Yesterday was a big day in the lives of the more than 10,000 children who are incarcerated in adult prisons. And the 81,000 more who are in juvenile justice facilities. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) opened public hearings on the school-to-prison pipeline.
The pipeline has its roots in the zero tolerance discipline policies schools embraced following the Columbine shootings in 1999. These policies impose severe penalties on children without regard to individual circumstances. What started as an effort to keep schools weapon and drug free has deteriorated into a growing tendency to criminalize any behavior deemed unacceptable by schools. There seems to be little concern for the responsibility we have to teach children rather than condemn them (Craig, 2012).
It’s a scary situation. As schools rely more and more on law enforcement to handle minor school misconduct, children are at increased risk of being arrested for having a temper tantrum, being tardy, or disrupting the peace. And nothing seems to stop the momentum. Not condemnation by the American Bar Association (ABA Juvenile Justice Committee, 2001). Not research suggesting that the overuse of punitive discipline actually increases the likelihood of later criminal misconduct (Wald & Losen, 2003). Not the historical reality that America's public schools are very safe, even when located in high crime neighborhoods ( Fowler, 2011).
Desegregation and the inclusion of children with disabilities have demanded that all children have access to a “free and appropriate public school education”. The school-to-prison pipeline is a serious barrier to this laudable goal. Children of color are disproportionally represented at every stage of the school-to-prison pipeline. While African-American children represent 16% of the nation’s juveniles, they account for 45% of juvenile arrests (Snyder, 2005).
Children with disabilities don’t have it much better. The emphasis on test based accountability has led some school districts to give longer suspensions to low performing students, especially during test taking periods (Figlio, 2006). While approximately 8.6% of students attending public schools school-aged have learning disabilities (Burrell & Warboys, 2000), students with disabilities are represented in correctional facilities at a rate nearly four times that number (Quinn, Rutherford & Leone, 2001).
So Senator Durbin’s hearings are important. They call attention to the growing tendency of public schools to view prison as the default educational placement for children whose behavior is deemed unruly or out of control. Let’s hope that the hearings raise awareness and outrage about one of the most serious civil rights issues our country faces today.
Read more at: http://jjie.org/senate-subcommittee-hears-testimony-on-schooltoprison-pipeline/100517
Bibliography
ABA Juvenile Justice Committee, ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY: REPORT (Feb.2001).
Burrell, Sue & Lauren Warboys (2000). OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, p, 1.
Craig, Susan E. (2012). Children need partners not enforcers. Kappanmagazine.org February 7, 2012.
Figlio, David N. (2006). Testing, crime and punishment. Journal of Public Economics, 90 (4-5).
Fowler, Deborah (2011). School disciple feeds the school-to-prison pipeline. Phi Delta Kappan, 93(2), p. 14-19.
Quinn, Mary M., Rutherford, Robert B. & Peter E. Leone (2001). Students with disabilities in correctional facilities. ERIC Clearing House on Disabilities and Gifted Education.
Snyder, Howard N. (2005).Juvenile arrests 2003. OJJDP Juvenile Justice Bulletin, p.9.
Wald, Johanna & Dan Losen (2003). Defining and re-directing a school-to-prison pipeline. New Directions for Youth Development, #99
Comments (1)