That’s a question the National School Boards Association (NSBA), the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), and six other organizations are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to answer following a pair of appellate court decisions in favor of two Pennsylvania students.

In a brief filed recently, NSBA and the other groups say that, in order to further their educational mission, “schools need authority to regulate student speech that originates off campus.”

In one of the cases, J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District, a middle school girl who was upset about being reprimanded for dress code violations posted a fake MySpace profile of her principal that, according to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, “contained crude content and vulgar language, ranging from nonsense and juvenile humor to profanity and shameful personal attacks aimed at the principal and his family.” Nonetheless, the court, in an 8-6 decision, ruled in June that the school district had violated the girl’s First Amendment right to free speech when it suspended her for 10 days.

The other case, Layshock v. Hermitage School District, involved a Pennsylvania high school senior who also created a fake MySpace profile mocking his principal. In that case, the Third Circuit ruled unanimously for the student.

NSBA and the other groups argued that the expanding use of social networking and other forms of online communication have led to “a stunning increase in harmful student expression that school administrators are forced to address with no clear guiding jurisprudence.”

“Now is the time for the Supreme Court to resolve the question of whether and to what extent school district have the authority to discipline students for off-campus speech,” said NSBA General Counsel Francisco M. Negrón Jr. “As technology blurs the lines between on-campus and off-campus speech, school districts need clear guidance to be able to effectively address extreme off-campus speech that interferes with a safe and orderly learning environment.”

With more and more communications, as well as classes, conducted online, “grappling with the distinction between off-campus and on-campus speech,” as some courts have done, is arguably “a distinction without a difference,” the brief said.

“Courts that remain committed to the on-campus/ off-campus fiction risk discouraging school boards from using off-campus forums that benefit student learning,” the brief added. “Public school districts have been able to expand educational opportunities for students and to increase communication between school districts and their constituencies with their online presence. But school boards may be less inclined to expand educational opportunities online if their authority does not also expand. Imagine if a court held that a virtual school student who engages in lewd speech during a group online project cannot be disciplined because the conversation did not happen ‘on campus.’”

In addition to AASA, the other groups joining NSBA in the brief include, the American School Counselor Association; Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network; National Association of Elementary School Principals;  National Association of Secondary School Principals;  Pennsylvania School Boards Association; and the School Social Work Association of America.

I interviewed counselor and author Stan Davis for my article, and I’ll never forget what he had to say about bullying prevention.

All schools have an overt culture and a hidden one, he said. “Kids are paying attention to the hidden one. They will see if we welcome new staff, and if we will listen to hate speech.”

If adults are permitted to bully and mistreat each other, or their students, no program, assembly, or curriculum will have much impact.

I had his words in mind when I assigned Senior Editor Naomi Dillon ASBJ’s October cover story, “Adults Behaving Badly,” now online on ASBJ.com. Dillon looks at the phenomenon of work place bullying. Lean budget times, school layoffs, and high-stakes testing pressure have created a toxic environment in some districts. In some cases, the toxicity is fueled by social networking sites. If not addressed, bullying among adults will spread to students. As educators and parents all know, children are watching your actions more than paying attention to your words.

Also as part of our school climate coverage, Senior Editor Lawrence Hardy writes about how some districts are working to reduce racial, ethnic and cultural tensions while creating an environment where children can thrive. “How’s Your Climate?” is also available at www.asbj.com.

Take a look at what we have online this month and please feel free to comment.

As it turns out, it’s not as much the behavior of the students that leads to vastly different kinds of discipline, says the study by The Council of State Government’s Justice Center and Texas A&M University’s Public Policy Research Institute. It’s the policies of school leaders.

“The bottom line is that schools can get different outcomes with very similar student bodies,” Michael D. Thompson, a co-author of the report, told the Washington Post. “School superintendents and teachers can have a dramatic impact.”

To that list we should also add school board members, who hire the superintendent and, through their policy-making decisions, have significant authority over the way schools handle discipline.

The day after that report was made public, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Attorney General Eric Holder issued a new Supportive School Discipline Initiative that aims to dismantle the “School-to-Prison Pipeline” that pushes students into the juvenile justice system for school infractions that could be handled in other ways.

