Go to
http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/opinion/letters/scn-sa-lettertotheeditor3jan28,0,2948492.story
January 28th, 2008
Stamford Advocate
Suspension Rules
To the editor:
Your editorial
on the state's new in-school suspension law (Jan. 22) paints a picture of school
districts financially strapped by the demands of separating "trouble-making
students," as you call them, from their classmates. You also call for more study
to fully explore the ramifications of ending out-of-school
suspensions.
Actually, there is already quite a bit of data on the issue.
The facts suggest that the Legislature was wise in requiring municipalities to
provide for in-school suspensions so that learning can continue (or perhaps
start), and so that children are not at home unattended during the day. The
behavior of many children currently suspended could have been addressed through
less-drastic, more-effective measures.
For example, only 43 percent of
suspensions or expulsions were for behavior the state Department of Education
deemed "serious." The balance were school policy violations, including such
offenses as having a cell phone in class. Many children are suspended for
truancy. That's right - the punishment for not coming to school is not being
allowed to come to school.
Whether a child is suspended may have more to
do with where they are than what they do. A number of suburbs throughout the
state suspended no students in 2006. More than 10 percent of the students in
Bridgeport, New
Haven and Hartford, however, were suspended or expelled
last year. A student's risk of being suspended or expelled is also dramatically
greater if the child is in special education, a male or a racial
minority.
You object to the lack of state funding to finance in-school
suspensions. Department of Education grants are available to school districts
with large suspension problems to fund after-school programs, parental
involvement, early reading success and other measures proven to prevent
suspensions.
You argued that spending on these children diverts resources
from their peers. On the contrary, when schools get their discipline problems
under control, academic achievement rises for all children. And remember -
suspension is a temporary measure. These children will return to their regular
classrooms eventually. Out-of-school suspensions cause children to fall behind,
which hampers an entire class from making progress.
Connecticut children
missed 152,850 school days due to suspensions last year. That's 418 years! It's
a number that casts a pall on our state's economic future and unconscionably
limits the futures of our children. The Legislature got this one
right.
Emily Tow Jackson
Abby Anderson
Wilton
Emily Tow
Jackson is executive director of The Tow Foundation, a statewide funder of
juvenile justice reform programs. Abby Anderson is executive director of the
Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance.
