Pubdate: Thu, 30 Sep,1999
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Copyright: 1999 The Orange County Register
Contact:  http://www.ocregister.com/
Section: Local News,page 8

ZERO TOLERANCE RULES ARE SIMPLY DRACONIAN

The Tustin school board, harshly criticized for a "zero-tolerance" policy 
that could have resulted in the transfer of several Foothill High School 
students accused of drinking at an off-campus school leadership event, is 
receiving additional criticism for announcing on Tuesday that it would 
punish the students, but not transfer them.

The board can't seem to win.

After the student leaders were accused of running afoul of the rules and 
news spread that involuntary transfers of the students were imminent, 
critics - rightly argued that zero-tolerance rules put the letter of the 
law over its spirit and make no distinctions between serious violations and 
lesser ones.

Now that the board has relented, restricting eight students' leadership 
roles (the ninth was exonerated) but leaving them at Foothill High, others 
have argued that the board is inconsistent. Board members cited an "extreme 
circumstances" clause in the zero-tolerance policy that allows them to 
circumvent the transfer requirement.

Parents of students who faced involuntary transfers in the past wonder why 
these ill-defined circumstances didn't apply when their children faced the 
ZT rules. They argue that the policy as implemented amounts to zero 
tolerance for some students' actions, but a degree of tolerance for the 
infractions committed by others.

That's a good point.

But the answer isn't consistency at all costs, if it means punishing the 
latest batch of rule-breakers too harshly simply because others before them 
have been treated unfairly also. The answer is to amend or eliminate the 
misguided zero-tolerance approach.

Proponents of zero tolerance say that some infractions are so bad that 
violators must face swift and severe punishment. Only by understanding that 
there's no wiggle room, zero tolerance for wrong behavior, will others 
learn to obey the rules.

That sounds good in theory. No one wants students showing up to school 
drunk or high on drugs, harassing fellow students or bringing knives or 
guns to school. But by eliminating distinctions and outlawing flexibility, 
such policies can be unfair, excessive and counterproductive.

In the Foothill High case, the school board appears to have done correct 
thing: impose serious punishments for an apparent violation of school rules 
without sending these students to a continuation school for one case of bad 
judgment. Having made a Solomonic decision, the board should stand firm 
against parents' demands that the suspensions be purged from student records.

But the way to avoid these problems in the future, to keep from imposing 
unduly harsh punishments or applying such rules inconsistently, is to put 
an end to the zero-tolerance nonsense. One-size-fits-all rules need to be 
replaced by ones that allow flexibility, sound judgment and compassion, 
that measure the severity and circumstances of the crime when meting out a 
punishment.

Tustin is correct to examine its zer0tolerance policy at the Oct. 11 school 
board meeting. Other districts that have similar policies should follow suit. 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Thunder