School Violence; J. Hood

The public seems to share teachers' con cerns about escalating violence in our schools. Remember the film Lean on Me? Despite carping from the education estab lishment-made up, to a large extent, of psychologists, consultants, professors of education, and professional activists-the film, which presented a story of one princi pal's tough stand against school violence, captured the imagination of movie audi ences. A less successful but arguably better film, Stand and Deliver, dealt with the motivational and instructional techniques of Los Angeles math teacher Jaime Escalante, who used humor as well as "tough love" to teach calculus to a class of poor, sometimes violent teens. Other movies on gang life, John Hood is research director at the John Locke Foundation, a state policy think tank in Raleigh, N.C., and a contributing editor of Reason mag azine. teenage violence, and the drug subculture have also scored with audiences, while pub lic opinion polls have found great concern about discipline and violence issues. Again, the public perception, at least, is that things "aren't what they used to be."

And the evidence is that they aren't. Violence in schools is up. Discipline is less predictable and not uniformly enforced. Students are, according to most teachers, more difficultto keep quiet, harder to teach, and deficient in basic personal and behav ioral skills. Yet educational activists tend to focus more on opposing discipline prac tices they abhor-such as corporal punish ment and expulsion-than on addressing the problem. In fact, today's public educa tors are probably incapable of dealing effec tively with school violence and discipline problems. To do so requires rethinking how education is organized and the proper rela tionshipbetween pupiland teacher, and more generally, between pupil and school. Defining the Problem No one keeps comprehensive statistics about school violence, but the numbers we do have are distressing, to say the least. Young people, who represent about 20 per cent of the population, account for over 40 percent of reported crimes-and almost half of the youths charged with serious offenses are under 15. Some researchers suggest that the level of violent crime perpetrated by juveniles is three times greater today than it was in 1960. Many of these acts are 85 86 THE FREEMAN • FEBRUARY 1994 committed at school, some with guns or other dangerous weapons.

A 1987 survey by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found that more than a third of eighth and tenth graders said they had been threatened with some sort of violence while at school. Fourteen percent reported being robbed and 13 per cent said they had been attacked within the past year. Another report, by the National School Safety Center, found that: • Almost 300,000students are attacked in schools every month. • Over 2 million students are the victims oftheft. • Approximately 5,200 secondary school teachers are physically attacked at school in a month's time, while 6,000 per month report extortion or robberies against them. A few states have generated more recent numbers. A 1992 survey by North Caroli na's Task Force on School Violence found that 59 percent of school systems reported an increase in violent behavior over the previous five years. School superintendents also reported marked increases in the prev alence ofguns, knives, and other weapons at school. During this same time period, the number of reported arrests of young people 15 years old or younger for violent offenses doubled.

While these crime and violence numbers are shocking, by far the most pervasive problem is not criminal behavior per se, but a destructive and painful pattern of misbehavior, threats, and disrespect di rected toward teachers and principals. This problem is harder to quantify, because no crime report is generated, but teachers have noticed a change in student behavior over the last 30 years or so. Instructor magazine columnist Adele M. Brodkin began to call attention to the problem with a series of interview features in 1990. Brodkin asked Wendy Jacobs, a fifth-and sixth-grade teacher in Caswell County, North Carolina, what teachers find most challenging about teaching today's children. "That's easy," Jacobs replied, "the biggest challenge is dealing with discipline. We have to con tend with disruptive behavior, fighting amongst the kids, shouting, physical and verbal abuse, acting silly, being disrespect ful of the teacher-all sort of behavior that can take so much of a teacher's time and energy."

William C. Lane, Jr., an assistant princi pal at Dunbar Middle School in Ft. Myers, Florida, says that the process of gaining control over the classroom is in fact "the cornerstone" of education and "an integral part of an effective schooL" Older teachers who remember a time of stronger discipline and fewer problems with students are espe cially vocal about the change in their per ception of child behavior. A July 1989 sur vey by the American Federation of Teachers reported that over 80 percent of AFT officialsaround the country considered teenage violence a bigger problem today than in the past. Charles H. Wolfgang, a professor of early childhood education at Florida State University, tells of meeting a former English teacher of his at a neighbor hood mall and proudly announcing that he, too, had become a teacher. "The twinkle 1 recalled as being ever-present in her warm blue eyes seemed to be missing," Wolfgang remembers. "As 1spoke to her of our shared profession, her body stiffened and she re sponded in a cold tone of voice. 'I retired last year, thank God! 1 am glad to have gotten out of teaching. Students have changed. They certainly aren't interested in learning! And there are just too many dis cipline problems.' "

