NAACP Opposition To FSD1 Zero Tolerance Policy

On Friday, December 3, 2021 the NAACP National’s Office of General Counsel sent a letter to Florence School District One’s Board explaining why the Board’s proposed zero tolerance policy would gravely harm our children, do little or nothing to helpd reduce violence in our schools, and likely violate federal law. “We must keep our children and school staff safe,” said Jerry Keith, Jr., President of the Florence Branch NAACP, “but a zero tolerance policy will not actually make our schools safer. It would put students, and especially Black students, at an even greater risk of disciplinary sanctions. It ignores the real causes of fights in our schools: not bad kids, but insufficient staff and the isolation and disruptions caused by COVID-19.” The Florence Branch NAACP calls on the Board not to adopt the propsed policy changes and encourages parents and community members to attend the school board meeting, Thursday, December 9, 2021 at 6:30 pm at the District office. The letter sent by NAACP’s Office of General Counsel is listed below.

RE: Florence One Proposed Student Code of Conduct Changes

Dear School Board Trustees:

We write to you on behalf of the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and the Florence County Branch of the NAACP to express our opposition to the District’s proposed revisions to the Student Code of Conduct. The proposed changes, and specifically the proposal to implement a zero-tolerance policy for fighting or physical violence, not only implicate federal law, but also fail to address the root causes of the violence. The proposed changes would not reduce violence or provide students and staff with the resources and support they need to be safe in school. Instead, the proposed new policy will likely lead to an increase in the sanctioning of minority students, specifically Black students and students with special needs.

We share the Board’s dismay over the potential increase in the level of physical violence amongst students. Our priority is the safety and wellbeing of all students; we wholeheartedly believe that the school board, school staff, teachers, parents and community members should all work together to ensure that our students and children are safe from violence. However, the proposed changes would run counter to this priority. Accordingly, the Board should reject these proposed changes on December 9th and instead adopt a preventative approach that increases teacher support and student access to necessary resources.

I. The proposed zero-tolerance policy will likely violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by creating a disparate impact on Black and Latinx/Hispanic students

The proposal to make all instances of fighting an automatic level 4 offense works in effect as a zero-tolerance policy. Zero-tolerance policies refer to individual school or districtwide policies that mandate predetermined, typically harsh punishments, such as suspension and expulsion, for a wide degree of rule violations.1 These policies eliminate the ability of teachers, staff, and administrators to assess each student’s behavior on an individual basis, and instead require blanket remedies for nuanced problems. Unlike the current tiered policy for fighting, zero-tolerance policies do not take into consideration a student’s intent, culpability, or harm to the learning environment. Nor do they account for potential bias from school officials, the impact the punishment will have on a particular student, or the likelihood of success alternative guidance or oversight for principals or the superintendent as they determine what the ultimate punishment for a student should be.

a. The predictable outcome of zero-tolerance policy is a disparate impact amounting to discrimination on the basis of race

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ensures “that public funds, to which all taxpayers of all races contribute, not be spent in any fashion which encourages, entrenches, subsidizes or results in racial discrimination.”2 Title VI not only prohibits intentional discrimination on the basis of race, but the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights regulations make clear that schools also may not "utilize criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimination," thus barring unintentional disparate-impact discrimination.

Based on the nature of zero-tolerance policies and the existing racial disparities in student discipline, it is likely that the proposed policy change will have a disparate impact on Black and Brown/Latinx students in this district. In general, while the blanket nature of zero tolerance policies is harmful for all students, they are particularly harmful for Black students, as studies show that zero-tolerance policies systemically increase their rates of suspension and expulsion. And Florence District One’s current suspension and expulsion policies already disproportionately affect Black students. A 2018 study found that Black students in Florence District One were 2.2 times more likely to be suspended than white students. Additionally, the study found that although Black students comprised 53% of the student body, 72% of students who received out-of-school suspension and 83% of students who were expelled were Black.

