By:Matt Armstrong
Editor’s
note: Part of a continuing series of
student roundtables hosted by The
South Brunswick Post on a variety
of issues.
My how
times have change
d.
In the good
old days, that are not really that old
or necessarily that good, games,
threats, flirtations and even fights
on the playground were a common
part of growing up — a right of
passage as students developed their
social
skills.
But
those days are long go
ne.
Schools
across the nation have been adop
ting zero-tolerance policies in the
wake last year’s tragic shooting at
Columbine High School in Little
ton, Colo. These policies are meant
to deter students from violent or
unruly behavior by issuing strict
punishment for any such behav
ior.
Though in
response to several controversial
incidents involving this policy of
absolutes, some students at South
Brunswick High School say this
policy is being taken too far and is
unfair to the stu
dents.
Last
month, a fourth-grader at the Upper
Elementary School in the West
Windsor-Plainsboro school district
was suspended for “threatening” to
shoot a classmate with a rubber
band and a wad of paper. The
fourth-grader was suspended from
school for a day, questioned by po
lice and had to undergo a psycholo
gical evalua
tion.
In
Sayreville last month, four kinder
garten students were suspended
from school for playing cops and
robbers on the playground during
recess. By pretending their fingers
were guns, the game was de
termined an act of violence and the
students were suspend
ed.
Similar in
cidents around the nation have been
met with harsh punishments under
the zero-tolerance policy. A student
in Florida was suspended for bring
ing nail clippers to school. Seven
students in Indiana were expelled
for two years for getting into a
fight. Many incidents labeled as
sexual harassment have led to sus
pensions for students as young as 6
years
old.
While ul
timately these policies seek to pro
tect students from incidents like
Columbine and the March incident
in which a first-grader in Flint,
Mich., shot and killed a classmate,
many students feel these policies
infringe on students’ rights and
their ability to grow, develop and
learn.
“Grow
ing up is about trial and error,” said
Tamy-Fee Meneide, a junior who
took part in the roundtable discus
sion with the editorial staff of The
South Brunswick Post.
Students ar
gue that the zero-tolerance policy is
flawed inherently in different ways.
On one hand, the zero-tolerance
policy holds young children to the
same rules of adult society, with
sexual harassment codes of con
duct. On the other hand, it doesn’t
afford them the same leeway in re
gards to freedom of
speech.
“You
make a mistake and hopefully you
learn from it and don’t do it again,
but zero-tolerance just tries to scare
kids. Fear does not equal respect,”
said sophomore Maria Leg
re.
The stu
dents say school is supposed to pre
pare them to be adults, but zero-
tolerance policies judge minors
more harshly than adult
s.
“If they
were going to have zero-tolerance
for everyone they’d have to throw
everyone in jail,” said sophomore
Monica Mangu
al.
“The pun
ishment has to fit the crime,” said
Tamy-
Fee.
Students
said it is unfair that a colloquial
threat made in jest or frustration,
can lead to such harsh punishments.
They said that the more experi
enced teachers and staff can recog
nize these comments as harmless.
But, with so many new teachers in
the school, the students fear that
they will get in trouble for a mean
ingless comment or gestu
re.
“If you are
mad and you say you are going to
hurt someone, they punish you for
something you might do. They
can’t just react so quickly without
thoroughly looking at the situa
tion,” said Mon
ica.
Students
said that schools have overstepped
their bounds in disciplining stu
dents and should defer more to par
ents.
“My par
ents are strict, but my teachers are
10 times stricter than them,” said
Swati Bagaria, a sophomo
re.
“I’m mov
ing out of my house in September,”
said Kelly Zimmermann, a senior.
“I’m getting in the habit of paying
bills; setting standards for myself to
be independent. My parents treat
me like an adult. I work a lot. But
then I come here and I’m treated
like a
child.”
The
students said that the rules of zero-
tolerance are being enforced unfair
ly. They said one problem is the
haphazard way the policy is en
forced.
“They
always hassle the boys more than
girls,” said Mari
a.
“I hate the
way they stereotype kids as good
and bad,” said Tamy-Fee. “I’m sor
ry, but they always pick on the
black people.”
&nb
sp;A possible racial bias has been
brought up in many of the recent
zero-tolerance policy infrac
tions.
In the
case in Decatur, Ill., after seven
students were expelled for two
years for fighting, the Rev. Jesse
Jackson led a protest to reduce the
punishment on the grounds that
these black students were punished
more severely than white students
that had been in fights earlier in the
year. The expulsions were subse
quently reduced to nine month
s.
In West-
Windsor, a fourth-grader was sus
pended for threatening to “shoot” a
classmate with a rubberband and a
wad of paper. The father of the boy
said that the district’s actions were
based in part on the fact that his son
is black — a charge that has been
denied by district offi
cials.
The par
ents of the West Windsor boy re
ceived an offer of free legal
services from the Virginia-based
Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit le
gal firm that has taken on a number
of zero-tolerance cases throughout
the coun
try.
John
Whitehead of the Rutherford Insti
tute, who has been handling cases
nationwide involving zero-toler
ance policies for about three years,
said they force school officials to
defend themselves after punishing a
child for conduct that is not illegal
or disruptive, and take away the
power of teachers and principals to
exercise discretion and common
sense.
“The
problem with zero-tolerance poli
cies is that they don’t go into in
tent,” he said.
&nb
sp;Under such policies, Mr.
Whitehead said school officials
“don’t exercise any discretion, they
simply report the incident to the po
lice.”
Accord
ing to literature provided by the
Rutherford Institute, the incidents
of violence in schools and illegal
possession of drugs and guns have
motivated communities to “get
tough” on offenders. Most zero-
tolerance policies have been en
acted by local school boards in an
effort to demonstrate to the public
that board members are serious
about improving school discipline,
according to the institu
te.
But such
policies, the institute says, often
have the unintended effect of de
priving children of constitutional
rights to free speech, free exercise
of religion, privacy and fundamen
tal due pro
cess.
Students
at South Brunswick High School
argue that the zero-tolerance policy
will not prevent tragedy in the
schools from happening again and
that meanwhile they are forced to
suffer.
“What
happened in Columbine was a terri
ble thing, but I don’t see why every
student age 4 to 18 should be pun
ished for what a couple kids in our
generation did,” said Mari
a.
Students ar
gued that rather than calling the po
lice or issuing an absolute
punishment for every misdeed, they
should use some common sense
and judge each case individual
ly.
“I think
there should be graduated toler
ance,” said Swati. “If you throw
one punch you shouldn’t be kicked
out of school. Have punishments
for a first offense, second offense.
Weapons are what the zero-toler
ance policy should be for. I mean
that’s why it came about.”
