 |
 |
Earl Ofari Hutchinson
According to the latest report from the U.S. Department of Education nearly one out of eight black students was suspended from the nation's public schools in 1997-98. By contrast only one out of thirty white students were suspended. The figure for expulsions is even more appalling. Nearly one million students were expelled that year and one-third of them were black. Civil rights groups instantly blamed the gaping disparities on racism and said that they would challenge school officials nationally to find better ways to discipline black students instead of shoving them out of their school doors. Education officials counter that factors other than racism could explain the disparities in suspensions.
Though they don't spell out what those factors are the disturbing implication is that black students are more prone to carry knives and guns, pick more fights, act unruly, and engage in illicit conduct than whites at schools. There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case. In fact, education officials concede that one reason for the racial blip in suspensions is that poor, and minority parents are less likely to challenge school officials decision to suspend or expel students than white, middle class parents. If school officials grossly overreact to the bad behavior of black students there are two big reasons. One is justifiable and the other is objectionable. The Federal Gun Free Schools Act passed in 1994 requires that states boot students out for weapons possession in order to get money under the elementary and secondary education act. School officials quickly expanded the list of violations for student expulsion to include fighting and other violent acts. California's zero tolerance school laws mandate that a student be expelled for one year for infractions that include drug sales, robbery, assault, weapons possession, and fights that cause serious physical injury to another person. The only exception to the rule is if the student that caused the injury acted in self-defense.
The horrific stories of students welding guns and knives on school campuses and assaulting and terrorizing other students has deepened public panic that murderous youth are running amok at schools. School officials zealously enforce get tough policies to prove to the public that they will do whatever it takes to get rid of disruptive students. But what rankles civil right groups and is objectionable is that get tough school policies may be badly tainted with racial stereotypes. The danger is that many school officials reflexively view young blacks as violence-prone, menace-to-society thugs. The well-publicized two year expulsion slapped on black students for fighting at a football game by the mostly white school board in Decatur, Illinois last year raised huge warning flags that some school officials deal more harshly with black students who misbehave than whites. In those instances zero tolerance is a repressive tool that victimizes black students.
The aim of a zero tolerance school policy is to send the stern message to students that violent acts on campus will not be tolerated. But does a rigid zero tolerance policy toward school violence effectively keep students and the community out of harms way? Despite the murderous rampage at Columbine High School, the rash of shootings at other public schools, and the steady tales of crime ridden, failed inner city schools, campuses are generally much safer than they were five years ago. In a report by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice school-associated shootings have sharply dropped since 1991, while homicide rates among adults have jumped. Better and more effective school counseling and mediation programs, and greater parental and teacher involvement are the major reasons why school violence has plunged, and not zero tolerance policies.
Zero tolerance policies that merely dump students into makeshift alternative schools, or out onto the streets demoralizes students and parents, reinforces the notion among blacks that school officials impose a racial double standard in punishing blacks and whites, and increases cynicism and disdain among minorities for public education. This should force school officials to ask themselves whether they use zero tolerance policies to punish bad behavior or to overly punish black and Latino students because of racial fears. Civil rights groups are right to demand that school officials ask and answer that question.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is a nationally syndicated columnist and the director of the National Alliance for Positive Action.
All rights reserved.
-back to top- |