Adopting a zero-tolerance policy for physical violence will only exacerbate this issue, as evidence shows that racial disparities may increase as disciplinary actions increase, so zero tolerance policies have the potential to make the problem of racial disparities in discipline even more acute.

b. There are less discriminatory ways to reduce potential violence

Violence amongst students should remain a top priority for this Board. Studies have shown that zero-tolerance policies are ineffective at curbing violence. Put simply, the facts show that they just don’t work. Worse still, these policies may create more harm for all students. Rather than resolving issues related to violence in the district, a zero-tolerance policy will only widen the racial disparities in this district’s disciplinary process. In practice, the zero-tolerance policy will unfairly penalize Black and Hispanic/Latinx students. Implementing preventative measures, such as services from school psychologists, counselors or social workers, opportunities for community engagement, and school-wide positive behavior educational opportunities have been shown to decrease levels of violence amongst students.10

II. A zero-tolerance policy will not address the issues that are actually causing student violence.

Instead of limiting violence, the proposed zero-tolerance policy will likely only exacerbate systemic issues in Florence. Across the country, automatic suspensions and expulsions correlate with increased risks of arrest, time in juvenile detention facilities, and failure to graduate high school.11 And the proposed policy would do nothing to respond to the significant social and structural changes that have taken place over the past few years that contribute to and exacerbate violence amongst students. Teacher and staff shortages and a lack of counseling for students who have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic are almost certainly the causes of any rise in violence amongst students. The district must address these institutional challenges and use this as an opportunity to learn from the mistakes of other school districts.

Additionally, the proposed policy ignores the myriad of disciplinary options currently available to schools. Under the current policy, it is possible for a student who engages in fighting to receive an out of school suspension or expulsion. However, unlike the zero-tolerance policy, the current policy enables to administrators to make a more informed assessment of what social or structural issues may be impacting student behavior and provides an opportunity to address these factors. Overall, the proposed policy severely limits teacher and school administrator decision making power while doing very little to address the underlying causes of violence amongst students.

a. Current teacher and staff shortages put students and teachers at risk for violence.

Teachers and school staff play a crucial, preventative role in reducing violence amongst students in schools. Teachers and staff are able to supervise students and de-escalate conflicts between students. Studies have shown that as students feel more connected to their teachers, levels of violence decrease.12 But, in Florence, there simply are not enough teachers, as the number of teachers in the district has continued to decrease since 2019 and the school district continues to struggle to fill a number of teacher vacancies.13

b. COVID-19 has had a negative impact on the social and emotional well-being of students and community members.

While COVID-19 has had life changing implications for many Americans, it has been especially devastating for children. The CDC reports that more than 140,000 children in the United States have lost a primary caregiver to COVID-19, with children of color accounting for 65% of that number. Additionally, the American Academy of Pediatrics recently declared that pandemic-related declines in children’s mental health was a national emergency. Despite clear evidence of the negative impact the pandemic has had on the physical, emotional, and social wellbeing of students, specifically Black and Hispanic/Latinx students, there has not been an increase in social services such as counseling or therapy for these students. These traumas have detrimentally affected student behavior in and out of school.

Additionally, conversations with students and Florence County community members about the increase in violence reveal that many of these disputes are exacerbated by tensions and anxieties directly or indirectly stemming from COVID-19. Until students are able to get appropriate mental health support for these traumas, violence amongst students is likely to persist.

c. Zero-tolerance policies diverts necessary resources from sustainable, systemic solutions that will keep all students safe

Zero-tolerance policies are costly to enforce. Costs include “spending on both school security measures, such as metal detectors and surveillance cameras, as well as the administrative costs associated with harsh punishments such as suspensions, expulsions and school-based arrests”. While the costs of these policies are clear and certain, evidence proves that the benefits are nonexistent. Studies have repeatedly shown that these policies do not make the learning environment safer. Adopting such policies in Florence One will only reduce the district’s ability to invest in more holistic and preventative measures that benefit all students.

III. The School Board of Trustees should implement a student centered, preventive approach to combating violence

The safety of our students and teachers is of the utmost concern for the NAACP and our members. But the proposed zero-tolerance policy would likely do nothing to reduce the level of violence among students and instead would likely violate Title VI, pushing a disproportionate number of Black students out of school and into the broader school-to-prison pipeline at a faster rate. Instead, we ask that the Board implement more preventative measures aimed at providing staff and students with the tools and resources they need to deescalate conflicts on their own and engage all community members in addressing violence amongst students.

Should this board adopt the zero-tolerance policy, we reserve the right to take all appropriate legal action necessary to ensure that these provisions are removed or repealed. But we seek to work with this board and school staff to create holistic, student centered preventive approaches to this matter. We look forward to hearing from you and working toward a just solution for our students and teachers.

Sincerely,

Martina Tiku, NAACP Equal Justice Works Fellow

Joseph R. Schottenfeld, NAACP Assistant General Counsel