# Lentis/The School to Prison Pipeline

The "School to Prison Pipeline" is a concept originating in the United States theorizing that the discrepancy in the incarceration rates of disadvantaged youth is due to national policies as well as practices within schools. This chapter explores the history of the School to Prison Pipeline as well as how modern advancements in technology have affected the concept.

## What is the School to Prison Pipeline?

The School to Prison Pipeline refers to disciplinary policies and practices that disproportionately impact students from disadvantaged backgrounds. These policies tend to increase the likelihood of these students suffering academically, or becoming incarcerated later in life. Practices such as zero tolerance policies and placement of police officers in schools continue this pattern. In turn, this results in early exposure to law enforcement for many students, which can cause lasting negative effects.

## Origins

The term “School to Prison Pipeline” was coined during President Nixon’s “War on Drugs” during the late 1970’s. The United States began making stricter drug laws resulting in a nationwide increase in incarcerations. In turn, schools began cracking down harder on minor rule violations via suspensions. Forcing students out of the classroom as punishment increases the likelihood of them ending up in the criminal justice system. This is amplified in underfunded school districts; where there is a lack of qualified teachers and the ability to properly discipline students. In 1994, the Gun-Free Schools Act was implemented nationally. It was the first national Zero Tolerance policy. Under the law, bringing a gun onto school property would result in a mandatory year-long suspension. With the first Zero Tolerance policy in place, the School to Prison Pipeline became a prominent national topic and focus for a variety of social groups across the country. These policies are still being used in modern-day schools and state districts as well as nationwide.

## Current Policies
### Overview

Many current policies within the United States have an effect on the performance of disadvantaged youth and children of color in schools. Two of the most influential policies in effect today are Zero Tolerance policies within schools as well as the implementation of School Resource Officers (SROs) in both primary and secondary schools. Both of these policies have solidified the role of institutional racism within education, perpetuating a cycle that has a net-negative effect on the ability of minority groups to pursue an education as stated by the National Education Association (NEA).

### Zero Tolerance Policy

The NEA recently issued a policy stating that “Zero Tolerance policies mean school disciplinary policies that set predetermined consequences or punishments for specific offenses or rule infractions. Zero Tolerance policies forbid persons in positions of authority from exercising discretion or changing punishments to fit individual circumstances”. The use of Zero Tolerance policies within schools is founded on the principle that a strong law enforcement approach to minor crime will prevent more serious crime from occurring. With punishments generally resulting in suspension/expulsion no matter the infraction, students are often alienated from their peers and driven towards criminal activity in their time outside of structured learning environments.

### Law Enforcement in Schools

School Resource Officers were originally added to schools in order to combat school shootings by having a law-enforcement presence within the school. However, this idea was poorly thought out as a large majority of school shooters are not unknown assailants and instead are a student of the target school. Not only are SROs ineffective for their intended purpose, but their presence is also very harmful to the students they “protect”. Students learn from an early age to fear the presence of law enforcement when they should have very little interaction with any part of the criminal system in their most formative years. Law enforcement in the United States especially has a well-documented history of incorrectly racially profiling Black and Latino students, a trend that has been continued by SROs.

### Effectiveness of Discipline Policies

There is much debate as to whether these policies work or not. For example, the reasoning for the increased implementation of School Resource Officers in schools was to prevent school shootings and violent crimes. However, when comparing schools with and without School Resource Officers, there is little disparity when it comes to violent or drug-related incidents occurring. The only notable difference is a near four times increase in disorderly conduct arrests in schools with SROs. Also, since Nixon’s “War on Drugs”, out-of-school suspensions have more than doubled. Per research conducted by Shoshana Jarvis and Jason Okonofua of The University of California, “African-American students are nearly four times as likely to be suspended from school as Caucasians.” Studies have shown that not only does missing time in school negatively impact academic performance, but also increases the likelihood of the student going to jail in the future.

