Keeping students safe in school have been an issue of concern in the country over the past decade. School officials have continued to deliberate on best ways to keep the students safe including putting of police officers in schools. Insecurity might be thought to be caused by external perpetrators, but it is also possible that students can be the agents of insecurity. Thus, police presence in the schools can significantly improve then the level of security.
Jason Nance through an empirical analysis stated that increasing police officers presence at school will significantly increase the odds that a school will refer students to law enforcement for offenses including the lower-level offenses. The laws put in place by the school administration so as to ensure security prevails in the school may determine the level of discipline of its students. While the governments have continuously conducted researches and surveys targeting to inform the public about the safety of the student.
Less have been done regarding determining which can be the best school policies that should be put forward so as to reduce the crime rates amongst the students. In considering the different strategies for promoting safe and productive school environments, it has been difficult to know what works better and what doesn’t. Zero tolerance in schools has been an issue of concern for both the government and the school administrators. In particular, longstanding debates about zero tolerance policies leave many people confused about the basic facts (Jacob K Brown et al., 2013).
The goal of this research project is to collect secondary data from the U.S National Center for Educational Statistics about School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) that was conducted in the fall of 2010 school holiday.
My main objective is to use this data to conduct an in-depth research using survey data collected from school principals to compare outcomes of programs with and without zero tolerance policies and practices.
To analyze this objective, I am going to use different statistical computations that assess the relationship between the number of crimes occurring in a school and the type of punishment passed for different crimes. Some of the statistical calculations I will employ include correlation analysis, logistic regression, multiple regression and tests based on the comparison of means.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Background Of The Study And Significance
Analysis Of Zero Tolerance Policies
Justification for zero-tolerance practices.
Critiques Of Zero-Tolerance Policies
Research Questions
Significance Of The Study
Research Design And Methods
Specific Aim
Subjects
Procedures
Recruitment
Data Collection Phase
The mail-Stage
Data collection
The follow-up session
Survey instruments
Personal information
School Practices and Programs
Parent and community involvement at school
School security
Staff training
Limitations on Crime Prevention
Frequency of Crime and Violence at School
Number of incidents
Disciplinary Problems and Actions
School characteristics
Data analysis strategy
Descriptive statistics
Correlation analysis
Logistic regression
T-test
Dealing with Missing data
Confidentiality
References
Research Objectives and Focus
The primary objective of this research is to evaluate the impact of zero-tolerance policies in public schools by analyzing secondary survey data to determine if these policies significantly influence the number of students referred to the juvenile justice system.
- Analysis of the "School-to-Prison Pipeline" phenomenon.
- Evaluation of disciplinary outcomes in schools with and without zero-tolerance policies.
- Statistical assessment of the relationship between crime rates and specific punishment types.
- Investigation into whether harsh disciplinary measures effectively promote school safety or exacerbate juvenile justice involvement.
Excerpt from the Book
Analysis Of Zero Tolerance Policies
The prevalence of crime, violence and other behavioral problems in schools was a subject of immense focus by the public in 1990’s. The administrators of many public schools became increasingly concerned about the dreadful incidences of drug abuse, gang violence among students and rampant shootings such the one in Columbine High School. These inflamed the public’s worry about the safety conditions of schools. The administrators and policy makers in response to the escalating activities threatening safety in schools responded by endorsing and implementing zero-tolerance policies and practices. The clarion call was zero-tolerance to drugs, zero tolerance to alcohol, zero-tolerance to truancy and zero-tolerance crime. The underlying assumption of incorporating these rules was that the policies will craft a peaceful learning ambiance and dissuade others from violating school regulations by removing the disruptive elements.
Originally, the zero-tolerance policies and practices came into action in the 1980’s as a preferred approach to school discipline in efforts to combat and discourage drug use. After the enactment of the Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 ,which required and to some extent compelled the school administrators to expel a student from school for a period not less than 1 academic year if the student is determined to have brought a firearm in the precincts of the school, the application of zero-tolerance policies rapidly spread. The Act, staying true to its punitive nature, further directs the schools to refer the culprits determined to have brought a firearm to school to law enforcement. Although the law specifically provided for zero-tolerance policies with regards to firearms, educational agencies seized the opportunity and crafted zero-tolerance guidelines for other disciplinary infringements. In the school year 1996-1997, zero-tolerance policies had widely spread that 94% of public schools reported having zero-tolerance policies for firearms and 91% instituted zero-tolerance policies for other weapons. In addition, 88%, 87% and 79% of the schools had zero-tolerance policies for drugs, alcohol, and school violence respectively.
