Dana Kuehn12/5/2014EDL 204 H A

D&D: Discipline

In education, disciplinary action can greatly affect the culture of the classroom. For example, how would you feel if you were punished for an action, and somebody else that committed the same action was not given punishment due to too many people of that race already being punished? Due to a recently issued guidance from the Obama Administration, specifically the Education Department and Justice Department, a racial quota is being implemented in school districts throughout America to be certain that minority students are not being suspended any more than the white students. What the outcome has been, however, for this legislation is ultimately backfiring on the schools, and now students can use these racial quotas to their advantage; a means to get away with unacceptable behaviors with little to no punishment. Could an end to this policy also in turn minimize bullying? Along with this new policy, the zero tolerance policy can also be tied in and scrutinized. According to Quantz, With schooling comes discipline. As a result of high-profile events like Columbine and Sandy Hook, many schools are taking a zero tolerance approach to school discipline and imposing strict, mandatory penalties for offenses. (Quantz, Race, Gender, Sexuality and Discipline packet, p1). If there are mandatory penalties for offenses, and schools are implementing a zero tolerance policy, one must ask themselves if it is democratic to hinder one policy to satisfy another; for example ignoring the zero tolerance policy to satisfy a racial quota. Currently, in the United States, schooling serves to fulfill the function of giving students, a way to be able to engage each other regarding our shared public spaces in a manner that both respects everyones private values but that also permits a process for determining what is or is not ethical in public spaces. (Quantz, p. 88). However, Quantz later states that Americans easily agree that public schooling is unsuccessful, but mostly thanks to the media, politicians, and corporate executives say so. If the purpose of a school is to engage each other publicly and respectfully, but Americans do not believe that this is being achieved, where does discipline become affected? By delving into Quantzs statement on the function of schools, and comparing it to Deweys understanding of public versus private, discipline can be criticized with a new perspective. Private events refer to all of those interactions among people in which the effects of their actions affect no one beyond themselves; public events refer to all of those interactions among people in which their action affects people beyond those participating in the decisions and actions. (Quantz, on Dewey, p. 9). To further comprehend the difference of public and private, it also helps to understand Deweys stance on what a democracy truly is. A democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoint communicated experience. (Quantz, p. 8). Using this particular interpretation of a democracy, and applying it to the zero tolerance policy can argue whether the zero tolerance policy is truly a democratic approach to education. According to Bullying + Zero Tolerance Safe Schools, by Ray Ferronato and Shaquille Carbon, zero tolerance is scrutinized through the eyes of LGBTQ (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning) youth. Zero tolerance hasn't made schools safer because it doesn't teach aggressors why their behavior is harmful and how they can improve it. (Ferronato and Carbon, p. 1). For this reason, the zero tolerance policy can be viewed as undemocratic because it does not teach an understanding, or communicate experience as Dewey would say, it just gives consequence to action. Drawing from these statements, it can be concluded that nearly anything occurring in or regarding schooling in America, even the punishment of a singular student is a public, democratic event. When discipline is thought of as a public event, is it ethically right to have a quota set, meaning the punishment relies on how many punishments have already been given? Concluding from both Quantz, as well as Dewey, I would claim that no, setting a quota is not just. When conversing with team members regarding the new racial quota, as well as the zero tolerance policy, I was certainly surprised at how unanimously the team responded to the articles. Even team members who supported the zero tolerance policy concluded that it was not applicable to every situation, and vocalized how difficult it would be to instate it for one issue but not another. Noting these discrepancies and disagreements regarding when a zero tolerance policy is effective or appropriate, I personally agreed with the team members that stated that they felt that an all or nothing approach would be necessary in order to make the policy effective; however they felt as though it could not be applied to everything. The conversations with my team members really made it clear that the zero tolerance policy is not a one size fits all solution to discipline in schools, and understanding the many examples of where the policy did and did not work only strengthened my beliefs that the racial quota paired with the zero tolerance policy cannot end well for schools across America. Another aspect of education that can bring more depth to the discipline issues in schools is looking into the the rhetoric used to strengthen the claims made in the articles: described through the political ideologies that exist in education, as well as the philosophies of education. To support my claim against the zero tolerance policy as well as the racial quota, I chose to focus on progressive democracy, as well as the philosophy of Homo ethicus. I believe that progressive democracy supports my claim, because it acknowledges the need to protecting the rights of minorities, yet does not tolerate secrecy in decision making. Democracy works best when its leaders represent the wide range of interests. (Quantz, p. 149). I think that a progressive democrat would also oppose the racial quota because it limits the range of interests by capping the amount of punishments that can be given to a student for committing a crime, based sheerly off of race. Homo ethicus is describes as being, About the virtues, its about self-discipline and courage, compassion, faith, friendship, the other virtues. Its about the hard realities that constitute the virtues. We used to teach the virtues in the schools. They are very important for young people to learn. (Quantz, p. 61). This description particularly of Homo ethicus resonates that the zero tolerance policy should not be used, because instead of teaching the virtues of discipline and compassions, students are just dealt punishments and left with questions. Instead of teaching an actual understanding of the rules, zero tolerance policies just push rules on to students that sometimes are left misunderstood, as misinterpreted. When reading Obama administration guidelines could lead to racial quotas in school discipline, published in the Washington Times by Ben Wolfgang, this article, which discusses the new racial quota directly quotes a political science professor form the University of Colorado to gain support on the claim that these racial quotas may lead to a backfire in misbehaviors. If they actually do enforce these guidelines, there will be unintended consequences. This creates some rather destructive incentives. I dont think theres any way around that. (Wolfgang, 2014, p.1). Understanding that implementing a racial quota is imperative to the disciplinary actions taken in schools. This quota also deeply affects the zero tolerance policy, because it would require some cases to be re-evaluated for punishment if quotas have already been met, which is exactly the opposite intention of the zero tolerance policy. This indiscretion is yet another reason that I believe that the racial quota, as well as the zero tolerance policy need to be taken out of the disciplinary action in schools, and swapped for a more case-by-case approach. A more individualized approach can create a better understanding of what behaviors lead to a punishment, as well as realizing what behaviors are appropriate in the classroom. Other than punishing without explanation, taking each case and working out a plan, regardless of race, will ultimately progress school environments toward a more comprehensive environment in terms of bullying, which should in result reduce the behaviors. Reference Sheet (Additional Articles)Ferronato, R. (2012, August 14). Bullying Zero Tolerance Safe Schools. Retrieved December 7, 2014, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ray-ferronato/bullying-zero-tolerance-s_b_1776635.html

Wolfgang, B. (n.d.). Obama administration guidelines could lead to racial quotas in school discipline. Retrieved December 7, 2014, from http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/8/white-house-to-offer-new-rules-school-discipline/?page=all