Zero Tolerance Issues - Rough draft

Schiraldi, et al (2001) maintains that news media coverage plays a major role, particularly since no rise in assault is occurring. As mentioned previously, other researcher’s data indicates that gun violence in schools is unchanged. It was only when the issue of gun violence emerged in white neighborhoods, that the issue suddenly had greater media push and the concern of the media and the nation (Keleher, 2000). Rather than utilizing the case exception to the one year expulsion requirement, the policy seems to have become a panic reaction and an easy way for school officials to deal with a student any way they pleased under the guise of a federal law. Existing data that indicates there are increasing numbers of ways that students can be expelled by expanding what we call violence (Maeroff, 2000.) The data does not support that zero tolerance has been in line with the intended effectiveness:

Perhaps the most startling consequence of the policy is the effect that zero tolerance has had on minorities. They create problems of equity (Verdugo, Glenn, 2002). While the policy may appear race neutral, glaring inequalities exist. Study after study highlights this point, with zero tolerance becoming a vehicle of intolerance and disproportionate rates of minority students being expelled (Schiraldi &Ziedenberg, 2001). The reasons students are expelled, are often subjective. For African American students, getting expelled for appearing threatening, suggests that minorities are being expelled for ambiguous reasons. Further, in some school districts, African American students are expelled for less serious and subjectively defined infractions (Johnson, Boyden & Pittz, 2001). Further, zero tolerance policy blames the victim. It diverts the attention from existing structural inequities. Students of color are blamed for the failure of the educational system rather than the emphasizing systemic biases. Biased testing procedures, culturally biased teaching materials, and teachers without similar cultural experiences are part of the real problem (Cross, 2001). Hand in hand with zero tolerance policies are outcome tests that determine what a student has access to learn, further limiting advancement into higher levels of education. Thus, Cross believes, that a focus is kept on negative racial stereotypes rather than on “fallacies of bureaucracies, systems, unearned privilege

Some topics in this essay:
Boyden Pittz, Verdugo Glenn, GRAPHS Instead, Statewide Minnesota, Barriers IDEA, Rehabilitation Act, Effect Create, African American, Schools Act, Education Mandatory, zero tolerance, students expelled, “no child left, et al, child left, “no child, tolerance policies, security measures, african american, minority students, security guards, zero tolerance policies, moderate stringent security, 2001 zero tolerance, child left behind”,