Citing the Texas report and the high number of suspensions and expulsions it found, Holder said, “I think these numbers are kind of a wake-up call. It’s obvious we can do better.”

In yet another critical look at school discipline, journalist Annette Fuentes, in her new book, Lockdown High, examines the heightened national concern about school safety – and its negative consequences – since 9/11 and Columbine.

“The Columbine scenario is terrifying, but the odds of it occurring in your hometown are about one in two million,” Fuentes told the Post.

In a later interview, she makes another point that is well known to most school board members: School is among the safest places for children and young people to be.

So how about those ultra-safe playgrounds, with nothing too high or too hard, too fast or too rickety? Not good for kids, says Ellen Sandseter, a professor of psychology at Queen Maud University of Norway. Yes, they may prevent a few physical injuries (and even that is open to debate) but the psychological toll – in children becoming more fearful because they’re not given the chance to adequately explore their world — outweighs the benefits, she says in a New York Times article.

So too safe is bad – psychologically. What about too extravagant, for example, the $248,000 playhouse a former CEO built for his grandchildren? Not a great idea, notes the Post’s Ruth Marcus. Could make for overly indulged, uncreative kids. Imagine that?

At least that’s one problem cashed-strapped school districts don’t have to worry about.

NSBA General Counsel Francisco M. Negrón, Jr. told NSBA’s Legal Clips that the OCR missed an opportunity to support the expertise and discretion of local school officials. Legal Clips has a full analysis of the letter.

Russlyn Ali, the assistant secretary for the OCR, will speak at the Council of School Attorneys’ annual conference in San Francisco on April 8. (That session along with several other COSA sessions on the topic will be covered by School Board News Today’s Conference Daily.)

The initial guidance came in the form of an Oct. 26, 2010 “Dear Colleague” letter that raised many questions about school officials’ responsibilities to report and address bullying and harassment incidents. NSBA also noted its concerns that the guidance could conflict with some state laws. The guidance could invite “misguided litigation,” according to NSBA’s legal department.

Negrón asked OCR to clarify or reconsider its stance on the responsibility of public school officials to address bullying and harassment in schools in this letter late last year. According to NSBA’s Legal Clips, “Negrón expressed concern that the [letter], which provides a broad view of the behaviors that constitute harassment falling under the purview of OCR’s enforcement responsibilities and a wide range of remedial measure schools may need to take to address them, may invite misguided litigation against schools and prove difficult for school officials to implement.”

“It’s important that OCR give school officials some brighter lines, so they know not only what OCR will enforce, but also whether OCR’s expectations line up with existing legal precedent.  We continue to be concerned that the [letter] may unwittingly invite needless litigation,” Negrón said in Legal Clips.

But the new research shows this is not the case for many LGBT youth in the U.S. According to an online survey conducted in 2009, nearly one in three responding LGBT teens admitted skipping at least one school day in the previous month due to concerns for their safety.

The new CDC resources are a “nice tie between public health and education,” said Brenda Z. Greene, director of NSBA’s school health programs.

“When students are disengaged or bullied, they don’t feel safe and they’re not going to do as well in school—if they show up at all,” Greene said.

LGBT adolescents face tremendous stresses, which increase their risk for mental health problems and substance abuse. A national study of lesbian, gay, and bisexual 7^th through 12^th graders found that these youth were twice more likely than their straight classmates to have attempted suicide.

As a result, school board members and administrators are being called to take a stand against the bullying epidemic.

“This is a good time to be proactive,” said Roberta Stanley, NSBA’s director of federal affairs, at a Feb. 7 presentation on digital bullying at the Federal Relations Network conference. “You don’t want to be the one to be [negatively] highlighted.”

The CDC recommends enforcing “clear policies, procedures and activities designed to prevent bullying.” Additionally, an atmosphere with supportive staff,  psychological “safe spaces” and the development of student run organizations such as the Gay Straight Alliance can help LGBT youth flourish.

To improve sexual education, schools can use  “inclusive terminology” and cover issues relevant to LGBT youth. Information about community resources for HIV and other sexually transmitted disease testing should also be provided by schools.

“When people are talking about an important issue as if you’re not there, you’re not going to pay attention,” said Greene. Ignoring same-sex couple issues “disenfranchises” LGBT teens, who have a lower chance of engaging in “high risk” health behaviors if included in curricula.

