�鶹������ý

With the alarming rise in violence at public schools across the country, zero-tolerance policies have become the norm. In theory, these policies should lead to safer schools, since they offer school administrators the ability to deal with infractions promptly and decisively. However, the practice of zero-tolerance policies is showing significant flaws in the system, and many are demanding reform in the rules that have proven to hurt students more than they protect them in some cases.

The Purpose of Zero-Tolerance Policies

The establishment of zero-tolerance policies began in the 1980s. At the time, these policies primarily dealt with major offenses involving weapons and drugs. The term was first introduced by the Reagan Administration when the President launched his War on Drugs. When the federal government passed the Drug-Free Schools and Campuses Act of 1989, zero-tolerance policies became the law.

According to the , zero-tolerance policies expanded with the federal Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994, which mandated that any student caught bringing a gun to school would be expelled for one year or longer. Students accused of violations were also to be referred to local law enforcement agencies. However, it wasn’t long before that zero-tolerance policy was expanded to encompass a host of infractions, from dress code violations to assaults on another student. At that point, many began to question the effectiveness of zero-tolerance policies, particularly in situations where the policy began to override common sense and the best interests of the

Teachers say students are becoming more unruly and disrespectful. Schools complain that it is getting harder to get parents involved. So what is the solution? Some school districts have turned to handcuffing and police intervention as a way to get students under control. However, that idea is not sitting well with many parents and community members – particularly when it is their own children on the receiving end of the harsh disciplinary measures. After all, what type of message does a school send to students when they are throwing handcuffs on young wrists? In this author's opinion, which is supported by research, it is a message that encourages a vicious cycle of future violence and criminality.

This video demonstrates handcuffing.

�鶹������ý Incident in Mississippi Results in Policy Change

Jackson Public Schools in Mississippi have had a policy that allows handcuffing students to stationary objects as a means of discipline. The policy has been particularly prevalent at Capital City Alternative School, where teachers and administrators say discipline problems abound. According to a report in the , a suit was filed last year in response to this policy, which forced the school district to take another look at their disciplinary measures.

The lawsuit was filed by Jeanette Murry on behalf of her son, who was 16 at the time of the incident and a student at the alternative school. Murry stated

Social media has become a prevalent component of today’s society, shaping relationships on both a professional and personal level. Unfortunately, the advent of social websites did not come equipped with a handbook to guide users with ethical boundaries in the use of these media outlets. Instead, this job has been a reactive one, left to whoever might see potentially offensive posts and take the necessary steps to discipline those responsible. In the case of students, that job is often taken on by the public school system – much to the chagrin of many who believe the line between public school and private life must remain strong and consistent.

This video from PBS looks at the issue of schools and social media.

According to a recent article at , the age of the Internet is forcing many to reexamine constitutional liberties – primarily those protected under the First Amendment. Public schools have been flung directly into the fray, as they attempt to make the distinction between a student’s private life and the impact of the choices they make outside of school on the school environment overall. Currently, a number of questions have arisen over the use of social media by both students and teachers. Three cases, in particular, have forced public school officials, and even the court system, to take a second look at what constitutes “appropriate” behavior on social websites.

School

Drug testing has been commonplace in professions that require critical decision-making skills, ranging from police officers to civil servants. A growing number of individuals also believe that the people who spend the most time with our children should also be subject to random testing of this kind. Teachers have come under the gun in recent years over the issue of random drug testing. While some parents and education experts believe random testing is necessary to keep schools safe, teachers believe these tests violate their privacy rights. Public school teachers are not universally required to undergo drug testing in every state. No federal mandate requires drug testing for teachers, and no state laws specifically mandate it for all teachers across the United States. However, drug testing policies vary significantly by state and individual school districts.

Drug testing is one part of these policies, and it serves a necessary role in a drug-free work culture. And because of the negative impact drug use can have, especially in safety-sensitive industries, companies should consider the benefits of drug testing in the workplace when developing new safety policies. Source:

Why Drug Testing?

In numerous states, questions have arisen over whether teachers in public schools should undergo random drug testing as a part of their employment. The practice is shared with other professionals, and some believe teachers fall into a similar category because they work directly with students all day. They argue that teachers who fail random drug tests

Most educators and parents would agree that school needs to be a safe place if children are to successfully learn. However, what that safe place looks like has become a topic of controversy for one Michigan school district. On the one hand, a teacher is being applauded for standing up for homosexual students. On the other hand, that same teacher is being accused of bullying students who voiced their own views of anti-homosexuality based on their religion. Which stand is correct? The verdict is still out.

The Howell Controversy

In a high school about 45 miles northwest of Detroit, a school teacher asked one of his economics students to remove a belt buckle that featured the Confederate flag. The teacher, Jay McDowell, explained that the symbol could be offensive to some of the students in the class. The student readily complied with the request, but the exchange sparked a discussion among other students and the teacher that resulted in two students being asked to leave the classroom, according to a report at Black Christian News.

The first student, 16-year-old Daniel Glowacki, asked McDowell to explain the difference between the confederate flag and the rainbow flag that serves as a symbol of pride for the gay community. (At the time, McDowell was wearing a t-shirt with an anti-gay bullying message.) When McDowell explained the difference, Glowacki responded with, "I don't accept gays." Glowacki went on to explain that homosexuality goes against his Catholic religion, according to