Cub Scout expelled for bringing his eating utensil to school…
Folks may have noted the mandatory expulsion of a second grader, so excited to get to join the Cub Scouts that he brought his cub scout fork/spoon/knife utensil to school to eat lunch, thus running afoul of the schools zero tolerance policy. (Dr. X blogged about it here). The picture above is the kid, with his utensil, and below is something that looks to me like the threatening weapon. It accompanies this NY Times story.
This policy strikes me as ridiculous. My schoolmates and I used to carry things like that into school all the time, and somehow we managed to not stab each other. Stabbing someone with something like that probably would have just gotten us an ass-kicking anyway. The things are too small to do much real damage unless you get very (un)lucky.
Zero tolerance equals zero brains. It’s just another way politicians act like they’re tough on crime, and don’t accomplish a damn thing other than making the prison industry happy.
I suspect that zero tolerance was adopted because application of discretion results in white kids’ wrists getting slapped disproportionately. (Ah — reading the article, I see their guess is the same.)
Regardless, *any* mandatory suspension of a 6-year-old is absolute horseshit.
You can always find a law professor to support any stupidity:
Charles P. Ewing, a professor of law and psychology at the University at Buffalo Law School who has written about school safety issues, said he favored a strict zero-tolerance approach.
Great.
“Zero-tolerance” should mean the implement is not allowed. Confiscate it, tell little Zachary that it’s a very neat tool but not okay for school, and have mom or dad come pick it up & get counseled on the school policy. That is as “zero-tolerance” as anyone needs.
‘Tail Wag Dog’-Just another example of the “dumbing down” of public education so the majority can accommodate the minority.
From the NYTimes article:[quote]Education experts say that zero-tolerance policies initially allowed authorities more leeway in punishing students, but were applied in a discriminatory fashion. Many studies indicate that African-Americans were several times more likely to be suspended or expelled than other students for the same offenses.
“The result of those studies is that more school districts have removed discretion in applying the disciplinary policies to avoid criticism of being biased,” said Ronnie Casella, an associate professor of education at Central Connecticut State University who has written about school violence. He added that there is no evidence that zero-tolerance policies make schools safer.[end quote].
I feel so sorry for the little boy and his family but home schooling may be a blessing in disguise.
WS
Wonder how everyone would feel if a gang-banger had the same knife? And it is a knife even if it also has utensils. It’s the little innocent looking boy that makes us rationalize that the knife is no big deal. We’re way past allowing knives of any kind in school.
dd5, sorry that your argument is so utterly unconvincing.
Whether a knife is *allowed* (it shouldn’t be) is by no means the same question as whether bringing a knife to school should merit a 45-day automatic suspension.
A “gang-banger” with no prior record (if that’s possible) would merit the same response I advanced re: the 6-year-old above: take up the tool, return it to a parent, and counsel the parent on the policy.
How hard is that?
I agree with Anderson. “Zero tolerance” does not make children more responsible nor does it make schools any safer. This boy came to school thinking he was going to have cool utensils to eat with at lunch, not that he was going to harm anyone. In fact chances are good if he had intent to hurt someone, he would have concealed the tool. Regardless, you would think part of this school’s responsibility would be to educate this boy on why he can not have his new tool at school. Instead, schools just throw up their hands and say “that is it your out of here”.
I too am sorry my argument was so utterly unconvincing :)
The problem, IMO, is that this is a 6-year-old. Typical gangbangers are considerably older and far more capable of understanding the rules, even if they don’t always conform to the rules. The punishment is draconian for a 6-year-old who can’t understand consequences the way an older child can.
People who make professional careers of working with children ought to understand that the inflexible application of this rule to 6 and 14 year olds alike ignores the profound differences in developmental capacities and needs between 2nd graders and middle school or high school students.
Dr X makes a good point, not completely convincing but not utterly non-convincing. Age should make a difference.
What??? No knives in school? How we gonna dig our holes and gouge out our ringsies for our marble matches during recess?
There are similar zero tolerance rules for drugs, which also include theraputic classes different from mind and mood altering chemicals. Unless a lessened headache is mood altering….See the tylenol fiasco:
http://www.wvec.com/news/local/stories/wvec_local_050407_tylenol.39595d6a.html
and the comments from the ABA in 2000: http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/zerotolreport.html
NL
Maybe the Cub Scouts should have taken a little time to tell the boys that you don’t take this to school. Dr. X and Anderson made good points. I find this situation to be the most far fetched of reason of rational adults suspendng a six year old for such a minor problem.
This story made http://detentionslip.org ! Check it out for all the crazy headlines from our schools.
Classic example of leftist policies run amuck. How much more of this type of seemingly endless bureaucratic stupidity must we tolerate? One size does not fit all.
AFOTL: “Leftist”?
School boards “leftist”?
School boards??