NSBA’s 2011 annual conference, held April 9 to 11 in San Francisco, will include a presentation about “Welcoming Schools”, a Human Rights Campaign initiative to help public schools create a healthy and productive climate for all students.

These changes will help create “positive, supportive, and healthy environments,” which “promote acceptance and respect and help youth feel valued,” according to the CDC. But in order to succeed, Greene said, school employees must also have a “commitment to kids and a commitment to doing the right thing.”

-Melissa Major, publications intern

In my former life as a newspaper reporter, I remember spending the better part of a day, visiting a correctional facility with a group of students, who were given a grim but cursory look at prison life. I remember the experience being long, void of any real contact with inmates, and hence not very impactful for the students, none of which I recall where troublesome.

I guess, you could say it was a lighter version of Scared Straight, the widely acclaimed one-day intervention juvenile deliquents had in prison. Well, it seems Scared Straight is a lighter version of Beyond Scared Straight, a far more intense and frankly, downright scary wakeup call to teens heading in the wrong direction.

The shows promo contends that today’s youth require a different approach, one that marries communication, information and confrontation, to get through to them. In watching the last 20 minutes of the program, I’m certainly a believer in this strategy. And in followups with a handful of girls they profiled in the season’s openers, all but one seemed changed for good.

As security issues and student violence continue to plague schools, it’s a get-tough approach that could save some of today’s toughest youth.

Naomi Dillon, Senior Editor

Photo courtesy of Stockvault.net

There was a time — for days, even weeks – after the terrorist attacks of 2001 that I could not look at a digital clock showing 9:11 without seeing images from that horrible day.

But I got over it. And in the same way (in much abbreviated fashion) I got over Saturday’s shootings in Arizona. Sunday was a strange day. Yesterday was more depressing. But today? Things seem back to “normal,” whatever that is. How quickly we move on.

But there are a few things I’d like to say about the terrible shootings that killed six people and injured 14, including a U.S. congresswoman. On the issue of whether the killer, Jared Loughner, was influenced by violent, mostly rightwing, rhetoric, we might never know for sure. But at a time when some on-air entertainers/commentators regularly denounce not simply the ideas or policies of opponents but their very legitimacy – in what some observers have called, using a rather odd phrase, “eliminationist rhetoric” — the potential impact on unstable individuals seems self-evident.  

Much as been made of the fact that the shooter’s political views are all over the ideological map, as if that excuses the vitriol of some of the more inflammatory rightwing commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.  (Loughner cited both Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto as among his favorite books.)

But why do the political views of an obviously unhinged individual have to be coherent to suggest that violent rhetoric – emanating from any source, left or right – could help push him over the edge? Again, we might never know for sure, but it can’t be ruled out. Consider: Did Loughner come by this online pronouncement – “You don’t have to accept [the] federalist laws” – after reading James Madison? I don’t think so.

For opposing views on this subject, read Jonathan Chait and Norm Scheiber, both blogging for  The New Republic.

So that’s one question. But perhaps more disturbing was to read a Washington Post account of Loughner’s behavior in an algebra class at Pima Community College. According to an email from the time, the instructor wrote: “I always felt, you know, somewhat paranoid. When I turned my back to write on the board, I would always turn back quickly –- to see if he had a gun.”

Despite the instructor’s repeated attempts to remove Loughner from the class, the college did not act until he arrived one day in class, pointed to a copy of the U.S. Constitution on the wall, and declared, “You’re violating my First Amendment right of free speech,” the newspaper said.

What was Loughner like in public school? What signs of mental illness, if any, might he have displayed there?  We’ll surely read more about this in the coming days, but in the meantime, UCLA’s Center for Mental Health in Schools is publicizing its exhaustive online clearinghouse on the subject, which is filled with important information for anyone connected with the public schools.

ASBJ has also written extensively about school violence and how to prevent it, most notably in Managing Editor Kathleen Vail’s 2009 account from eyewitnesses to the Columbine massacre, written 10 years after the shootings. Also see our Topics Archive for related stories on school safety and bullying.

Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Why are we so smitten? Well, for one, the characters are expertly cast, and the singing, dancing and, especially, acting, are remarkable. The young stars have really gotten into the heads of adolescents and given us a true portrait of what high school is like.

