YUC report says zero tolerance a failure
by Dale Mezzacappa on Jan 13 2011 Posted in Latest news
The School District’s zero-tolerance discipline policy does not make school safer, creates a prison-like culture, costs money - and it keeps students “one minor mistake away from having their life turned upside down,” according to a new report.
Philadelphia schools, it said, rely on punitive measures more than most districts across the country.
The report—by Youth United for Change, a student organizing group; the Advancement Project, a national civil rights organization; and Education Law Center, a Philadelphia-based legal advocacy organization – urges a “smarter” approach to discipline in order to dismantle what it calls the “pathway to prison” exacerbated by the policy.
“There may be no other large, urban school system that matches the District in its promotion of zero tolerance and in the heavy use of out-of-school suspensions, expulsions, disciplinary transfers to alternative schools, referrals to law enforcement, and school based arrests,” the report said.
A smarter approach would focus on prevention and intervention, such as redirecting money from school police and metal detectors to counselors and social workers, the report said. Its authors found there are more security guards per student in the district than counselors, and that in some schools the imbalance is pronounced.
A smarter policy would also invest more heavily in training teachers and other staff in adolescent development and conflict management, among other techniques, and use a “restorative practices” approach to discipline.
“All the research has shown that zero tolerance is a failed policy,” said Jim Freeman, senior attorney with the Advancement Project. “It has not succeeded in making schools safer or more effective. School districts and state legislators are moving away from zero tolerance, recognizing its devastating effect.
"But Philadelphia is moving in the other direction, with school discipline that is more harsh and more severe.”
Now, in many schools, the report said, the climate is one “in which young people are treated as dropouts - or criminals-in-waiting,” and punished or even arrested for infractions that do not rise to criminality. Data show that of more than 46,000 suspensions in 2008-09, nearly one-third were for the catch-all category of “disruption.”
Students who are excluded from school through suspension fall further behind academically. Plus, high suspension rates do not result in better academic achievement, but the opposite. Schools with the highest suspension rates generally have the lowest achievement and graduation rates, according to the report.
It said students are routinely arrested for petty offenses at school that should not warrant criminal charges. One Philadelphia high school, Lincoln, had more arrests than 17 of the 19 other largest school districts in the state.
“This is not just an educational policy issue. It is a vital question of community health and well-being,” the report said. “As a result of zero-tolerance, there are tens of thousands of students being removed from their schools and sent in to the streets of jails of Philadelphia every year.”
The report was unveiled at a press conference at which YUC members did most of the talking, relating stories that happened to them or others that they said exemplifies harsh and unfair treatment.
Brandon Johnson, 15, said he was expelled from his school when a metal detector found a butter knife in his backpack that he didn’t know was there. He was taken to the local police district and held for 11 hours, he said, and ultimately sent to a privately run discipline school, Ombudsman, where he said the school day is only four hours long and he is not learning much.
School District officials reacted to the findings with a statement saying that its goal is to “ensure students are safe.” It said that out-of-school suspensions have been declining for the past several years.
“Our goal is to educate young people, helping them move into a bright future filled with promise,” the District statement said. “It is certainly not our goal to guide them towards the juvenile or criminal justice system.”
The data show that Black students are expelled at five times the rate of White students. Based on student interviews as well as data, the report concluded that students of color are punished more harshly than White students for the same offenses.
For instance, the report found strikingly different disciplinary consequences for students at Central High, a magnet school with an ethnically diverse student body, compared to FitzSimons High, a neighborhood school where almost all the students are Black.
At Central, of 32 reported incidents involving assault, robbery, theft, threats, arson and possession of a knife, only one resulted in arrest and four in suspension. At FitzSimons, of 103 incidents – most of which were simple assault or disorderly conduct – 51, or half, resulted in arrest and 36 in suspensions.
“These radically different disciplinary practices affect more than just the students being disciplined,” the report said.
The District disputed one of the more shocking findings of the report – that in 2008-09, most of the students expelled from city schools were between 8 and 14 years old, with the most common ages being 11 and 12.
Spokesperson Shana Kemp said that the District doesn’t expel students below the sixth grade and that the average age of the 169 students expelled that year was 15.9. But Freeman, who analyzed the data, said that conclusion was based on information the District gave him.
“We used their data,” he said. “If it’s not right, it’s because the numbers they gave us were not right.”
As high as the expulsion rate was in District schools, expulsions were three-and-a-half times higher in charter schools, based on data from 57 charters, the report said.
The authors said that charter schools “cherry-pick” students, encourage students to leave rather than face expulsion, and “appear to be even more inclined to banish unwanted young people.”