Come on. I don’t know what you’re drinkin’, but it oughta be outlawed if that’s what it does to a man’s brain.
School boards?? Leftist?? When Southern Baptists adopt the Douay Bible ….
To my mind “zero tolerance” is a textbook example of what the term “arbitrary and capricious” means.
Zero tolerance allows spineless, ignorant people in charge to not have to answer for their inability to use common sense, logic or reason in determining what is right, equal or fair. Zero tolerance equates to zero discretion and zero use of intelligent reasoning. And it has the added benefit of allowing total dumbasses to feel like they are tough on criminal activity. Unless it’s their kid.
Here’s a good article for lay people, like me, to read
http://www.abanet.org/crimjust/juvjus/zerotolreport.html
this isn’t leftist, AFOTL.
A tale of two school boards: In Tupelo, or suburban Jackson, the kid would have been out for a year. Zero tolerance. In Holly Springs, where I’m the lawyer, here’s what would have happened:
They would have listened carefully. They would have talked to the kid. They would have followed their policy, required by state statutes, that they consider expulsion for a year, and they probably would have told the kid he got counseling (which would have amounted to meetings with the school administrators and counselors to make sure he understood the rules) and a hope by all concerned that the seriousness of meeting with the school board would make him understand what he was dealing with and he’d never be back. And in my experience with the school board, it would have worked.
Holly Springs is in effect an urban school in a rural setting, with all the problems that entails. And the school board would be closer to the “liberal” that AFOTL disaproves. But (based in part on my advice) they’ve reserved to themselves the ability to sort between kids like this one and the “gang bangers,” mentioned above, and in my experience representing them for 18 years, they act accordingly. Zero tolerance is an alarmist conservative effort to turn off the brains of school officials in dealing with children, taking away the ability to treat everyone as an individual.
bingo, razor
i would like an explanation of how this is a leftist policy run amuck? (i spell “amok”). AFTOL doesn’t like policy or result = leftist policy run amok?
On a more positive note, the cub scout could parlay this into merit badges for Law, Education (do they give one for that?), Food & Nutrition, Government, Stupidity, …
Waitaminnit … I just read the complete NYT story: the kid is getting 45 days in the state reform school? 45 days in reform school!?!? I’ll tell you who oughta be sent away … the entire school board. They’re a buncha certifiable fools. They oughta be lashed. That district needs a Zero Tolerance policy banning stupid school officials … not cub scouts with camping gear.
You have all missed the point. This is really an attack on Boy Scouts of America. Scouting has been set up. The school system can’t ban scouting so they ban their tools. This time next year a compass will be contraband and lost children will be aimlessly wandering the halls.
As the father of a brand new Cub Scout who is VERY eager to get his own pocket knife, I’m whispering “There but by the grace of God. . ” as I read this.
On the Scout side, I don’t know if this is the case in all Cub Packs, but ours does not allow the scout to have a knife at meetings/campouts until they have completed their whittling achievement and encourages the parents not to buy them a knife until they’ve completed it. I’m assuming the achievement includes teaching knife safety.
IMO, NMC understands the “zero tolerance” policy better than most. It is my understanding that the zero tolerance policy in schools was instituted to ensure not only school safety but fairness in the application of rules and penalties. For example, this policy would ensure that a school board member’s child who brought a weapon onto school property this week would receive the same treatment that the weapon-bearing “gang” member received last week. However, this example reflects the problems with such exacting blanket policies, especially in dealing with young children whose level of understanding of weapons might vary.
The creation of the zero tolerance policy reflects the changing environment of the schools. Today teachers must take valuable time away from teaching the “four R’s” to teach children what weapons–and drugs– are and what the rules are regarding having them on school property. How many of you above the age of –say 45 to 50– had that as part of your first and second grade school education?
One person commented that the parents of said child should be called to pick up the utensils (weapons), and they should be counseled about what the child can bring to school. Anyone who works with the schools can tell you that some children don’t have parents who are accessible or who care. Schools can no longer assume that parents will enforce the school rules. Therefore, more responsibility is put upon the school itself to enforce its rules, and ensuring safety in the school setting has become a most important priority. Although “zero tolerance” may seem leftist, idiotic, etc., etc., it is the school administration’s effort to ensure school safety and to ensure fairness in the application of school rules and penalties. It’s not perfect.
To look at this particular situation in another light, what if another student had grabbed the spoon utensil, pulled out the knife, and started running and accidently injured himself or another student? Or what if a student had been injured just trying to pull the knife out of it’s socket? You might say, “oh, that didn’t happen,” but the school would be responsible if it had happened. We simply don’t live in innocent times anymore.
What if you or your child is discovered with a knife on a commercial airplane? What penalty would be applied there? It’s interesting times we live in.
