Collaborative Role of Courts in Promoting Outcomes for Students: The Relationship Between Arrests, Graduation Rates, and School Safety

• Date: 01 July 2013
• Published date: 01 July 2013
• Author: Brian Huff,Steven C. Teske,Cora Graves
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12038

COLLABORATIVE ROLE OF COURTS IN PROMOTING OUTCOMES

FOR STUDENTS: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARRESTS,

GRADUATION RATES, AND SCHOOL SAFETY

Steven C. Teske, Brian Huff, and Cora Graves

Schools throughout the United States have adopted zero-tolerance strategies to address school discipline. These policies have

resulted in a significant increase in suspensions and expulsions. The placement of police on campus has exacerbated the

problem by adding arrests and referrals to juvenile court as a disciplinary tool. This article discusses the origin of zero tolerance

and its negative effects on school safety and graduation rates. This article examines three jurisdictions and their application of

a collaborative model using judicial leadership to convene stakeholders resulting in written protocols to reduce school arrests

and suspensions and developing alternatives that have produced better outcomes for students, the school, and the community.

Keypoints:

• Reduce arrest of students for minor offenses

• Develop alternatives to suspension, expulsion, and arrests

• Create system of care targeting chronically disruptive student for behavior improvement

• Improve school safety using a Positive Student Engage Model for Campus Police

• Improve school climate

• Increase graduation rates

Keywords: Collaboration;Judicial Leadership Model;Linear Programming;Multi-Integrated System Model;School-to-

Prison Pipeline;and Zero Tolerance.

Weare a nation in crisis when it comes to educating our children. On one hand we promulgate laws

to promote the education and welfare of children and on the other we implement policies that

effectively push them out-of-school, creating what has been coined the “School-to-Prison Pipeline.”

These competing approaches create a dysfunctional paradox that harms children and the community.

In an effort to address school discipline, educators have adopted a zero tolerance approach resulting

in a dramatic increase in out-of-school suspensions (OSS) and expulsions. The introduction of police

on school campuses exacerbated the problem by adding arrest and incarceration as another disciplin-

ary tool.

The widespread use of zero tolerance policies is probative of educator’s belief that such “get

tough” strategies have value in correcting behavior and removing disruptive students. No matter the

reason, zero tolerance policies deny recent research on adolescent brain development concluding

that “mischief is a foreseeable derivative of adolescence” (Teske, 2011). Other studies show that zero

tolerance strategies in general are ineffective, harmful to students and fail to improve school safety.

An analysis of the zero tolerance problem using a systems model reveals that school systems lack

the resources to effectively address disruptive behavior, creating an over-reliance on zero tolerance

strategies (Teske, 2011). The systems model, however, tends to focus on individual agencies and

although helpful in identifying deficiencies, is not always helpful in identifying solutions when the

problem is grounded in interorganizational issues. Finding solutions to reverse the negative effects of

zero tolerance, other than legislative changes, must involve those who are part of and involved in the

problem. This approach is summed up in Richard Kempe’s problem-solving quote, “A solution, to be

a solution, must share some of the problem’s characteristics.” Zero tolerance, in most localities, is a

multi-system problem and requires a multi-system approach for a solution.

Correspondence: 30236Steve.Teske@co.clayton.ga.us;huffb@jccal.org; Cora_graves@gwinnett.k12.ga.us

FAMILY COURT REVIEW,Vol. 51 No. 3, July 2013 418–426

© 2013 Association of Familyand Conciliation Cour ts