Summary of Chapters
Executive Summary: Provides an overview of the research scope, focusing on student safety, zero-tolerance policies, and the methodology used to analyze their effectiveness.
Background Of The Study And Significance: Discusses the rise of disciplinary rates in American schools and the emergence of the "School-to-Prison Pipeline" as a consequence of punitive policies.
Analysis Of Zero Tolerance Policies: Details the historical origins of zero-tolerance policies in the 1990s and their rapid implementation across public school systems.
Justification for zero-tolerance practices.: Explains the arguments made by proponents who believe these policies are necessary tools to maintain safety and deter student misconduct.
Critiques Of Zero-Tolerance Policies: Examines the opposing view, highlighting how these policies promote racial bias and fail to achieve meaningful educational outcomes.
Research Questions: Lists the specific inquiries guiding the study regarding the efficacy and impact of zero-tolerance disciplinary measures.
Significance Of The Study: Explains the value of the research in guiding administrators toward more balanced disciplinary practices.
Research Design And Methods: Outlines the use of the SSOCS dataset and statistical models like logistic regression to evaluate school discipline data.
Specific Aim: Describes the intent to use the 2009-2010 SSOCS dataset to compare outcomes between schools with and without zero-tolerance policies.
Subjects: Details the sampling of approximately 3,000 public school principals to provide national estimates for the study.
Procedures: Describes the methodology for data collection, including stratified random sampling and survey administration via email and follow-up contact.
Data Collection Phase: Outlines the two-phase approach to maximizing survey response rates through advanced notifications and follow-up procedures.
Survey instruments: Describes the organization of the questionnaire into specific topics such as personal information, school practices, and security.
Disciplinary Problems and Actions: Explains the variables used to assess the effectiveness of controlling minor violations through punitive measures.
School characteristics: Lists the demographic and environmental variables collected from schools to control for potential biases in the analysis.
Data analysis strategy: Describes the statistical techniques, including descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and logistic regression, used to interpret the findings.
Dealing with Missing data: Outlines how the study handles incomplete responses to maintain the integrity of the data analysis.
Confidentiality: States the commitment to protecting the identity of the schools and respondents involved in the research.
Keywords
Zero-tolerance policies, School-to-Prison Pipeline, school discipline, student safety, juvenile justice system, punitive punishment, School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS), educational policy, racial discrepancies, juvenile delinquency, school security, behavioral problems, statistical analysis, logistic regression, educational reform.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research?
The research examines the effectiveness of zero-tolerance disciplinary policies in public schools and their potential role in pushing students into the juvenile justice system.
What are the central themes of this study?
The core themes include school safety strategies, the "School-to-Prison Pipeline," the impact of punitive versus restorative discipline, and racial disparities in school discipline.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if zero-tolerance policies contribute significantly to the volume of students referred to law enforcement for minor infractions.
Which scientific methods are utilized?
The study employs a quantitative approach, utilizing secondary data from the U.S. National Center for Education Statistics (SSOCS), analyzed through descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and logistic regression models.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body covers the historical context of zero-tolerance policies, arguments for and against them, the specific methodology for data analysis, and an evaluation of disciplinary variables.
What key terms define this work?
Key terms include zero-tolerance policies, the School-to-Prison Pipeline, exclusionary discipline, and juvenile delinquency prevention.
How does the "School-to-Prison Pipeline" function according to this study?
The study suggests the pipeline functions by creating an institutional link between schools and the justice system, where school officials refer students to law enforcement for even minor or non-criminal offenses.
Why are the 2009-2010 SSOCS survey data considered vital to this research?
This dataset provides a comprehensive, restricted-access view of public school practices, including school security, disciplinary actions, and student demographic characteristics, allowing for a robust empirical analysis.
- Quote paper
- Festus Kipkosgei (Author), 2010, The School to Prison Pipeline in the USA. Examining The Influence Of Zero Tolerance Practice Using School Survey On Crime And Safety (SSOCS) Data, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/314341