As a longtime teacher in a public school in the Delta (in my former life), NoMiss is correct about one of the main reasons for institution of zero-tolerance policies. It removes any question that students are disciplined differently – one size fits all.
And the policy is just as strong towards threats of violence (e.g. violent drawings) as it is for weapons violations.
Know, too, that the Mississippi State Department of Education requires the reporting of these types of infractions (classified as Level IV offenses) and posts them to the student’s state electronic records so that if an expelled or suspended student attempts to enroll at another district, the new district will be alerted.
I would also add that that these policies were introduced in the wake of the Columbine killings.
Point well made and well taken, Ignatius. However, there is a big difference between a six year old and a sixteen year old. Where are the studies on recidivism and zero tolerance? By golly, if that little cub scout isn’t a ne’er do well by now, maybe we can turn him into one by sending him to reform school. He’ll either grow up quickly or be scarred for life, or both. Our tax dollars at work!
I definitely don’t agree with the zero-tolerance policies, Tightlip. I do agree with the objective of protecting educators from charges of discriminatory discipline. Like the rest of education policies, zero-tolerance will be cyclical and will be replaced by a newer approach, especially in light of the resulting inequities such as those described above.
Look, we’ve all seen The Omen and know what evil powers can be bestowed in small innocent looking children. This kid could very well be the spawn of Satan. In light of that, I have no problem with the zero tolerance policy.
I like no tolerance policies–you always know exactly where you stand on any given issue: a knife is a knife is a knife and the fact that no reason, logic or common sense is involved is meant to drive home that very fact. Also, those involved in school boards no doubt get calls from self-important folks who want the rules changed for their children. The policies are also meant to protect the schools, its teachers and administration from lawsuits. The litany of “no tolerance” policies are explained in the literature received prior to the school year and I think even one parent has to sign to acknowledge their understanding of the policies. Regardless of fairness issues, this young boy–who I am sure is very sweet and meant no harm–still could have seriously injured someone.
Having done some Youth Court Defender work, I have grave misgivings about what Reform School resources there could be for a second grader even in one of the Blue States.
What if the untensil didn’t have the knife? It seems like the fork could do as much damage. I think the bigger issue is school officials that are brainless. The purpose of school is to teach and that would include things such as using a eating utensil with a knife.
[...] Run”, Q and O, BoingBoing, Kate Harding/Salon “Broadsheet”, Below the Beltway, Tom Freeland/North Mississippi Commenter, Lowering the [...]
“one of the main reasons for institution of zero-tolerance policies. It removes any question that students are disciplined differently – one size fits all.”
Exactly why I called it a “leftist policy”. It emanates from extreme CYA reactions to political correctness run amuck. Public education in this country has been taken over by well-meaning idiots.
What should have happened in this situation, is that the teacher noticing the kid with the spork should have discreetly asked the child to hand it over and then talk to the child why he should not bring it to school. This should be followed up by a constructive chat with the child’s parents about appropriate future behavior at school. And that’s it. No need to make a mountain out of this molehill. IF the behavior is then repeated, then take stronger measures. Quite obviously, this first grader was not a gang-banger, terrorist, criminal, or delinquent. He is just a kid being a kid.
And folks wonder why people are still flocking to private schools and many are choosing to home school.
“allows spineless, ignorant people in charge to not have to answer for their inability to use common sense, logic or reason in determining what is right, equal or fair.”
Thanks Razor. That is about as good a description of the effect of far left extremism currently rampant in the US House leadership and Senate leadership as I have ever seen penned. Nailed it.
AFOTL, its just a fact that zero tolerance started with a “lets get tough” mentality that has zero to do with liberalism and is in fact the opposite. You’ve defined “liberal” as bad.
Treating each child as an individual and not viewing school discipline as something that should work like criminal sentencing is a approach advocated by conservatives.
Cujo359 You’re an idiot!!! Plain and Simple, if the kid breaks the rules he should be punished.He should know or the dumb parents should know to tell him not to bring weapons to school. When I was in grade school and you were caught with a weapon you were expelled, as this kid should be.
I disagree. There is simply not much that is “conservative” still displayed in public schools anymore. Its turned into a giant liberal social experiment filled with indoctrination of political agendas, instead of the basics of math, language, and science. From the human-caused global warming farce to Mmmmm Mmmmm Mmmmmm. But, whether “left” or “conservative”, such application of zero tolerence, IMO, equates to zero intelligence.
Fairly innocuous things that I used to carry to school every day are now deemed to be “dangerous weapons” —eg a small pocketknife carried in my pocket —going back to my early elementary school days–always be prepared I was told.
To prevent the “sissification” of the US male population, we need some serious changes in our public schools. The return of common sense would be a good start. Support for Scouting —including at schools—would help as well.
And speaking of Scouts, I heard on the news tonight that an Eagle Scout was booted out of school for having a pocket knife with a 2 inch blade in his parked vehicle on campus. And the search and seizure aspect of this scenario necessary for the school to discover the pocket knife is disturbing as well.