In fact, surveys for Phi Delta Kappan (a prominent education magazine) by the Gal lup Organization have consistently ranked violence and discipline problems as one of the major reasons why public-school teach ers leave the professiona finding but tressed by the fact that private schools, which generally pay lower salaries and offer fewer benefits to their teaching staff, often receive plenty of applications from public-school teachers. The flight of good teachers from public schools can't be ex plained only by increasing safety concerns, but violence is undoubtedly an important factor in many cases. In Policy Review, Ben Wildavsky reported the case of Tom Masty, a teacher at a South Florida middle school. In Masty's first 10 weeks at the school, he wrote over 300 referrals for student mis conduct. He confiscated weapons, broke up fights, and struggled to maintain control over his classroom. He quit shortly after ward.

Why Violence Is Increasing Obviously, the wave of American school violence in many ways reflects underlying social trends. Crime generally has increased over the last several decades as well, so it's not surprising that violent and criminal be havior has risen in schools. An important explanation of the rise in school violence can be found in changes in the American family. As the traditional two-parent model has given way to escalat ing numbers of single-parent families, chil dren have often been put at risk, neglected, abused, and marginalized, resulting in dis cipline problems at school. One study of children with teenaged mothers found they were more likely to exhibit behavioral prob lems such as running away, fighting, steal ing, and smoking than were children of older mothers. A 1989 study of children whose parents have divorced noted that five years after their parents broke up, only 34 percent of the children were clearly doing well at school. The remainder exhibited significant behavioral and academic problems. Many school administrators report that the major ity of students suspended or expelled in their schools have either been sexually or phys ically abused or have a high incidence of substance abuse in the family.

While many of these social trends are partially or completely out of the reach of public policy, some government activities such as the welfare system and punitive taxation of families-put pressure on fami lies. Researchers such as Charles Murray and Mickey Kaus have identified at least some link between federal welfare payments and undesirable behavior. By subsidizing broken families, welfare can rob children of the stable horne life they need to develop into healthy, well-adjusted teens. SCHOOL VIOLENCE 87 But blaming the entire problem of school violence on social trends and family breakup would be a mistake, since it would ignore the crucial role of the school in setting rules of behavior and enforcing them. School poli cies do affect student behavior, as the ex perience of inner-city Catholic schools and other private schools demonstrates. Not surprisingly, students respond to credible promises of punishment and come to respect authority when it is exercised constantly and uniformly.

Unfortunately, the modern public school in America is ill-suited to develop a realistic response to school violence. A host of administrative decisions, court rulings, and legislative actions have created such a maze of regulations that school principals and teachers are often unable to exercise meaningful control over their schools. Fur thermore, the prevailing "ethos" in the education establishment-made up of re searchers, administrators, and bureaucrats -is suspicious of many forms of punish ment, and exhibits a fixation with "sensi tivity training" and building self-esteem among students. Legal Restrictionsand School Discipline A range of school disciplinary measures, ranging from public embarrassment to ex pulsion, have been successfully challenged in court. In the 1975 case Goss v. Lopez, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amend ment gave students the right to receive oral or written notice of the charges against them and, if they deny the charges, an explanation of the evidence and a chance to tell their side of the story. While no formal hearing was required for short-term suspensions, the Court suggested that more formal proce dures might be required to impose longer suspensions or expulsions. While suspen sion remains an important response to acts of violence by students, these procedural limitations have made administrators more hesitant to use them.

Restrictions on suspension and expulsion 88 THE FREEMAN • FEBRUARY 1994 are especially troubling because of the great damage that violent and disruptive students can do to the educational process. These students not only disrupt the classroom, thus making it difficult for other students to learn, but also generally weaken the authority of teachers and administrators. "This type of student," writes education researcher Kurran Heston, "has a negative effect on everyone around him or her. " It's in the interest of the majority of students that schools be able to quickly eject such students from class. "Eighty to ninety per cent of the kids in a classroom are good kids," Oakland, California, schoolteacher Ruth Meltsner told Policy Review. "A small number are impossible and you spend all your time dealing with them." Other decisions have further limited school disciplinary practices. Indeed, Heston notes that since 1950, "schools have been placed under the jurisdiction of the courts, whereas the court may decide it is necessary to step in regarding discipline."

