ILNews

From the principal’s office to the courtroom

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In the heat of a tense moment, without planning, without forethought of any subsequent action, a stressed student might pop off a statement that has the potential to bring harsh consequences. If others perceive the verbal outburst as a threat, the student could be arrested and taken to juvenile court.

Such strong reaction to student misbehavior was born in the 1990s with zero-tolerance policies and a national appetite for getting tough on crime. The result of the harsh measures has helped create a school-to-prison pipeline.

Even students who are not arrested can face life-altering consequences if they are disciplined through suspension and expulsion. They will be removed from the classroom, putting them behind in the coursework and at increased risk for dropping out completely.

“We can’t say this is the Wild Wild West and we can do anything we want to children,” said attorney JauNae Hanger.
 

JaeNue Hanger Hanger

Hanger has spent much of her career working on juvenile issues as well as public policy related to reforming the juvenile justice system and how society treats children. In 2012, she helped found and currently serves as board chair of the Children’s Policy and Law Initiative of Indiana, a nonprofit that educates and advocates for fundamental changes to public policy regarding Hoosier children.

A key issue for the organization is school discipline. During the 2014 session of the Indiana General Assembly, CPLI pushed a bill that would have created a model approach to addressing troublesome students without using extreme measures that can cause long-term harm.

The measure, House Bill 1287, was authored by Rep. Greg Porter, D-Indianapolis, and based on the work done by CPLI’s Equitable School Discipline Work Group chaired by retired educator Carole Craig. Although the bill failed to get out of committee, members of the initiative said it broadened the discussion of school discipline issues, and they are hopeful it will be on the Legislature’s summer study agenda.

Putting the hammer away

School principals are now joining the conversation. Todd Bess, executive director of the Indiana Association of School Principals, raised concerns that the bill was drafted without input from teachers, counselors and administrators, and it limits the schools’ discretion in maintaining a climate conducive to learning.

“Principals through and through don’t want to just suspend and expel kids,” Bess said. “The times when they do, they feel like it’s a situation that has to occur for the needs of the school and, this sounds strange, but also the needs of the student.”

The misconception, he said, is that principals remove students from the classroom at the first infraction when actually other means of discipline were tried before the harsh method was applied.

However, Craig said on the whole school discipline codes have become punitive. As an alternative, CPLI is promoting methods that prevent students from causing disruptions and keep bad behavior from spiraling out of control.

“We’re not talking about having unsafe schools, that’s absolutely ridiculous,” Craig said. “We’re talking about using proven interventions and helping children rather than going straight to the hammer.”

Some schools in the state are incorporating best practices into their approach to discipline and showing positive results. HB 1287 sought to expand the use of evidenced-based methods by requiring the Indiana Department of Education to develop a model plan for improving behavior and discipline in the classroom.

Bess said schools do need to use best practices when dealing with student discipline, but he cautioned against what he saw as the bill’s blanket approach to addressing the issue of suspension and expulsion. Sometimes an elevated response is necessary, he continued, and HB 1287 would limit a school’s options.

“Whenever we get into a broad approach like that, there probably would be unintended consequences,” Bess said. “We want to avoid that at all costs.”

Disproportional discipline

Other provisions in the CPLI proposal would require schools to report information related to disciplinary actions and would require the DOE to take a look at disproportionality in discipline.

An examination of data from Indiana’s public schools found that over a five-year period, African-American students were being suspended at a higher rate than other ethnic groups.

According to an analysis for CPLI by Brandie Oliver and Nick Abel, both assistant professors in the College of Education at Butler University, in-school and out-of-school suspensions for African-Americans far exceeded expectations based on total school population.

African-American students represented roughly 12 percent of the total school population in Indiana but they accounted for about 26 to 28 percent of the in-school suspensions from school years 2007 through 2012. The rate climbed for out-of-school suspensions, with 37 to 42 percent of this kind of discipline being assigned to African-Americans.

Neither Oliver nor Abel was surprised by the results of their study, saying it confirmed the anecdotal evidence they have encountered. The pair has requested more specific data from the DOE and hope to have a more comprehensive report on school discipline in Indiana by the end of the summer.

Despite its inability to get to the floor of the Indiana House of Representatives, HB 1287 and the testimony it inspired made an impression on House Education Committee Chair Rep. Robert Behning. He included language in his measure, House Enrolled Act 1319, that urged the Legislative Council to assign the topic of school discipline and suspension of students to a summer study committee.


behning-robert Behning

School discipline is a concern of the General Assembly, the Indianapolis Republican said, especially with regard to minorities who represent a higher rate not only for school suspensions but also in prison populations.

“I do believe it’s something we ought to take a look at and figure out a way to reduce,” Behning said.

CPLI maintains the best way to disconnect the school-to-prison pipeline is to keep the students out of the juvenile justice system and keep them engaged in school. It charges expulsion is used too often, too readily and effects the most vulnerable children.

Bess countered the statistics do not give the entire picture. The data does not provide the whole story of what happened and what other disciplinary strategies were tried before the suspension was issued.

Jill Johnson, assistant division chief of juvenile delinquency at the Marion County Public Defender Agency, questioned the practice of kicking kids out of school. She conceded the jobs of teachers and principals are not easy, but time and time again she has seen students banned from the classroom for months. The students are stuck at home instead of being in school where they have the opportunity to learn and participate in pro-social programs.


johnson Johnson

Recently, the Marion County juvenile courts have begun to pay more attention to classroom discipline by considering alternative approaches for students arrested in school, Johnson said. The courts have shown more willingness to make an informal adjustment which would require a student to stay out of trouble and do something like community service or write a letter of apology.

This is seen by Johnson as a positive step since the informal adjustments can prevent the low-risk, non-violent students from going deeper into the justice system and encountering bad influences.

What Johnson would like to see happen next is the juvenile courts and schools to start working together. Too often, the juvenile justice system feels as if the students are being dumped at the backdoor and schools are saying “they’re your problem now,” she said. Moreover, being arrested at school in front of their peers can be especially traumatic for students.

“Is it a deterrent?” Johnson asked of sending troublesome students to juvenile court. “I don’t know because I don’t know if it’s addressing the heart of what the issue is.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • very sad
    in reality schools do not care about future of child , feel not responsible. It is because wrong attitude towards public schools , where child's future often getting damaged. Schools can do miracle , if would feel responsible. We have to learn from some other(even much more poor) countries, where children getting great education , and are treated like children , but not like criminals.Human is biggest value , but not money..
  • time for changes
    I lost my daughter after involvement with Juvenile System. She was expelled from school , sent to Girl's school for year for small things , what many teens do. Since then her life and health collapsed, she is lost human. She was 13-14 when she get involved with Juvenile "justice" system.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Applause, applause, applause ..... but, is this duty to serve the constitutional order not much more incumbent upon the State, whose only aim is to be pure and unadulterated justice, than defense counsel, who is also charged with gaining a result for a client? I agree both are responsible, but it seems to me that the government attorneys bear a burden much heavier than defense counsel .... "“I note, much as we did in Mechling v. State, 16 N.E.3d 1015 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied, that the attorneys representing the State and the defendant are both officers of the court and have a responsibility to correct any obvious errors at the time they are committed."

  2. Do I have to hire an attorney to get co-guardianship of my brother? My father has guardianship and my older sister was his co-guardian until this Dec 2014 when she passed and my father was me to go on as the co-guardian, but funds are limit and we need to get this process taken care of quickly as our fathers health isn't the greatest. So please advise me if there is anyway to do this our self or if it requires a lawyer? Thank you

  3. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  4. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  5. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

ADVERTISEMENT