The strict language of these policies were intended to hold students accountable for their misbehavior at school; however, according to Skiba & Knesting (2002), the lack of consideration for context in these cases has resulted in the criminalization of what are considered by many to be normative adolescent behaviors.
While the intention of zero tolerance was to reduce violence and create safer school environments, unintended consequences of these disciplinary rules have made schools less safe for many students by interrupting the learning process and paving a pathway from school into the juvenile justice system. The history of zero tolerance policies in the United States in addition to psychological research and case studies, provide evidence that these policies cause more harm than good to schools and students. In reviewing the existing body of literature, I will underline the detrimental impact that zero tolerance policies have had on U.S. public schools and outline alternatives to school discipline that are more supportive of educational achievement and conducive to the needs of adolescents during this period of social and cognitive development. .
During the 1980's, the United States saw an increase in drug use and drug related crime throughout the country. The general public perceived the epidemic to be the result of lenient laws and many advocated for more punitive practices to be implemented by law enforcement in retaliation. This era, known as the War on Drugs, introduced zero-tolerance policies as a measure of combating this crime wave that so many feared. These tough-on-crime laws aimed to decrease crime through deterrence effects, hoping that the fear of harsh punishment would prevent criminal activity. The laws were also largely motivated by concerns for public safety and, with the intention of protecting communities, these policies included harsh long term sentencing requirements for a variety of offenses.