Sort of. Because, in truth, much of the appeal of Glee is pure escapism. McKinley High is a mythical kind of school, a place where even the bad guys (and girls) are endearing and the worst thing that can befall you is being doused with a Slurpie in the hall or — if you’re Kurt, the one gay glee club member – ritually tossed into the trash bin by the football players at the start of school. (Mr. Schuester, the Spanish teacher and glee club director, drives by the trash bin a few times, and barely notices. So no harm done.) 

The real world is not so benign. A report released yesterday by the national gay rights group Campus Pride found that nearly one quarter (23 percent) of gay and bisexual students face harassment on college campuses, and more than a third (33 percent) “have seriously considered leaving their institution due to the challenging climate,” according to a news release accompanying the report.

Of course, what happens in college doesn’t start in college. In fact, it’s much worse in high school and middle school, where, according to GLSEN’s 2009 survey of 7,261 middle and high schools students, nine out of 10 experienced harassment in school in the past year and almost two thirds felt unsafe because of their sexual orientation. On the GLSEN’s website and in Managing Senior Editor Kathleen Vail’s September 2009 story on bullying, you can see what schools are doing to prevent such bullying. Also, see the riveting new Teaching Tolerance documentary on how one gay student stood up to the bullies and became an inspiration for others.

It seems self-evident to me – “a no-brainer,” if you will – that schools should specifically include gay students in their anti-bullying policies. Yet that same Fox Network that brings you the wonderfully diverse and tolerant McKinley High on its entertainment side is — incredibly — railing against anti-bullying policies on its “news” side, accusing them of fostering the ”gay agenda.”

On the same show (I believe it was Tucker Carlson sitting in for Glenn Beck) the newscasters criticized schools that allowed Muslim students to sit in the school library at lunch hour during the fast of Ramadan. That’s right – the Muslim agenda. Apparently, they’re supposed to suffer in the cafeteria, surrounded by the smells of food they can’t eat. 

I grew up in the 1960s and early 1970s, and except for those tumultuous years, I’ve never witnessed such intolerance and bigotry on so massive a scale. School leaders, you’re going to have to fight this menace, which is fueled by opportunistic politicians and entertainers, speak out boldly and continue to institute policies that respect all students and keep them safe: Policies you know are right.

Because, unfortunately, McKinley High is only make believe.

Lawrence Hardy

Senior Editor

Whether readers are well-versed in the nuances of food allergies or this is their first introduction to the issue, BoardBuzz recommends attending Food Allergies and Schools:  Keeping Students Safe and Ready to Learn. This webcast will provide valuable information and insight to school board members, superintendents, and other administrators, as well nurses, teachers and all those who play essential roles in carrying out the policies and practices that keep all students safe and ready to learn.  In other words, all BoardBuzz readers will benefit!

The webcast will feature a comprehensive panel of presenters, such as national-level experts and legal counsel, school board members, and other critical school personnel, and parents and students.  Topics will include:

• Why you should act to address food allergies in schools;
• What parents and students with life-threatening food allergies experience and need;
• How food allergies have been successfully addressed by schools and recommendations for concrete policy and practice actions;
• Where you can find additional resources to help you get started in enacting your own plans; and
• Much more!

This multimedia program will be broadcast by ESGN Network – the Missouri School Boards Association’s production brand.  Support for this webcast is provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Food Allergies and Schools:  Keeping Students Safe and Ready to Learn will take place on Tuesday, November 9, 2010 from 2-3:30 EST, and is free but registration is required.

NSBA and the Texas school district that was sued said the policy was essential to maintaining a safe and orderly school environment.

On Wednesday, the 5^th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the district court ruling in the case, Meadows v. Lake Travis Independent School District, and ruled unanimously in favor of NSBA and the school district.

“We are pleased with the court’s ruling, as school boards must be able to adopt reasonable visitor policies designed to protect the safety of students and ensure that students are able to learn in a safe and distraction-free environment,” said NSBA Executive Director Anne L. Bryant.

The plaintiff, Yvonne Meadows, refused to give officials at Bee Cave Elementary School her driver’s license or disclose her birth date so they could compare the information against a list of registered sex offenders. The district initiated the policy after an unidentified man entered the school several years ago and exposed himself to a fifth-grader.

