Good point.
BTW, I'm taking the Browns +3 against the Raiders for Sunday. You?
Posted on 10/10/2003 8:49:57 AM PDT by Scenic Sounds
Once, long ago, there was legitimate reasoning behind the zero tolerance policy in our public schools that could be fathomed - but there’s also legitimate reasoning behind the saying that good intentions pave the way to hell. Originally, zero tolerance measures were aimed at dangerous kids who brought guns and drugs to school. However, the number of items and behaviors now considered suspension or expulsion-worthy has grown to an infinitely ridiculous amount.
The terms regarding these items and behaviors are conveniently vague, as well, and vary from place to place. There is zero tolerance for weapons - what is a weapon? Is it a butter knife, a laser pointer, a beeper? The same question applies to drugs. Is a children’s multi-vitamin a drug? What about an inhaler? Certs? Mouthwash?
What about zero tolerance for “disrespect” or “insubordination”? Is that simply whatever the administrator of the school deems it to be? For example - in Mississippi, there is a law that allows students older than 13 to be expelled if they are “disruptive” in class three times over the course of the school year. What power that gives to administrators – how convenient for them! With the vague wording of these laws, they can remand any child that they see as a troublemaker to an alternative school so that they no longer have to “deal with” them. What qualifies as a disruption? Is that chewing gum in class or passing notes or using profanity - or pulling out a gun and threatening the teacher with it?
Futures – in the guise of college scholarships – are being put in jeopardy because of zero tolerance. Consider the case of the 17 year old honors student from Arkansas that was sentenced to 45 days in alternative school because his father accidentally left a scraper and pocketknife in the car the weekend before. Despite the pleas from the father, the school system refused to budge on the inviolate “weapons possession” punishment. Then there was the 18 year old girl who was arrested and charged with a felony for having a kitchen knife in her car that she had been using to open boxes. She was denied her right to graduate and she now has a criminal felony on her record. Is this the ultimate aim of zero tolerance?
Does constant fear of the tiniest infraction bringing severe punishment actually cause children to respect teachers and school administrators? Hardly. On the contrary, it fosters an attitude of resentment, disrespect, and deep anger towards authority. It also leaves no room for a positive relationship between children and teachers – there is, for the child, always a fear of punishment for the slightest unintended wrongdoing. It leads to a form of self-censorship that is representative of life under dictatorships.
Do we really want the cookie-cutter kids that zero tolerance strives to create, devoid of fire and passion and intelligence and creativity? Do we want kids that are always afraid to speak their own mind and stand up for themselves for fear of disrupting a classroom and being suspended or expelled for it?
Perhaps the only positive aspect of zero tolerance is the likelihood that the children who had to endure it will be the ones who are likely to change it.
Cathryn Crawford is a student at the University of Texas. She can be reached at cathryncrawford@washingtondispatch.com.
Yes, ultimately a 7 year old who brings a toy gun to school will be denied permission to own a real gun as an adult.
I'm glad you thought so. :-)
And you have to teach that to them at an early age. Those kinds of skills are not something you'd like to introduce to your middle-school child, but you almost have to "corrupt" them in that way for their own good. And it is complicated to teach them things like that without teaching them to be the dissemblig, sneaky type.
Free, but not compulsory. I don't like these mandatory institutions. Someplace your kids(or you) have to be 6-8 hours a day, five days a week or the police will come get you and lock you up. Bad, bad, bad. Slave state.
With all due respect, you have really said nothing that will fix the problem. We need to be in the faces of the School Boards, we may even need to start challenging these outrageous decisions in the courts.
Are there any organizations out that there that are devoted to taking on this problem?
He appropriately exercised his judgement and authority.Unionized public employees are about as enthusiastic about using "judgement" as vampires are about cooking with garlic. This is how "zero tolerance" was developed, to avoid the need to do so.
-Eric
I can't think of any.....
Originally, zero tolerance measures were aimed at dangerous kids who brought guns and drugs to school.
