As we've frequently noted, teenagers, as a whole, comprise an unruly, dangerous mob that continues to threaten the every fabric of our society. We ban them from public spaces, we install sonic devices that drive them away with frequencies only their ears can hear, and we crack down on them for peddling candy on mass transit. But let's face it: teenagers are a symptom, not a cause. To nip this menace in the bud, schools have been suspending elementary students in record numbers, according to a new NYCLU analysis.
Elementary school-age students were hit with 6,119 suspensions in the 2008-09 school year, a dramatic increase from 3,469 suspensions back in 2002-03— a 76% increase. The Education Department says the spike in suspensions is due to a "zero tolerance" policy that requires suspensions for any student caught fighting. But critics say the suspensions are excessive; UCLA education researcher Daniel Losen tells the Daily News, "This sort of frequent reliance on removing kids from school backfires. It doesn't work as a deterrent."
It's a good point, because what does an unruly student want more than a get-out-of-school pass? In order for suspensions to be effective, perhaps the policy could go further, and send these young roustabouts to work in labor camps making textbooks or washing dishes in cafeteria kitchens? Of course, parents are upset—one Staten Island mom is furious that her 5-year-old son who hit his teacher was suspended for a week. "He's suspended and he's 5. I think there could have been a better reaction," Vilma Limani, 28, tells the News. Perhaps a glass of warm milk, some chocolate chip cookies, and a refreshing nap would be more appropriate.
Donna Lieberman, the NYCLU's Executive Director, tells us, "The dramatic rise in suspensions of the youngest children in schools raises serious concerns. Instead of providing support to kids with behavior issues, the DOE is pushing them out of schools. This is an unacceptable trend. And in this particular case in Staten Island, the school ignored the parents' plea for help and never even advised what services were being provided or included the parent in the process until they suspended the child. That's particularly problematic."