The report suggested action steps at the District, city and state level, including a local task force made up of students, teachers, community members, principals, parents and other stakeholders to “rewrite the District’s discipline policies” with a goal of limiting the use of suspension, expulsion, disciplinary transfers, and referrals to law enforcement.
Several officials appeared at the press conference, including School Reform Commission member Johnny Irizarry, who said that the District was working to make the process more fair and faster so that students aren’t left in limbo for months. He and other SRC members have said that they spend much of their time considering expulsion cases.
Councilwoman Maria Quinones-Sanchez said she would hold City Council hearings, and state Assemblyman Tony Payton, a Democrat who represents Frankford, said “The numbers are striking, the trends disturbing and the stories unforgettable.” He said he would “push the School District to revise its processes.”
Comments (19)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 01:08.
I am looking forward to see what they are going to do about this mess. I am not sitting back and waiting for proactively lobbying against this unfair, and unjust no tolerance conduct law. It is destroying students, emotionally and academically and it needs to be amended today.
Submitted by Teacher in the trenches (not verified) on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 08:45.
Zero tolerance is not effective. There are too many cases that are worded carefully to move an uncooperative child, instead of dealing with the issues. There are things that are allowed to slide, that should not be ignored, as well. Discipline should be fair and consistent. This is not a good situation.
Submitted by Anonymous teacher (not verified) on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 18:47.
I've been teaching for 20+ years and have seen various "behavior" solutions come and go. "Zero tolerance" is just one more failed approach to the seemingly intractable problem of too many kids in classes, too few responsible adults in the home, too much turnover in the teaching profession, too many cell phones and other electronic devices in the hands of children, too many weapons too easily available, too much unsupervised out of school time, and most of all, too few Americans who really care whether their schools are funded or their children are truly well educated or whether the future of their country is secured.
There ARE no easy solutions. This is what we never seem to understand. Interesting, engaging, hands-on classes of small size, with qualified teachers, excellent resources and materials, and authentic assessments would be expensive to implement and demand much of our time and attention and money. The only thing more expensive, in the long run, will be the final collapse of our economy, our cultural values, and our way of life.
Submitted by Phantom Poster (not verified) on Fri, 01/14/2011 - 21:20.
Zero Tolerance started as a reaction to school shootings, but devolved into an arbitrary system of punishment without regard for intent. Save it for violent or threatening behaviors, and stop over-reacting to kids who commit stupid acts with no victim or intent to do harm.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 01:13.
It starts with the metal detectors at the doors of the school that tells kids that we don't think they are good enough for anything but prison. Let's teach kids they they are valuable, not suspects in waiting.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/15/2011 - 13:28.
Wonder how many of the previous commentators would feel the same if the 1 weapon that managed to slip through ended up being used against THEIR kid? It only takes one mistake, cannot say "our bad" or "the kid has issues" after wards.
The problem is not in the schools, it's in the homes and neighborhoods where parents teach their kids that violence is not only an acceptable alternative to solving your problems, but a REQUIRED solution! I have heard many parents tell their children in front of teachers and other adults that they (kid) better "go after" anyone who "diss's" them or don't come home. I have seen parents come in and phyiscally attack students right in the main office of our school and outside our enterance at dismissal. As educators, we are placed in a position of being blamed
for the violence, while being expected to "manage" it at the same time, then being told our methods of trying to manage it (Zero Tolerance) are unacceptable! How many more incidents of violence involving weapons would be taking place INSIDE our schools each day, instead of outside, if the Zero Tolerance policy is removed? Beside, it's not like the District actually enforces it anyway
As far as training teachers in "conflict management" and other areas. Come on people, as a teacher I already am expteced to be a Guidance Counselor, Big Brother/Big Sister, "fight manager" fill out TONS and TONS of mindless paperwork, make on the spot judgements on what the kids "issues" are, put up with constant disruptions inside the hallways and classrooms, be called every name in the book by 14 year olds, threatened with bodily harm, have my life threatened, have my car broken into or stolen, watch other kids be beaten senseless in our hallways, and, to add insult to injury, see any kid guilty of a crime, threat or violent act against another child or a teacher be given a "token" overnight suspension and then sent right back into our school or classroom laughing at us to do it all again. Teachers are put into the position of having to weigh whether or not they want to risk their careers by trying to defend themselves or innocent children when violence breaks out, because they know that it will be the TEACHER or NTA that IS dealt with, not the student(s)
At least let us keep the Zero Tolerance policy so we can keep some of the weapons out of the buildings (the ones we do catch), untill SOMEONE wakes up and deals with the violent neighborhood cultures and violent home life a lot of our students are subjected to.