Disagree. They were there so the school boards and admins (nothing more than politicians) can look good and say. "See, we are doing something!!!"
There is zero tolerance for weapons - what is a weapon? Is it a butter knife, a laser pointer, a beeper?
A pencil or a pen can be used as a weapon.
The same question applies to drugs. Is a children’s multi-vitamin a drug? What about an inhaler? Certs? Mouthwash?
Caffine.....
What about zero tolerance for “disrespect” or “insubordination”?
I'm glad I'm out of school......
Is that simply whatever the administrator of the school deems it to be? For example - in Mississippi, there is a law that allows students older than 13 to be expelled if they are “disruptive” in class three times over the course of the school year.
That's ridiculous. Disruptive is whatever a teacher or admin says it is.
“deal with” them. What qualifies as a disruption? Is that chewing gum in class or passing notes or using profanity - or pulling out a gun and threatening the teacher with it?
Or speaking my mind.....
Consider the case of the 17 year old honors student from Arkansas that was sentenced to 45 days in alternative school because his father accidentally left a scraper and pocketknife in the car the weekend before.
A pocket knife is a TOOL.
Despite the pleas from the father, the school system refused to budge on the inviolate “weapons possession” punishment.
Time to recall or vote out their school board.
Then there was the 18 year old girl who was arrested and charged with a felony for having a kitchen knife in her car that she had been using to open boxes. She was denied her right to graduate and she now has a criminal felony on her record. Is this the ultimate aim of zero tolerance?
But it's for your safety.
Hardly. On the contrary, it fosters an attitude of resentment, disrespect, and deep anger towards authority.
It sure does. I'll just say that I'm glad I graduated before Columbine. That was the final nail in the coffin of freedom.
t also leaves no room for a positive relationship between children and teachers – there is, for the child, always a fear of punishment for the slightest unintended wrongdoing.
I'm glad most teachers I had didn't like to fill out paperwork and had some sort of common sense. I was in the office enough as it is. Luckily I only got suspended once.
It leads to a form of self-censorship that is representative of life under dictatorships.
Or is could lead to rebellion???
Do we really want the cookie-cutter kids that zero tolerance strives to create, devoid of fire and passion and intelligence and creativity? Do we want kids that are always afraid to speak their own mind and stand up for themselves for fear of disrupting a classroom and being suspended or expelled for it?
I don't, but I think most people do. The dems sure do. The unions sure do. "Shut the hell up and follow orders."
Perhaps the only positive aspect of zero tolerance is the likelihood that the children who had to endure it will be the ones who are likely to change it.
I sure hope so.
There was a thread on here about Zero Tolerance. A 15 year old asthmatic lent his inhalor to his girl who was having an attack. Now he's charged with drug dealing and busted by the school. This kid should get a medal, and he's getting screwed over. That one hits close to home for me. I'm an asthmatic and I've lent my inhalor out before. I could have been in the same situation and busted if some dumb schmuck wanted to go on an authority trip.
My school was the same way. I carried my inhalor with me anyway.
But you won't, or at least not enough folks will, and that's why I encourage children to resist assimilation by the smarmy Borg that is the typical public school.
Good point.
BTW, I'm taking the Browns +3 against the Raiders for Sunday. You?
Thanks, but it can't compare to that other thread. :-)
I graduated from high school in 1985. Most, if not all the trucks in the student parking lot had rifles or shotguns in the back window. Our shop teacher would allow students to bring their rifles into class, especially right before deer season, for lessons on proper firearm care. Most guys carried some sort of pocket knife.
Heck, at junior high summer camp, us 11 and 12 year olds shot skeet and trap.
Most fights were allowed to run their course, unless someone was getting hurt, with the punishment being a trip to the principals office for a quick three licks.
Suprisingly, with all the guns and knifes around our school, no one ever got shot or stabbed. How did we survive without the nanny state to look after us?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.