James S. Coleman, who has conducted landmark studies comparing public and pri vate school students, argues that "the growth of student rights constitutes a fun damental change in the relation of the school to the student, which had been that of trustee for parental authority." This has been replaced, Coleman says, by a relation in which the student "is regarded as having full civil rights." Extending civilrights protection to un ruly students has created an unworkable, and sometimes absurd, situation in public schools. "The due process system assumes bad faith on the part of teachers," says Bruce A. Miller, special counsel to the American Federation of Teachers, "but teachers aren't lawyers-they have to have some freedom of action." Sociologist Jack son Toby agrees, and observed that a gen eration ago it was possible for principals to rule schools autocratically, to suspend or expel students without much regard for procedure. While some injustices occurred, the administrators were able to avoid sig nificant violence and discipline problems.

"Student assaults on teachers· were punished so swiftly that they were almost un thinkable," Toby wrote. But it is not only the most stringent disciplinary actions that are subject to judi cial negation. Consider, for example, the commonsensical idea that teachers and principals should be able to reduce student grades as a punishment for constant mis conduct or violence. Several courts have struck down grade-reduction policies, treat inggrades earned for academic performance as a constitutionally protected "property interest. " Applying the Criminal Justice Model to Schools A number of other actions-ranging from locker searches to dress codes-are fre quently challenged by students, parents, politicians, and judges. Applying the crim inal justice model to the school situation reflects a strange sense of priorities. Fasci nated with whether or not an administrator has "probable cause" to search a locker which is, after all, the property of the school and not the student-these critics prevent administrators from controlling the avail ability of weapons and drugs on school grounds. (Of course, administrators have at times gone too far-initiating strip searches without reasonable cause, for instance.

Thus, schools must remain ultimately ac countable for their decisions.) Even a modest policy such as a dress code can help reduce disciplineproblems and even violenceat school. So-called"gang" clothing often sparks conflictbetween students, while valuable jewelry or athletic shoes become the objectives in robberies and thefts. Such restrictions are obviously unthinkable in adult society, but the school environment is-or, at least, should be-different. Not only are school policies found to violate students' so-called constitutional rights, but school officials are also poten tially liable for civil damages. Naturally, administrators act increasingly warily when disciplining students. Classroom safety and student performance have deteriorated as a result.

How the Education Establishment Views Discipline Surveying the academic literature on school violence and discipline will leave the average person with an almost irresistible urge to alternately laugh and cry. When you see such article titles as "Should Students Be Punished?" and "Multicultural Class room Management," you know you've en tered a world of make-believe, divorced from the reality of dangerous classrooms and disruptive students. "The case against punishment has been steadily growing," wrote John Martin Rich, a professor of education at the University of Texas at Austin. "Critics claim that [even] nonphys ical punishment can damage relationships, create resentment, and compel rather than encourage obedience. Moreover, punishment may promote school absenteeism, dropping out, school vandalism, and excessive anxi ety. " Education "experts" hated the film Lean on Me because they thought it sent an overly simplistic message about the efficacy of discipline and expulsion to reduce vio lence and increase student achievement.

,'Its popularity shows how badly the public can be deceived when offered easy solutions to its fears of teenagers, blacks, Hispanics, drugs, and crime," wrote one particularly excitable professor in Education Week. "In fact, the public support [Joe] Clark has gained for his tough-guy antics may well demonstrate the fragility of democracy. " The self-esteem craze is particularly amusing. Over the past couple of decades, programs to boost self-esteem among stu dents have proliferated in many school sys tems. "The litany of statistics about self destructive tendencies such as substance abuse, crime, and suicide must surely be seen as a signal from young people that many do not find much about themselves to like," wrote education professor James A. Beane in Educational Leadership, a prom inent journal. Beane argues that enhancing self-esteem in school will, in addition to addressing behavioral and academic prob lems, "extend the idea of personal devel opment beyond coping with problems and SCHOOL VIOLENCE 89 into personal efficacy or power, which, in turn, may lead toward action," thereby helping to "build the personal and collective efficacy that helps us out of the morass of inequity that plagues us."

