Zero tolerance misses bigger picture
Exene Rodriguez
Issue date: 11/20/09 Section: Opinion
Having been raised in a family full of educators I feel it's safe to say that I have an intimate understanding of the "Zero Tolerance Policy" enforced on most school grounds. Typically, the rule implies that illegal substances and violence will not be tolerated under any circumstances, and those involved in these forbidden acts will suffer severe disciplinary action.
The goal of this policy is to discourage the majority of students from partaking in these deeds, or teach those who do to refrain from repeating the offence. In a world where violence and drug use were black and white, this method would work. However, the truth is that there is always a grey area with these issues.
In my experience, the policy assumes that every case fits the same criteria and that alone makes it greatly flawed. The truth is that there is always a reason for why students become involved in these things, and while the school may not be responsible for fixing the situation, they certainly are not helping the situation by giving out senseless punishments.
If students are going to learn from their mistakes, at some level, there needs to be tolerance. The issue is at the heart of what it is trying to prevent.
I would say eighty percent of the incidents relating to drugs or violence require special care or even just some attention so that it can be dealt with. With the "Zero Tolerance Policy" students are punished without even the attempt of resolving the issue and eventually disregarded all together. The frustrating thing is that each situation has different needs and has a reason for happening. The policy allows educators to ignore those needs.
The only thing worse than ignoring the students a school is responsible for (in order to rid themselves of that responsibility) is when the policy is enforced in order to exploit students. Having gone to both a private and public high schools, I have seen this happen in both sectors of education.
In public school, minority students and those from low-income families were expelled or suspended without question. In the private sector, the policy was enforced only to expel students who were considered disposable based on wealth or performance. In short, the Zero Tolerance Policy grants schools the opportunity to ignore the very people they are supposed to help and grants them the power to potentially destroy some ones life on a whim without proper investigation of the problem.
Though investigation is supposedly required, I find it hard to believe that every case is looked into, especially if the student is still going to be expelled or suspended.
The goal of this policy is to discourage the majority of students from partaking in these deeds, or teach those who do to refrain from repeating the offence. In a world where violence and drug use were black and white, this method would work. However, the truth is that there is always a grey area with these issues.
In my experience, the policy assumes that every case fits the same criteria and that alone makes it greatly flawed. The truth is that there is always a reason for why students become involved in these things, and while the school may not be responsible for fixing the situation, they certainly are not helping the situation by giving out senseless punishments.
If students are going to learn from their mistakes, at some level, there needs to be tolerance. The issue is at the heart of what it is trying to prevent.
I would say eighty percent of the incidents relating to drugs or violence require special care or even just some attention so that it can be dealt with. With the "Zero Tolerance Policy" students are punished without even the attempt of resolving the issue and eventually disregarded all together. The frustrating thing is that each situation has different needs and has a reason for happening. The policy allows educators to ignore those needs.
The only thing worse than ignoring the students a school is responsible for (in order to rid themselves of that responsibility) is when the policy is enforced in order to exploit students. Having gone to both a private and public high schools, I have seen this happen in both sectors of education.
In public school, minority students and those from low-income families were expelled or suspended without question. In the private sector, the policy was enforced only to expel students who were considered disposable based on wealth or performance. In short, the Zero Tolerance Policy grants schools the opportunity to ignore the very people they are supposed to help and grants them the power to potentially destroy some ones life on a whim without proper investigation of the problem.
Though investigation is supposedly required, I find it hard to believe that every case is looked into, especially if the student is still going to be expelled or suspended.
Be the first to comment on this story