Editors wonder; what's the point in calling the cops?

The Journal editors penned a piece yesterday;

What’s the principle in bringing the law to class?, link.

They are, I suppose, at least superficially interested in beginning a public debate on the involvement of "law enforcement" in maintaining order in schools.

Discipline in schools, mountain or molehill?

APS teachers are not, have not been, and will not be surveyed about student discipline and the effects of chronically disruptive students.

Were they, there is no reason to believe that they would respond much differently than the thirteen hundred respondents in a survey, link, entitled;

Teaching Interrupted: Do Discipline Policies in Today’s Public Schools Foster the Common Good? 

They found;

Too many students are losing critical opportunities for learning—and too many teachers are leaving the profession—because of the behavior of a few persistent troublemakers.

Persistent trouble makers; chronically disruptive students, are interfering with the education of other students.  Their right to make trouble trumps the rights of other students who count among their rights, the right to have order in the classrooms, hallways and campuses.

School boards, superintendents and principals, in their efforts to "protect" students from "law enforcement" and the consequences of their criminal misconduct, actually enable and encourage criminal misconduct.

Part of their reasoning is that there are other, better strategies for dealing with students who break the law, than involving law enforcement.  One, and the one advocated by the Journal editorial staff;

An after-school lesson in respect and self-control ...

If teachers, or anyone else working at the educational interface in the presence of chronically disruptive students, were surveyed;

Would after-school lessons in respect and self-control improve the behavior of chronically disruptive students?

The response would indicate a shared professional consensus that that that particular strategy would be about as effective, and the results as long lasting,  as "jumping" in an effort to get closer to sun.

APS is crippled in problem solving by their problem solving rubric.  They are about solving problems such as student discipline and chronically disruptive students;

• without admitting that there is a problem and

• without gathering any damning data even if data is useful in addressing problems

APS has policies but no underpinning philosophy regarding chronically disruptive students.  In fact they have no "discipline philosophy".  They closest thing they can come up with is a student behavior handbook written and the 14th grade level.  Most parents can't read and understand it, never mind students many of whom can't read at all. 

Instead of investigating and reporting on student discipline; student standards, accountability and chronically disruptive students, a sound first step in addressing those issues, Kent Walz and the Journal spew drivel;

"after-school lessons in respect and self-control."

What they need is some;

after-school lessons in honest to God journalism.