I am so thankful that I did not attend school in today’s environment.
The funny thing is that what I normally carry in my truck is a reflection of my upbringing. I am indeed prepared for most emergencies, carrying in my truck such items as matches, a lighter, extra set of clothes, a rain poncho, a warm jacket, water, food, a compass, cigars, a flask of brandy, a wool blanket, a .22 pistol, several knives of various sizes, several flashlights and extra batteries, rope, first aid kit, hand-held radio with weather stations, and an entire array of things needed for my vehicle. Who knew that these were “criminal” tendencies carried over from my youth —at least according to what we teach our youth these days.
All that in one truck … but no henway? Sounds like commie thinking to me.
AFOTL do you stock cat litter? Or is that one seasonal?
Common sense people. Just use common sense…..Thats all it boils down to
I remember some years ago a girl was suspended for the no tolerance rule of bringing chains to school. She got suspended for having a key chain.
“One sentence fits all” has been pushed by conservatives for years, as a way of showing they were getting-tough-on-crime, and “zero tolerance” is a product of the same thinking, AFOTL. In a fit of legislative getting-tough-on-schools, we got a statute that seemed to require expulsion for a year (I discussed this above). Schools in such bastions of liberal thinking as suburban Jackson and Tupelo were expelling people for the pointy-nail-file on fingernail clippers. This is not liberal thinking any way you slice it.
Perhaps we could have a long discussion on why political conservatives, willing to go charging off after all kinds of “reforms” like this, or mandatory arbitration, etc., aren’t really conservative in the sense of “lets be very cautious if not opposed to changing the way things are,” but in the sense the word is used in politics, zero tolerance at schools is a conservative policy.
NMC, just to be clear, I view such absurdity as an overreaction to liberal policies enforced through our laws and lawsuits. A good example is school prayer. All prayer at school is not prohibited by the US Constitution. But, as an overreaction to lawsuits filed to stop alleged violations of the establishment clause (many clear, others questionable), many school districts react by attempting to ban any type of student prayer at school.
It often seems that all it takes is one lawsuit involving any sort of “weapon” anywhere in the country, and school district administrators appear to use that as an excuse to vacate all common sense in the banning of such “weapons” and punishments administered for rule violations.
No, Delta, I don’t carry cat litter in my truck. Ha. But, IF had a traveling cat, I would probably consider it. IF I ever find a cat that likes to ride in a vehicle —never seen one that does— then I’ll add this to my list.
NMC, I consider myself a “conservative” on defense and fiscal issues, and a “liberal” when it comes to individual rights, freedom and liberty guaranteed by our constitution and recognized as inherent. So, maybe I am probably not the typical “conservative” that many of you think of in this regard. And then again, many of the so-called “liberals” these days seem to favor positions that fly against our conastitutional rights, freedom and liberty —so, I don’t really know what term best characterizes them. So that we can all communicate more clearly, maybe we should all try discussing topics without using these terms —– I’ll start, as I am just as guilty as anyone.
Cat litter help when you need traction on ice or other slippery surfaces.
AFOTL @ 1128. If you’ll just add a few more items; a compass, a pair of socks and gloves, your truck will be as complete as mine :) Maybe it was just an oversight on your part.
Ben. A henway of about five pounds? Or the other kind?
I’m not inclined to agree with Razor on anything, but I do here: Zero tolerance is a sorry excuse for low wattage administrators, who have risen to their final level of incompetence in the turgid, Byzantine bureaucracy we call public education, to take it down another notch (just when we thought it could sink no further).
And if you outlaw school prayer, isn’t that a step toward outlawing the small but powerful and well GOP connected gay-cult-side of Scouting? If you’re talking about “baby out with the bathwater” zero tolerance — I’d say that’s way up there. Or what about Bhuddist soldiers who are “anti-war”? Where’s the zero tolerance in that? Or Olympia Snowe? How can her recent vote to put health care out there for illegal aliens be squared with zero tolerance? Or sick folks who show up at the ER who ain’t exactly “like us” if you get my drift. True, if they get the swine flu and don’t have the benefit of a “public auction” they’re liable to spread it on public transportation or at the post office to the rest of us, but that’s no reason to abandon our ideals, or the pleasure we’re afforded by introduction into our midst of a new subclass. Bravo, Zero Tolerance. And we ain’t even talking Coke/CokeZero here, but if the shoe fits, wear it. Dum, dum, da, dum, dum, dum (I ain’t retreating from Zero Tolerance until Rush or Glenn say so). Really more Glenn than Rush — Rush is so yesterday (and sucking up to Matt Lauer on the liberal networks proves it). Remember Lieutenant Oliver North? Got any idea where he would come down on any of this? Freedom fries, anyone?