This sounds so crazy that I think we need to look at it a bit more.

 

Ms Charen raises some interesting possible results of the new directive.

 

The bigger issue is the senselessness and the negative impact of "zero tolerance." Too many schools are not sending any and ALL discipline infractions, no matter how minor, to the police rather than handling it as a school matter. This defies common sense. You drastically increase the chance of school suspension and/or arrests when you fail to handle many of the infractions "in house." THIS is what the administration seems to be trying to fix with the result of less minorities going to the justice system over things that traditionally have been handled by the schools.

 

So let's keep in mind the desired result and THEN analyze the potential issues with the directive. I applaud them for trying to fix a big issue. I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it but the problem has been ignored for too long and needs to be examined.

This is the reason the directive was issued:

 

The Departments recognize that disparities in student discipline rates in a school or district may

be caused by a range of factors. However, research suggests that the substantial racial disparities

of the kind reflected in the CRDC data are not explained by more frequent or more serious

misbehavior by students of color.7

 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201401-title-vi.pdf

Re: "disparate impact" - it's not quite as simple as mentioned thus far. It's not as simple as saying "well more blacks are disciplined than whites so you're guilty."

 

From the directive:

 

In determining whether a facially neutral policy has an unlawful disparate impact on the basis of

race, the Departments will engage in the following three-part inquiry (see also Illustration 2,

page 13).

(1) Has the discipline policy resulted in an adverse impact on students of a particular race

as compared with students of other races? For example, depending on the facts of a

particular case, an adverse impact may include, but is not limited to, instances where

students of a particular race, as compared to students of other races, are

disproportionately: sanctioned at higher rates; disciplined for specific offenses;

subjected to longer sanctions or more severe penalties; removed from the regular

school setting to an alternative school setting; or excluded from one or more

educational programs or activities. If there were no adverse impact, then, under this

inquiry, the Departments would not find sufficient evidence to determine that the

school had engaged in discrimination. If there were an adverse impact, then:

(2) Is the discipline policy necessary to meet an important educational goal?22 In

conducting the second step of this inquiry, the Departments will consider both the

importance of the goal that the school articulates and the tightness of the fit between

the stated goal and the means employed to achieve it. If the policy is not necessary to

meet an important educational goal, then the Departments would find that the school

had engaged in discrimination. If the policy is necessary to meet an important

educational goal, then the Departments would ask:

(3) Are there comparably effective alternative policies or practices that would meet the

s l’s stated educational goal with less of a burden or adverse impact on the

disproportionately affected racial group, s e s l’s ffe e j s f

pretext for discrimination?23 If the answer is yes to either question, .....

So basically a quota system for discipline..

So basically a quota system for discipline..

 

I would encourage you to look a little deeper.

From a school principle: I think that this premise by Holder is way off base, and more race baiting. I'm a public school principal, so I'm living it. EVERY principal I know makes decisions about discipline violations based on the approved student code for conduct and criminal statutes, not skin color. I'm sure there are some instances of discrimination, but they are few, and don't require any federal input. I have been accused of "picking on my child" because he is black many times. I tell the parents and students the same thing...I'm white, but I don't care if you are white, purple, black, or green..if you disrupt teaching and learning, or cause an unsafe environment, you will be suspended from school. Holder...let us do our jobs. We have enough interference from the state level, we don't need more from the Feds.

So basically a quota system for discipline..

The Bluegrass State has been wrestling with this problem for years. That's what alternative schools are about. If a high school's suspension rate is too high, the state will ask why.

I would encourage you to look a little deeper.

 

I have and for the record are you defending this directive ?

I have and for the record are you defending this directive ?

 

Already answered that.

This sounds so crazy that I think we need to look at it a bit more.

 

Ms Charen raises some interesting possible results of the new directive.

 

The bigger issue is the senselessness and the negative impact of "zero tolerance." Too many schools are not sending any and ALL discipline infractions, no matter how minor, to the police rather than handling it as a school matter. This defies common sense. You drastically increase the chance of school suspension and/or arrests when you fail to handle many of the infractions "in house." THIS is what the administration seems to be trying to fix with the result of less minorities going to the justice system over things that traditionally have been handled by the schools.

 

So let's keep in mind the desired result and THEN analyze the potential issues with the directive. I applaud them for trying to fix a big issue. I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it but the problem has been ignored for too long and needs to be examined.

 

So is this a yes or no?

So is this a yes or no?

 

I said already that the REASON for the new directive is legit. If you read the actual document sent out to the schools you'll see that there are issues with discipline being meted out consistently. This has shown to have a negative impact on minority communities.

 

So I'm for doing something. The document I linked to seems to discredit some of the original posts that it was simply a matter of the number of violations without taking anything else into account.

 

So with that said tell me which part you're bothered by.

,

I said already that the REASON for the new directive is legit. If you read the actual document sent out to the schools you'll see that there are issues with discipline being meted out consistently. This has shown to have a negative impact on minority communities.

 

So I'm for doing something. The document I linked to seems to discredit some of the original posts that it was simply a matter of the number of violations without taking anything else into account.

 

So with that said tell me which part you're bothered by.

 

I don't see how this policy fixes the problem . It creates new ones. I'm also not for any solution that divides by racial lines. There is no getting around that simple fact. Punishment should be color blind , this doesn't address that it actually enhances the racial component.

The race issue is what Obama likes to stir in. Keeps media from real issues like IRS, Benghazi, etc.

Hey...this is good for employment! How many additional administrators will now be needed for the burden of recordkeeping, investigating and "corrective actions".

From a school principle: I think that this premise by Holder is way off base, and more race baiting. I'm a public school principal, so I'm living it. EVERY principal I know makes decisions about discipline violations based on the approved student code for conduct and criminal statutes, not skin color. I'm sure there are some instances of discrimination, but they are few, and don't require any federal input. I have been accused of "picking on my child" because he is black many times. I tell the parents and students the same thing...I'm white, but I don't care if you are white, purple, black, or green..if you disrupt teaching and learning, or cause an unsafe environment, you will be suspended from school. Holder...let us do our jobs. We have enough interference from the state level, we don't need more from the Feds.

 

From what I have read there are national studies that indicate that minority students tend to receive harsher discipline for the same infraction. I doubt that many principals would set out to be overtly racist, but there does seem to be evidence of bias. I don't know you Commando, so I will assume that you make all of your judgement calls with no bias whatsoever. I do have one question though. This information was put out jointly by the Justice and Education departments. The one I have seen on television discussing it is Education Secretary Arnie Duncan. Any reason you chose to only focus on AG Holder?