zero patience for zero tolerance
In a drug-sweeping operation, a gun was fired in the school corridor.
Students at Stratford Creek High School in Goose Creek SC.
Dogs are forced to kneel down or against the wall, while dogs sniff the drugs in their backpacks with their noses. No discovery.
Although the incident is extreme, it is not abnormal, but the logical consequence of the \"zero tolerance\" policy jointly maintained by the school and the police.
Zero tolerance, especially those related to children, must be abandoned. Zero-
The tolerance policy resulted in the inclusion of some children in the criminal justice system.
There are two examples in the current news: A judge in Missouri ruled thata 6-year-
The old boy suspected of killing his grandfather may die as an adult;
The New Jersey attorney\'s office has charged a 7-year-
Harassing a 5-year-old boyyear-
The little girl in what the defense lawyer called \"playing the Doctor.
\"For the majority of children, they experienced zero tolerance in schools that allegedly enforced administrative rules of safety and discipline.
It can be said that administrative regulations are actually a response to the federal government\'s threat to cut funds.
In 1994, for example, Congress passed
Under the liberal School Act, states must have zero tolerance for weapons or lose federal funds.
Many schools strictly explain zero tolerance, including banning anything that looks like a weapon.
They adopt a broad definition of dangerous behavior, with no exceptions.
Soon, the media began to tell the story that children were suspended or treated as criminals because they played water guns, paper guns, and even because they accused each other of saying \"bang.
\"The punishment for having a clear toy is the same as the punishment for having a real weapon, because zero tolerance means zero difference.
Zero tolerance deprives educators of discretion and evaluation and requires a response that may be very inappropriate.
Acts that were previously detained or corrected by going to the principal\'s office are now suspended, deported, and even involved by the police.
The last resort of the past has become the first and only choice. Wis in Madison
Sixth Chris Schmidt.
The first-year students with spotless grades faced a year\'s suspension because they brought a kitchen knife to school for science projects.
When asked about the case, Valencia Douglas, assistant head of the Madison school, said, \"We can\'t say, \'You are a good boy, so your mistake is not so powerful, or the importance behind it. So, an 11-year-
Because a gun was drawn, the old man was taken away in handcuffs; an 8-year-
An old face with a keychain with a cheap henna knife was eliminated; a fifth-
The grader was suspended after the World Trade Center was hit by a plane. . .
The story continues.
The number of these events indicates that the vicious consequences of zero tolerance are not isolated events.
They are embedded in one of the most important institutions of society: the education system.
When the school principal of goose creekjusti pointed a gun at an innocent student, he said he would use \"any means\" to keep the school clean.
It is reported that Abacklashis has developed among students who say the same thing nationwide.
Now many schools, like prisons, have hidden security cameras, metal detectors, guards, random searches, drugs --
Sniff the dog and search without a search warrant.
Zero tolerance is often justified on the grounds of child safety.
But when studying Harden\'s \"unsafe\" school to force zero,
The National Center for Education Statistics found that there has been little change in tolerance policies for four years (
Squiba and Petersen, 1999).
Commenting on the study in the journal National Association of primary school principals, Roger W.
Ashford wrote, \"however, the conclusion of this study is that although there is very little data to prove zero
These initiatives are designed to assure the public that measures are being taken to ensure safety.
Therefore, the popularity is zero
Tolerance policies may not have anything to do with their actual effects, but with the image of schools they portray taking drastic measures to prevent violence.
Whether information really changes the behavior of students may not be as important as the assurance it provides to managers, teachers and parents.
\"Everyone recognizes zero.
The policy of tolerance is formulated in response to reasonable concerns, such as high-
The campus shooting in corenbyn
However, it is also increasingly recognized that zero tolerance-
Maybe more. -
The problem is more difficult than it was originally to solve.
Alternatives are being suggested.
Richard L. , for example.
Curwin and Allen N. Mendlerhave co-
Wrote a book entitled \"as tough as necessary: fighting aggression, violence and hostility in schools (
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1999).
They advocate a broad response to violence on campus, depending on the assessment of the environment around each incident.
These responses include \"counselling, compensation, behavioral planning, behavioral rehearsal, suspension with training or educational experience, and police referrals \".
Another option is to go to school at home.
There is little evidence that zero tolerance creates security.
Instead, it takes away the security of a peaceful society: compassion, due process, goodwill, presumption of innocence, tolerance, discretion, humor. . .
It hurts the most vulnerable citizens, children.
Wendy McRoy is an editor of feminists.
Com and research fellow at the independent Institute of Oakland, California
She is the author and editor of many books and articles, including the new book \"freedom of women: freedom and feminism in the 21st Century\" (Ivan R.
Dee/independent college, 2002).
She lives in Canada with her husband.