This article discusses theory and related policies that support zero tolerance policy in schools, including rational choice theory in criminology and national crime policies based on deterrence. Potential consequences of zero tolerance policy implementation in schools are also described. These consequences are shown to involve outcomes similar to those identified by researchers who have studied national crime policy, especially in relation to incarceration. Drawing from the qualitative data, anecdotal evidence, and related research, the article concludes with suggestions for violence prevention based on a model of restorative justice, including a practical agenda for what schools may do to prevent violence and to discipline students who act aggressively.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgnewR. (2000). Strain theory and school crime. In SimpsonS. (Eds.), Of crime and criminality: The use of theory in everyday life (pp. 159–178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
2.
AndersonE. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city.New York: Norton.
3.
ArumR., & BeattieI. (1999). High school experience and the risk of adult incarceration. Criminology, 37, 515–539.
4.
AshfordR. (2000). Can zero tolerance keep our schools safe?Principal, 80, 28–30.
5.
BanduraA. (1977). Social learning theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6.
BazemoreG., & SchiffM. (2001). Restorative community justice: Repairing harm and transforming communities.Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
7.
BeckerG. (1968). Crime and punishment: An economic approach. Journal of Political Economy, 76, 169–217.
8.
BlairF. (1999). Does zero tolerance work?Principal, 79, 36–37.
9.
BouffardJ., ExumL., & PaternosterR. (2000). Whither the beast? The role of emotions in a rational choice theory of crime. In SimpsonS. (Ed.), Of crime and criminality: The use of theory in everyday life (pp. 159–178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
10.
BoydW., CrowsonR., & van GeelT. (1994). Rational choice theory and the politics of education: Promises and limitations. Politics of Education Association Yearbook, 127–145.
11.
BurkeE., & HerbertD. (1996). Zero tolerance policy: Combating violence in school. Bulletin, 80, 49–54.
12.
BurstynJ. (2001). The challenge for schools: To prevent violence while nurturing democracy. In BurstynJ., BenderG., CasellaR., GordonH., GuerraD., LuschenK., StevensR., & WilliamsK. (Eds.), Preventing violence in schools: A challenge to American democracy (pp. 225–234). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13.
CareyM. (2001). Infancy, adolescence, and restorative justice: Strategies for promoting organization reform. In BazemoreG., & SchiffM. (Eds.), Restorative community justice: Repairing harm and transforming communities (pp. 151–170). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
14.
CasellaR. (2000). The benefits of peer mediation in the context of urban conflict and program status. Urban Education, 35, 326–357.
15.
CasellaR. (2001). At zero tolerance: Punishment, prevention, and school violence.New York: Peter Lang.
16.
CasellaR. (2002). Where policy meets the pavement: Stages of public involvement in the prevention of school violence. Qualitative Studies in Education, 3, 1–24.
17.
Civil Rights Project, & Advancement Project. (2000). Opportunities suspended: The devastating consequences of zero tolerance and school discipline policies.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
18.
CookK., & LeviM. (1990). The limits of rationality.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19.
CurwinR., & MendlerA. (1999). Zero tolerance for zero tolerance. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 119–120.
20.
Darling-HammondL. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
21.
De LiS. (1999). Social control, delinquency, and youth status achievement: A developmental approach. Sociological Perspectives, 42, 305–324.
22.
DeckerS., & Van WinkleB. (1996). Life in the gang: Family, friends, and violence.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23.
DevineJ. (1996). Maximum security: The culture of violence in inner-city schools.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
DunbarC. (2001). From alternative school to incarceration. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 158–170.
25.
FineM. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban public school.Albany: State University of New York Press.
26.
GlasserW. (1992). The quality school: Managing students without coercion.New York: Harper Perennial.
27.
GootmanM. (2001). The caring teacher's guide to discipline: Helping young students learn self-control, responsibility, and respect.Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin.
28.
GottfredsonG., & GottfredsonD. (1985). Victimization in school.New York: Plenum Press.
29.
GuinierL., & TorresG. (2002). The miner's canary: Enlisting race, resisting power, transforming democracy.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
30.
HarwayneS. (1999). Going public: Priorities and practice at the Manhattan New School.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
31.
HeanyM., & MichelaR. (1999). Safe schools: Hearing past the hype. High School Magazine, 6(pp. 14–17).
32.
HymanI., & SnookP. (1999). Dangerous schools: What we can do about the physical and emotional abuse of our children.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
JohnsonD., & JohnsonR. (1995). Reducing school violence through conflict resolution.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
34.
