The recent Inquirer series on school violence showed that unsafe schools have serious consequences. But while the series identified the right problem, we must take care not to address it with the wrong solution.

We already know what doesn’t work – including the district’s current “zero tolerance” discipline policy. It’s plagued by uneven application, long delays, and a general lack of common sense.

Research shows that for all their tough rhetoric and political appeal, zero-tolerance policies do not make schools safer. The American Psychological Association has found that they reduce instructional time, bring more students into contact with the justice system, and increase dropout rates. The Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations, the School District’s task force on dropouts, the state Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice, and the federal government have all declared zero-tolerance policies ineffective.

As the Inquirer series showed, the district’s zero-tolerance policy has not prevented serious incidents from going unreported. Meanwhile, it has led to referrals to the juvenile-justice system for minor infractions that could have been addressed within the schools.
Instead of wielding the sledgehammer of zero tolerance, schools must respond to disruptive and violent behavior with a continuum of intervention and support strategies. The district needs to develop a balanced approach that provides serious responses to harmful violence but doesn’t unnecessarily criminalize minor infractions.

We know what works. Extensive research supports evidenced-based practices that improve the school culture, reduce violence, and keep kids in school, such as School-Wide Positive Behavior Support, restorative justice, bullying prevention, and increased use of school counselors.

Successful anti-violence programs in Philadelphia, some of which were highlighted by The Inquirer, should be expanded to serve all the city’s schools. The district should also accurately track and report violence, teach and reward positive behavior, and ensure swift, appropriate responses to misbehavior. And none of that will work unless the district engages students and parents in the solutions and implements them consistently and for the long term.

A positive learning climate requires support, not threats, for our school administrators, teachers, and students. Principals will more accurately report violent incidents when the district promises help rather than punishment. Talented teachers will stay in the system when the district gives them the tools to manage challenging behaviors. And students will engage more fully in school when we model and teach positive behaviors.

Some of the most promising reforms require investment. State legislators will have to back up their rhetoric about improving school safety by providing resources for practices that actually work and, in the long run, save money. The more than 150,000 children who attend district schools shouldn’t have to wait any longer to be able to learn in a safe environment.

Shelly Yanoff is the executive director of Public Citizens for Children and Youth. She wrote this on behalf of Community Responses to Zero Tolerance, a coalition of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, ACTION United, the Defender Association of Philadelphia, the Education Law Center, the Juvenile Law Center, Philadelphia Student Union, Youth United for Change, and PCCY.

Philly.com – April 12, 2011 – Read article online