In accordance with school policy, Meadows was allowed two escorted visits on school premises but was denied a third visit after she continued to refuse to present identification. The 5th Circuit maintained the district’s electronic identification system was narrowly tailored to achieve school safety and efficiency, saying it “takes only the minimum information necessary to determine sex-offender status, identify the visitor, and ensure the lack of false positives.”

Jacobs shared her personal experience and noted:

Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan convened America’s first summit on bullying last week, and it’s about time. The goal was to bring together government agencies to both prevent and combat this growing problem. One in three students reports being bullied in middle or high school, and there are increased numbers of cyber bullying incidents. These are not rites of passage or normal adolescent behaviors, according to experts at the summit. They are learned patterns that can be changed.

My school’s bully was named Bradley. Everyone knew his pattern: He picked on students who were shy, overweight, or had a disability. We saw his actions in the schoolyard, yet we didn’t report him to teachers; we thought it was just the way it was. The message from the Department of Education, psychologists, and experts from the Department of Justice is that bullying has been protected for too long; it’s time to educate parents, teachers, and students to recognize when a child is being bullied and stop it before it’s too late.

BoardBuzz agrees that we must address school bullying as a safe school environment is critical in making sure our students succeed academically.

However, in his This Week in Education blog, Alexander Russo makes two good points: Locke High has many more problems than the typical low-performing school; and, considering cash-strapped California’s meager support of schools (about 46^th place among the states in per-pupils spending, according to one estimate), the high school had a lot of ground to make up.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Get Schooled blog covers a troubling development in Memphis, Tenn., where school officials are considering bringing back corporal punishment.

NSBA’s own EDifier blog describes an interesting study that shows states can have more meaningful tests – and have them at a fraction of the cost of the current bubble-in kind.

Finally, a “you be the judge” kind of post on Education Tech News about a Philadelphia area English teacher who was fired from her parochial school after writing a blog about a class assignment. A Philadelphia Inquirer poll found overwhelming support for the teacher, but after reading the paper’s story, which appeared some time ago, I have to believe she crossed the line in a couple of serious ways. What do you think?

Lawrence Hardy, Senior Editor

Stock Vault

I hate security cameras. So it really irritated me to read this week that Philadelphia schools chief Arlene Ackerman decided to install 126 security cameras inside troubled South Philadelphia High School.

It made me sad to learn that several other Philly high schools already have 100+ cameras looking over students’ shoulders.

Two things irk me about security cameras in schools. First, it’s a sign that the dangers of Big Brother did not diminish with the end of the Cold War.

Second—and a more practical argument—security cameras don’t discourage hotheaded kids from turning to violence. It just makes video of any incident available for broadcast on the evening news.

 I can understand why Ackerman thinks she had to act. In December, racial unrest led to several incidents—the most notable when African-American and Asian students clashed, with some groups of students allegedly going from room to room to target students for attack.

But cameras are possibly the least-effective possible strategy available to school officials hoping to avoid future violence. For a fraction of the $689,000 installation cost cited the Philadelphia Inquirer, school officials could have focused attention on changing the attitude of students.

As I recall, every school security expert I’ve heard speak has told educators that the school environment—the respect teachers show students, the expectations of behavior they set, the prompt response to any hint of trouble—will do far more to create a safe school environment.

In short, if you teach young people how to behave—and hold them to it—then the chances are students don’t need adult supervision, metal detectors, and surveillance cameras to keep them in line. They’ll just police themselves.

Admittedly, that’s sounds easier than it is—and idealistic in a school that serves an inner-city community where violence and social woes plague neighborhoods and the young people who live in them.

But, I believe, focusing on student values and behaviors is not an unrealistic anti-violence strategy. It’s just hard to do. You have to start instilling these expectations from the first day students enter the classroom—and your teachers, administrators, and other staff must continually hammer home that message day after day.

Alas, it’s a lot easier to install wires and devices than change behaviors and attitudes—and when the public is demanding action, it’s much more satisfying and politically defensible to point to some tangible action, like installing security equipment.

Yet, when it comes to tangible results, it’s what you cannot touch that will really make the difference. It’s how students feel about one another—and the value they place on their own behavior and expectations.