Beane and others assume that a lack of self-esteem leads to crime and substance abuse. In fact, violent students are often fixated with themselves and quite comfort able with their actions-and continue to commit crimes because they think they won't be punished. Other education "experts" contend that school violence stems from racial and cul tural inequities and therefore cannot be effectively combatted by disciplinary ef forts. Herbert Grossman, a teacher at San Jose State University, wrote in Contempo rary Education that the population of the United States is rapidly becoming less "EuroAmerican. " As a result, he says, fewer students respond positively to and profit from classroom management tech niques "that have been designed with Eu roAmerican middle-class students in mind." Grossman advocates "cultural sen sitivity" when operating classrooms con taining racial minorities. What about mis behavior and discipline? Grossman questions whether minority students can be expected to "sit in a quiet and controlled manner."

Education "experts" often argue that discipline is used in a discriminatory man ner, and that attempts to' combat school violence are merely smokescreens for pu nitive actions against minority students. Prejudice, Grossman writes, "drives many minority and working-class students to ac tively resist both their teachers and the system by purposefully misbehaving." Prej udice, he continues, "may also contribute to the unnecessary suspension of so many African-American, Hispanic, and working class students." In conclusion, Grossman asserts that "the elimination of teacher prejudice is one of the most important steps educators can take to reduce disciplinary problems with minority students." Both the self-esteem and multicultural fixations represent a fundamental challenge 90 THE FREEMAN • FEBRUARY 1994 to the role of punishment and discipline in deterring school violence. Even more radi cal theorists enjoy some following in the education establishment, which has tradi tionally included ra~icals whose view of incorrigible students and nonconformists was more positive than negative. They're the kind of people who refer to the 1992riots in Los Angeles as a "rebellion." In the school context, they view strong action against violent students as punishing soci ety's victims, rather than addressing crime's so-called "root causes."

Toward Solutions Radical theorists like these would present little threat to sound school administration if it were not for the current structure of American education. A system of publicly owned, controlled, and regulated schools, staffed by public employees and subject to the control of outside public authorities, is incapable of withstanding today's assault against punishment and common sense. Similarly, the legal restraints and require ments that have been placed on the admin istration of school discipline and security measures exist because of school's public nature. In some district~" to be sure, violence has become so common that traditional obsta cles to security measures have been over come. A number of schools have banned gang clothing and insignia, as well as opaque book bags. San Diego's school system got rid of lockers, which resulted in inconve nience for students but also reduced gun crimes, robberies, and graffiti. Programs to encourage positive behavior and involve parents are great, says San Diego school police chief Alex Rascon, but in the mean time "the answer is to lock the campuses down. Have everyone enter through one door, sign in, and have permission to see a teacher ahead of time." Good security, Rascon adds, is inconvenient "but we just cannot dilly-dally around with the way things are now. " It's unfortunate, however, that conditions have to escalate to crisis level before school administrators are given leave to take basic steps to reduce the threat of violence.

Private schools, by comparison, often maintain strict and uniform regulations that result in few incidents of violence or disrup tion, even in inner cities or other areas where crime is an integral part of the surrounding neighborhood. Private schools mete out not only more effective, but in many students' minds, fairer discipline, according to James Coleman: "This suggests that the legalistic approach to ensuring fairness in discipline may be less effective than other approaches ... [and] may indeed be counterproductive for effectiveness of discipline. " In a private school setting, the role of the student is not that of "citizen" (to use the Supreme Court's term) with constitu tional rights. Rather, the relationship with teacher and administrator is an economic one; if school personnel no longer believe they can handle a violent student, they do not have to continue providing him with educational services. In addition, private schools are often smaller, less bureau cratic, and, frankly, better able to keep kids interested in learning-all of which contribute to a greater sense of safety and security.

Thus, to address the epidemic of school violence in America, we will have to recon sider the governance of schools themselves. Any other measure-from peer counseling to handgun control-will ultimately fail without a fundamental change in the rela tionship between student and school. .Schools must discipline, but they willbe free to do so only when released from the polit ical constraints of the present system. At the same time, they must be held directly ac countable to. parents and students (their customers) if punishment becomes capri cious or excessive. In short, we must adopt a private model for education. The intellec tual and psychological development of all our childrenand, some cases, their lives depend on it. D THEFREEMAN IDEASON LIBERTY THE NEW YORK ASBESTOS DEBACLE by Tim Brown I n August 6th of last year a bomb went off, sending shockwaves throughout .the New York City public school system. The explosion, which subjected millions of par ents and schoolchildren to fear, anxiety, and emotional distress, was not set by terrorists, but by politicians. It was the result of a national climate of environmental hysteria and an urban political system that could not rationally deal with three words-possible asbestos contamination.