariel Small, a teen with Tourette Syndrome who inspires others living with TS to be the best they can be. American Idol star James Durbin makes an appearance as he discusses how he has overcome TS himself. This show is informational, educational, and an honest portrayal of what life is like for someone with TS. Follow one kids journey to be normal and accepted by others and how he became empowered to educate the world about TS.

“Different Is the New Normal captures the pain and frustration many parents and their children experience,” said Neal Shapiro, WNET’s President and CEO. “Ariel’s inspirational story provides an uplifting perspective to this often misunderstood disorder, and will inspire everyone who watches this film to think about people as individuals, not as labels.”

Just like my story, Ariel Small will show America that just because a person has TS, we don’t have to allow TS to win. This inspirational show is nicely done and without a doubt will help others understand what living with TS is all about. I give it two thumbs up and after viewing it, I think you do the same.

U.S. Department Of Education To Offer Schools Guidance On Restraint, Seclusion

Michelle Diament writes on Disability Scoop that the U.S. Department of Education will offering guidance to school districts on restraint seclusion, with the guidance being disseminated before the start of the next school year:

The U.S. Department Of Education plans to offer school districts guidance on restraint and seclusion before the next school year begins, officials said Thursday, even as Congressional efforts on the issue continue to appear stalled.

Alexa Posny, the Education Department’s top special education official, told a federal autism advisory committee Thursday morning that her agency will issue guidance to schools this fall around the same time it releases the first ever national data on the use of restraint and seclusion in schools.

Read more on Disability Scoop.

For those who might think this is good news, it’s not. “Guidance” has no force of law and is not enforceable. Guidance will not prohibit what needs to be prohibited, it will not impose mandatory notifications, transparency, and accountability, and it is not a substitute for a strong federal law.

Tears, laughter, and remembrances of Dee

Last Sunday’s memorial service for Dee Alpert brought together over 70 people from different parts of Dee’s life, including attorneys, parents and advocates, neighbors, dear friends who have known her from her days with the National Organization for Women,  those who knew her from her efforts to create the Anderson program for intellectually gifted students, and so many others whose lives she touched.

As person after person got up to express their admiration for Dee or talk about how she impacted the lives of others, we cried some, we laughed some, and we took solace in the beautiful music provided by the New York Kammermusiker, Dee’s favorite musicians who played some of her favorite pieces.

NYC Comptroller Liu’s office recognized Dee’s outstanding advocacy with a posthumous commendation that was appreciated by all who attended.

Those of you who emailed remembrances of Dee to me for her son, please know that Mike received them and was deeply moved by them.  Because so many people wanted to get up to speak about Dee, there wasn’t time to read them aloud, but your remembrances have become part of her living legacy in Mike and Onna.

Dee got one more gift posthumously that I will mention here.  A wonderfully kind person from Rutgers has agreed to adopt both her cats so that they can remain together and be in a loving home.  If there is a special place in heaven for those who champion disabled children, there is also a special place in heaven for those who rescue animals in need of a good home.

And so, now, life muddles on.  The hole we feel in our hearts will never close, but the lessons Dee taught us will remain strong clear voices within us to keep us working on the issues we need to address.

« Previous Page — Next Page »