JohnsonT., BoydenJ. E., & PittzW. (2001). Racial profiling and punishment in U. S. public schools.Oakland, CA: Applied Research Center.
35.
JonesV., & JonesL. (2001). Comprehensive classroom management: creating communities of support and solving problems.Reading, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
36.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1997). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American children.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
LitkeC. (1996, September). When violence came to our rural school. Educational Leadership, 77–80.
38.
MeierD. (1995). The power of their ideas: Lessons for America from a small school in Harlem.Boston: Beacon Press.
39.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Indicators of school crime and safety.Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
40.
NogueraP. (2000). Listen first: How student perspectives on violence can be used to create safer schools. In PolakowV. (Ed.), The public assault on America's children.New York: Teachers College Press.
41.
PalloneN., & HennessyJ. (1993). Tinderbox criminal violence: Neurogenic impulsivity, risk-taking, and the phenomenology of rational choice. In ClarkR. V., & FelsonM. (Eds.), Routine activity and rational choice: Advances in criminological theory (Vol. 5). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
42.
PetersenG., PietrzakD., & SpeakerK. (1998). The enemy within: A national study on school violence and prevention. Urban Education, 33, 331–359.
43.
PolkK. (2001). Positive youth development: Restorative justice, and the crisis of abandoned youth. In BazemoreG., & SchiffM. (Eds.), Restorative community justice: Repairing harm and transforming communities (pp. 265–286). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
44.
Public Law 103–382. (1994). Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act. SEC. 4001, 20 USC 7101.
45.
Public Law 103–227. (1994). Safe Schools Act. SEC. 701, 20 USC 5961.
46.
Public Law 103–227. (1994). Gun-Free Schools Act. SEC 1031, 20 USC 2701.
47.
Public Law 101–647. (1990). Gun-Free School Zones Act. SEC 1702, 18 USC 921.
48.
RobinsonP. (2001). Punishing dangerousness: Cloaking preventive detention as criminal justice. Harvard Law Review, 114, 1429–1456.
49.
SadovnikA., & SemelS. (2002). Founding mothers and others: Women educational leaders during the Progressive Era.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
50.
SampsonR., & LaubJ. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through lifeCambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
SchreinerM. (1996). Bold steps build safe havens. School Business Affairs, 62, 44–46.
52.
SchwartzR., & RieserL. (2001). Zero tolerance as mandatory sentencing. In AyersW., DohrnB., & AyersR. (Eds.), Zero tolerance: Resisting the drive for punishment in our schools (pp. 126–135). New York: New Press.
53.
SheleyJ., & WrightJ. (1998). High school youths, weapons, and violence: A national survey.Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
54.
ShortJ. (1997). Poverty, ethnicity and violent crime.Boulder, CO: Westview.
55.
SinclairB. (1999). Report on state implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
56.
SkibaR., & LeoneP. (2001). Zero tolerance and school security measures: A failed experiment. In JohnsonT., BoydenJ. E., & PittzW. (Eds.), Racial profiling and punishment in U.S. schools (pp. 34–38). Oakland, CA: Applied Research Center.
57.
SteinN. (2001). Sexual harassment meets zero tolerance: Life in K-12 schools. In AyersW., DohrnB., & AyersR. (Eds.), Zero tolerance: Resisting the drive for punishment in our schools (pp. 143–154). New York: New Press.
58.
StetznerK. (1999). How safe are your schools?The School Administrator, 56, 22–24.
59.
TobyJ. (1994). The politics of school violence. Public Interest, 116, 34–56.
60.
TonryM. (1995). Malign neglect: Race, crime, and punishment in America.New York: Oxford University Press.
61.
TonryM. (1999). Why are U.S. incarceration rates so high?Crime and Delinquency, 45, 419–437.
62.
TrumpK. (1998). Practical school security: Basic guidelines for safe and secure schools.Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
63.
TrumpK. (1999). Scared or prepared: Reducing risks with school security assessments. The High School Magazine, 6, 18–23.
64.
UmbrietM. (2001). The handbook of victim offender mediation: An essential guide to practice and research.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
65.
VigilJ. D. (1999). Streets and schools: How educators can help Chicano marginalized gang youth. Harvard Educational Review, 69, 270–288.
66.
ZirkelP. (1999). Zero tolerance expulsions. NASSP Bulletin, 83, 101–105.