I think administrators and teachers at South Philadelphia High might understand that. And, indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised if we see real change as a result of the shock and horror that adults felt after the December violence. Consciously—or perhaps unconsciously—they’re going to put a greater effort into changing student behavior.

Of course, since no one can “see” that, I predict the security cameras will get the credit for any improvement. And Big Brother will loom ever larger on the horizon.

Del Stover, Senior Editor

Bullied students feel unsafe and, therefore, are often absent from school.  In addition, bullying can affect the physical and emotional health of students and hinder their academic performance.  Bullying within school buildings is fairly common, but children spend countless hours “socializing” through mediums such as computers and cell phones and cyberbullying has presented itself as an “easy” and partly “masked” or anonymous way of harassing people. 

For these and other compelling reasons, BoardBuzz believes it’s imperative that schools address bullying—helping schools to be safe and supportive havens for students as well as places where they learn how to be respectful throughout their lives. Celebrating No Name-Calling Week, which began today, is a practical way to start the ball rolling.  No Name-Calling Week was inspired by a young adult novel called “The Misfits,” by author James Howe.  The book tells the story of a group of friends trying to survive the seventh grade in the face of all too frequent taunts based on their weight, height, intelligence, and sexual orientation/gender expression.  Inspired by the idea contained in the book, the No Name-Calling Coalition, created by GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network) and Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing, and consisting of over 40 national partner organizations, organized a No Name-Calling Week in schools across the nation. 

Although the project is targeted at grades five through eight – years when name-calling is particularly serious – the concept can be easily adapted by students and educators at other grade levels.  To help celebrate, the No Name-Calling Week website offers free materials such as planning documents; elementary, middle, and high school lesson plans; art lessons; promotional items; and anti-bullying resources from coalition partners.  In addition, a Resource Kit is available for purchase that includes among other things: an educational video; a comprehensive resource guide with program information; 11 lesson plans; and a copy of “The Misfits.”

And if you need to learn more about ways to prevent cyberbullying, NSBA has the right resource for you!   NSBA’s Technology Leadership Network has partnered with CyberSmart! to distribute their free Cyberbullying Package to schools nationwide.  The materials in the package provide tools for schools to begin a dialogue with students and build a sustained cyberbullying prevention campaign, promoting behavior change and continually reminding the school community of the importance of safe and ethical online use.

What are your schools doing to prevent bullying? Leave us a comment.

Columbine, by Dave Cullen, tops the list. When I wrote about the 10th anniversary of Columbine in May 2009, I read the book and was stunned by how much we don’t know about an event that has shaped education for a decade. Cullen, a journalist for Salon, uncovers the myths of the tragic school shooting, revealing the ugly and unsettling truth about the incident.

For our complete list of top education books, go to http://www.asbj.com/MainMenuCategory/Archive/2010/January/Top-Education-Books-for-2009.aspx.

Let us know if you disagree with our choices or if you want to nominate another education book for the list.

Kathleen Vail, Managing Editor

Police issued X-26 Taser

An interesting  and, for the moment, civil debate  has ensued between North Carolina’s Guilford County law enforcement and school officials.

On one hand, we have the district. Tasked with  providing a nurturing and safe learning environment, it has contracted with various local law enforcement agencies to help them in this endeavor, placing them in just about every middle and high school campus. 

And for it’s part, the local police departments are more than willing to help schools remain the secure and sound places of learning they should be. Where the two entities are disagreeing, however, is the method.

When the Guilford County Sherrif’s Office began arming its deputies with Tasers in 2007, it also went to the school resource officers. And this year, two other police departments that the district works with, provided their SRO’s with Tasers, too, heightening a percolating sense of unease that educators and families have felt about having these weapons on school sites.

It certainly didn’t help, when an SRO used a Taser on a female high school student earlier this year, nor that days later another SRO suffered injuries after breaking up a student fight because, according the sherrif’s office, the deputy wanted to avoid further controversy and abstained from using the device.  

School board member Sandra Alexander told the News & Record, the majority of the board and the public don’t like the idea of Tasers in schools, with the board extending an invitation to local law enforcement officials to speak about the matter at an upcoming board meeting.  

The police chiefs say they are happy to sit down and talk with the county board about the issue, though equipping only some officers with a weapon that all officers have been trained to use properly and with discretion is not a likely outcome.