I just want to teach in an environment where my first and foremost thought each day is NOT "how can I protect my children inside my classroom and hallways today?", instead of "how can I teach them the material they need to learn today?". Kids should be able to count on their schools as a safe refuge from the violence, not "Ground Zero" for it. Notice it took this long to menton "teaching" as something taking place in school. We are not schools, we are juvenile detention centers where the large majority of good kids and great teachers are held hostage, threatened and attacked daily by 1% of the student population in our buildings.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 00:21.
Why don't all the critics of Zero Tolerance open their own schools so they can deal personally with these kids who threaten teachers and students. They always take the most absurd cases and act like these exceptions are the rule. The fact is that Zero Tolerance is too rarely enforced (like the dress, cellphone, you-name-it code). I always love how the solution is to dump even more work on the teachers. Teachers in Philly are having enough problems just trying to meet all the busy work that Ackerman demands from her subjects. Extra training would be a waste of time.
Submitted by Ron Whitehorne on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 10:59.
Current practice in many schools, as this poster points out, is both permissive and repressive. Many infractions of rules are ignored. Others are punished in an arbitrary and overly harsh way as the students in YUC pointed out. The solution is not to ignore misbehavior but to address it in ways that are consistent with humane values and that recognize we are dealing with children and young people. Restorative justice, an approach that emphasizes building strong relationships of mutual trust and taking personal responsibility, has been employed successfully in some schools and is an alternative to current policies.
The poster also suggest we need zero tolerance "until SOMEONE wakes up and deals with the violent neighborhood cultures and violent home life a lot of our students are subjected to" Who is this SOMEONE? We all can and should be working to create and model ways of relating to each other that do not rely on violence or coercion. If we do this as individual teachers and educators it has an impact on students. If we do as a school community, or better yet as a School District, it will make a difference.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:52.
As long as thrown snowballs are answered with gunshots, insults answered with chairs and a hit is answered by the whole family jumping in, we will face these issues. It is what we teach our children that counts.
Fighting is not the solution - EVER.
Submitted by Sarah (not verified) on Sun, 01/16/2011 - 01:38.
YAY YUC!!!!!!! Thanks for your amazing work!
Submitted by Christopher Paslay (not verified) on Mon, 01/17/2011 - 18:00.
One concerning part of the YUC report is that it misrepresents facts and uses questionable methodology.
As its authors noted on more than one occasion in the study, the Philadelphia School District did not release the actual case records detailing the causes behind student suspensions, expulsions, arrests, and referrals to alternative school placements; much of this information is protected under state privacy laws.
So without any hard data or actual facts on the reasons why students were disciplined in the first place, United Youth for Change, in conjunction with the Advancement Project and the Education Law Center, piecemealed their report together by surveying several hundred random Philadelphia school students; they did not adequately consult school administrators, or disciplinarians, or anyone with objective firsthand knowledge of actual district discipline cases.
Interestingly, a number of the students interviewed just happened to be the very disgruntled rule-breakers facing discipline actions by the district. More disturbing was the fact that some of the students who provided testimony for the study were actually YUC members! Talk about having zero regard for research ethics and integrity.
The legitimate statistical data the report did include was presented in a less than straight-forward manner. A perfect example of this was the report’s claim that the Philadelphia School District’s discipline policies unfairly target Black and Latino students.
According to the report, “Black students were over two-and-a-half times more likely to be suspended than White students in 2008-09, and Latino students were over one-and-a-half times more likely to be suspended than their White peers. Thus, it is largely Black and Latino students who are excluded from school by these practices, which inevitably deepens the district-wide disparities in educational achievement along racial lines.”
This statement is misleading because in the 2008-09 school year there were four times as many Black students in the district than White, and approximately one-and-a-half times more Latinos than Whites. When you look at suspensions per 100 students, as the YUC report did, Black and Latinos were suspended more often simply because they made up nearly 80 percent of the district’s student body.
A more honest and forthright analysis of the data would have been to look at suspensions in the context of racial percentages. In the 2008-2009 school year, approximately 60 percent of students in the district were Black, 19 percent were Latino, 13 percent were White. However, only 35 suspensions per 100 students were Black, 23 were Latino, and 14 were White, according to district data. When you analyze this information in its correct context you’ll find Black children were only HALF as likely to be given an out-of-school suspension than their White counterparts. In fact, because White students only made up 13 percent of the student body in 2008-09, they were over-represented by suspensions that year, while Blacks were underrepresented.
This report not only cherry picks its information, but fails to acknowledge the real victims in city schools: those 90 percent of hard working students whose educations get compromised on a daily basis by the incorrigible few. THEIR rights should be addressed. This report was misguided and those adults involved should set a better example of how to correctly represent facts and employ ethical methodologies. For more on this topic, visit: http://chalkandtalk.wordpress.com/
Christopher Paslay
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/17/2011 - 22:19.
