The College Perspective by Lindsey

The New York Times, as part of a documentary series called Retro Report, has brought to light the effect of zero tolerance policies on public school systems in America. The article and video highlight the fact that in the 1980s and well into the 1990s, crime in public schools was at an all-time high. It was very common to hear about drugs and guns being found in students’ possession, and many students were injured or died because of this. One school was so troubled that the principal kicked out over 300 students, leading to zero tolerance policies like his to be implemented across the country.

However, as the article shows, this policy has not transferred well into recent years. The kinds of violence and crime described in these schools peaked in 1994 and has been going down relatively regularly ever since. Three million students on average are being suspended for things like bringing a nail clipper to school or kicking a trash can in frustration, all things that wouldn’t have elicited police involvement years ago.

Because of this, many teachers are trying to reform policy, enforcing programs that encourage communication between students and teachers instead of police involvement. Many are hoping for a change in policy in every school, but think because of the media attention violent crimes in schools get, it won’t be a very popular idea with lawmakers.

I believe this story is newsworthy because while reporting the news it also takes a look back at the history of why the story they’re writing is now news. They bring up a point not many people have thought about. Since there have been so many school shootings, most parents want safety over all other things. They don’t think about the consequences or what it takes to get to that point of almost total safety. I believe they did a nice job with the facts and brought up good points and connections that may not have necessarily been made by many outside the school system. The lead, while in narrative form, as this isn’t necessarily a timely story, set the scene accurately and intrigued people. It gave some sense to where the story was going to go.

The story seems to be aimed at parents as well as the general public, specifically anybody who can vote or speak to lawmakers about change. There was a definite bias towards changing policy, and not much emphasis on how the tougher tactics are useful. The evidence they provided was very much one-sided, but I believe this story was trying to bring up the point that there is a problem that needs to be addressed, so it isn’t necessarily a bad thing that the other side who is for the zero tolerance policy isn’t greatly included.

A link to the story can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/us/the-unintended-consequences-of-taking-a-hard-line-on-school-discipline.html?hpw&rref=education&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region&region=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well