“The idea that we want to hurt any children is ridiculous,” Guilford County Sherrif BJ Barnes told the News & Record.

Still, Alexander has many concerns.

“Working with children requires special training and I don’t know that they’re getting the training they need in that regard,” she said.  

What’s your thought on this issue? Should Tasers be a tool in a school resource officer’s arsenal? Does each side have a valid point? Read more on this issue from the National School Safety and Security Services organization.

Naomi Dillon, Senior Editor

It certainly wasn’t the first time zero tolerance got lambasted, but apparently some schools in Delaware still didn’t get the message.

This week, a 6-year-old boy named Zachary Christie is the poster child for zero tolerance gone amuck. He’s a Cub Scout who loves school so much that he sometimes wears a suit. And on Sept. 29, he was so excited about a new tool his parents gave him—a jackknife-type tool that has a knife, fork and spoon for camping—that he brought it to school to use for lunch.

And that’s where the trouble started. Under the Christina, Del., school district code, knives are banned. Zachary was sentenced to 45 days in a school for juvenile delinquents, and his parents, who are home-schooling him in the interim, created a website and are making the rounds on national news to tell their son’s plight.

Last year, state lawmakers tried to fix a state law to give school boards and administrators more flexibility in cases such as this, according to the New York Times. 

What spurred the legislature to act was an equally absurd case: a third-grader’s grandmother sent a birthday cake to school with a knife to cut it, and–after cutting the cake with the knife–the teacher called the principal. The legislature gave school boards authority to modify expulsions, but now is looking to revise that law to include suspensions. 

Of course, it’s never as simple as one incident relays. The Times interviews researchers who note that zero tolerance became popular in the 1990s in response to spurts of school violence, and many administrators were accused of racial and other biases in disciplining those at fault. Of course, zero tolerance also sent many students with sinister motives to the streets to create more violent episodes rather than addressing the underlying problems.

So what kind of message does it send to Zachary, his peers, and parents across the country when a first-grader is barred from his school because of a simple mistake?

If school boards, principals and teachers are given some leeway—which they should be—they must use common sense to avert situations like these. In this case, the teacher or principal could have nicely explained to Zachary and his parents why knives have to be banned and gotten assurance that it wouldn’t happen again.

Instead, the Christies feel desperate and now are rallying supporters to come to a school board meeting tonight in hopes that Zachary’s punishment will be overturned and he can return to his school.

“We didn’t want our son becoming the poster child for this,” Zachary’s mother told the Times, “but this is out of control.”

 Joetta Sack-Min, Associate Editor

The gruesome beating death of a Chicago honors student outside his high school wasn’t an act of gun violence, though. This time, Derrion Albert, 16, was beaten to death by a group of thugs with a railroad tie. His death might have been another statistic in an urban district struggling to deal with violence, except a bystander caught the beating on a cellphone video.

That video—shown on broadcasts internationally—did not help Chicago’s reputation for violence, but it did spur local and federal officials into action. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, the former Chicago schools superintendent, and Attorney General Eric Holder will visit Albert’s family today and later will speak about the federal initiatives to curb school violence.

Albert was the third student to die violently in Chicago this year, and he was the 67^th since the 2007-08 school year, according to the New York Times.

Hundreds of others have been shot or beaten on their way home from school, arguably the most dangerous time of day.

The new schools chief, Ron Huberman, has a plan, and it’s not just about increasing security. Instead, he’s using $60 million in federal stimulus funds for the next two years to use data to find the students most at risk for becoming victims.

Those students are not random—statistics show they are most likely to be black males living in an unstable environment and skipping an average of 42 days of school each year. Many are in special education.

Huberman’s plan would give those students paying jobs and a local advocate who would be on call 24/7 for support. About 10 percent of the district’s 410,000 students would be on the list.

“What this model won’t do is get every kid who gets shot, but what it does do is give us a fighting chance to identify those kids who are most in trouble,” Huberman, a former rapid response officer for the Chicago police, told the Times.

It’s clear the district needs more than the current strategies, and the district is focusing on the dangers of getting to and from schools, particularly the ones where most of the victims attended.  The data-based plan is certainly a strategy for all districts to watch.

Joetta Sack-Min, Associate Editor