Good rebuttal.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 11:47.
Thank you for balancing out the data. It is hard for some to realize that the district is racially imbalanced, as the city is. Looking at data in isolation is always a dangerous thing.
Submitted by Dale Mezzacappa on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 12:12.
With all due respect, I think that you misunderstood the data. The data show that for every 100 black students, there were 35 suspensions, for every 100 white students, there were 14 suspensions, leading to the conclusion that blacks are suspended at two-and-a-half times the rate of whites. That breakdown has nothing to do with the relative percentage of black to white students in the district.
Submitted by Christopher Paslay (not verified) on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 13:35.
I've gone back and looked at the data, and I see your point, Dale. It appears it is per 100 students, although it's easy to read as per 100 students suspended. The whole report is a bit ambiguous, and the methodology to me is still slanted and unethical. The students doing the report should not contribute testimony, and some of this information is still taken out of context. The focus should be on a shared responsibilty for behavior, and yes, the students must take some of this repsonsibility.
Submitted by Ron Whitehorne on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 18:00.
I think it's also important to point out that anecdotal evidence was gathered not only from students but from educators as well. I was part of a focus group of teachers, not a scientific sampling to be sure but a group with diverse views. I'd also add as a long time YUC supporter and board member that YUC members certainly understand students have a responsibility when it comes to behavior. Indeed YUC members constantly promote and model constructive responses to problems in their schools. We all want to see a learning environment free of disruption and violence. The authors of the report just argue that zero tolerance doesn't get us there.
Submitted by Christopher Paslay (not verified) on Wed, 01/19/2011 - 10:19.
The authors do more than simply argue that zero tolerance doesn’t get us there. Their main premise is that schools are actively turning students into criminals. Not a toxic street culture, or a materialistic society, or poor parents, or wayward peers, or any of the many factors that influence and shape a student’s behavior. They argue that SCHOOLS (and by extension, teachers, administrators, counselors, and disciplinarians) are “criminalizing” children. This to me is disturbing and in poor taste.
It’s one thing to suggest that schools need to do more to help save or remediate troubled children. It’s quite another to claim they are actively HARMING CHILDREN. How, may I ask, is this helping the situation? Helping morale? Teachers and schools, already short on resources and overburdened with a multitude of responsibilities, are working tirelessly to help children succeed. And how does YUC show its appreciation? By shucking responsibility for their own behavior and accusing schools of turning them into criminals. You’re welcome, YUC, for all the hard work I do every day. I’m glad you appreciate all we do for you. Your “report” makes me feel real good about helping you. When I talk to fellow teachers in the suburbs, your “report” makes all of us here in the city look fantastic. Suburban students are talking about attending prestigious universities, and the YUC crew is fighting to make victims out of selfish, chronic rule-breakers who rob their hardworking peers of an education on daily basis. Nice work.
As a previous commenter stated, if your want to avoid a “harsh” discipline system, have some respect for yourself and for your classmates and follow the rules. Real simple.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Wed, 01/19/2011 - 12:06.
This is not an issue to throw about lightly - agreed. Schools do not create criminals by our discipline codes, but I guess we are not helping the situation when the rules are not uniformly enforced or rational. Zero tolerance is a great example of rules not being rational or logical. Bringing a butter knife to school because it is cool, you need it for lunch or as an "oops" is not the same thing as bringing in a blade.
The fact that so many children, even very young children feel the need for the weapons is a huge issue we seem to be ignoring. Bullying is real and we are not dealing well with this issue. The fact that so many children do not feel safe in our halls, lunchrooms, bathrooms and anywhere else on school grounds is a huge issue we need to focus on. Zero tolerance should not be enacted as frequently as it is. There should be no one suspended for assaulting teachers or other adults - that thought should NEVER enter a child's mind - yet I have three that think nothing of hitting me - mostly because they have gotten away with it. If I am not safe from them, is anyone else in the room? Can I promise that they are? NO. Respect is not in our classrooms - not from the children, parents, administrators, politicians, school district leaders, reporters, or in some cases from each other. If schools are to be safe places, respect must be modeled, taught and enforced. Dress codes need to be enforced - policies uniformly adhered to and respect return to being the "NORM" everywhere.
Submitted by Teacher (K.R. Luebbert) (not verified) on Tue, 01/18/2011 - 17:38.
Many great points. Let's remind students of this: It is VERY simple to avoid suspension--simply follow the rules, remember you are in school to get an education, and behave yourself. This is what I expect of my own children and what I expect of my students. Why should that concept be so difficult to understand?
Post new comment