Is this really necessary?
I understand the need for 0 tolerance for weapons in a school.
Weapons are dangerous, kids have low impulse control, and you don't want the two to mix.
But when did common sense become irrelevant in this discussion?
If a six year old boy brings a camping tool that becomes a fork, a spoon, and a small (not sharp) knife for use at lunchtime, he should not face a 45 days in the district’s reform school.
He should perhaps be sent to the office, so that an adult can explain why it is dangerous to have anything sharp in the lunchroom. Then a guidance counselor or principal could have taken the tool away, called his mother to remind her of the policies and asked her to pick it up immediately.
So why didn't this happen? Why is the 6 year old facing a long suspension and time in reform school?
Because the law is written that 0 tolerance has to be enforced w/ a suspension, no matter the situation or age of the student.
What this really comes down to is lack of trust in our educators.
Why aren't we giving them the discretion to determine when a suspension or expulsion is warranted, or if a different and perhaps less punitive measure is needed?
Perhaps our school systems could spend more time and money actually EDUCATING students if they weren't forced to suspend 6 year old children and then face court challenges and loss of community support after the decisions.
Monday, October 12