## Influence of Technology

The technological support disparity has drastically increased during the COVID-19 pandemic and had even shown worrying effects in the years prior. Technological support disparity is the idea that with the recent focus to move a large portion of the average students learning online, many students a part of low-income districts or those who are a part of low-income families are being left behind their more privileged peers. Studies have shown that educational achievement differences are more closely aligned with family income than any other demographic factor, highlighting the importance of a child’s family income in their ability to participate in school and avoid the school-to-prison pipeline. An article from CNN stated that 70% of America’s teachers assigned homework to be completed online with 17% of teenage students being unable to complete assignments due to a lack of technological resources before the pandemic.
The COVID-19 pandemic predictably increased the amount of work assigned to students online, but it also perpetuated the school-to-prison pipeline in less obvious ways. With the introduction of zoom classes as the norm for education during the pandemic, teachers and SROs were given a direct view into a student’s life at home during class time whether or not the student consented. This breach of privacy created the opportunity for school authorities to police the events of their students’ households, often incorrectly leading to visits from Child Protective Services (CPS) and disrupting a child’s life outside of school. Zoom classes are also much more difficult to attend for students without WiFi access at home which results in attendance punishments disproportionately being given to low-income students.
A modern look at the effect of technology on the school to prison pipeline can be seen in the implementation of facial recognition software within schools. This surprising and unnecessary security feature has seen a surprising amount of support from technology security companies in recent years with companies such as RealNetworks even offering to upgrade their current security systems to include new facial recognition software for free for K-12 institutions. This software tracks a student’s biometric data for 7+ hours they attend school, a massive invasion of their privacy given that this data is often stored and could be vulnerable to leaks or hacks. Another concern with this technology is how ineffective it can be. Even ignoring instances when students may try and purposely trick the software, children are constantly growing and having their features change through puberty which would affect the accuracy of the facial recognition software. Along with student’s features changing, the databases of this software often come from police departments which are overpopulated with people of color. This discrepancy can lead to the students of color being biasedly targeted and discriminated against, furthering the disproportionate amount of minorities involved in the school to prison pipeline. With the consequences of a false match being possibly traumatic for an innocent student being falsely accused, it seems that the risks of implementing AI-based recognition software far outweigh the benefits.

## Alternative Solutions

The institution of the “School to Prison Pipeline” has created a culture in which the youth of minority communities are expected to fail in the education system and be raised through the penal system. Alternative efforts must be pushed so perceptions around youth in minority communities regarding education and their future can change. Banning the use of suspensions and expulsions would minimize the number of time students have in encountering trouble in their communities or being exposed to bad influences. Keeping students in school would give faculty the opportunity to pinpoint issues in the class and work on creating a space where the student is able to effectively learn in a classroom setting. If schools decide to ban suspensions/expulsions, they must supplement this change with increased funding to pay for well-educated teachers and guidance counselors that are willing to spend extra time with students to help them succeed. The expectation of teachers, guidance counselors, and faculty is to foster a strong connection with students so students gain trust and believe faculty are willing to help them graduate with a high school diploma. One step in creating a strong connection between teachers and students is to implement restorative practices. According to McClure, restorative practices ”can dramatically improve the school climate and strengthen the social and emotional skills of young people and adults”. Introducing circles into classrooms would push for students to be vulnerable and explain how they feel in a positive way such that they are able to express themselves. This not only serves as a tool for teachers to guide students in any trouble they are having but also gives students autonomy over their feelings and is a way for students to take control of their education. With faculty spending more time on restorative practices and creating stronger relationships with students, there should be less of a need for school resource officers to be stationed in schools. According to Kendrick Washington, “the arrest rates for schools with SROs were 3.5 times the rate of those without SROs, and in some states, the arrest rates are as much as eight times the rate of schools without”. The concentration of these arrests is based on non-serious incidents such as tardiness, bad grades, and disorderly conduct like cursing. This leads to blurred lines between students learning how to behave in a school setting and society branding them as delinquents. School resources officers expose youth to the penal system earlier than schools without them and don’t give students the opportunity to live and learn.

## References

* ↑ American Civil Liberties Union. (n.d.). School-to-prison pipeline. https://www.aclu.org/issues/juvenile-justice/school-prison-pipeline.
* ↑ Hermosura, L. (2016, April 25). The School to prison pipeline is a direct policy descendant of Nixon's War on Drugs. UT News. https://news.utexas.edu/2016/04/25/school-to-prison-pipeline-caused-by-war-on-drugs-policy/.
* ↑ Silva, M. (2018, May 4). Zero tolerance: School discipline or prison manufacturer? Education Reform Past and Present. https://commons.trincoll.edu/edreform/2018/05/zero-tolerance-school-discipline-or-prison-manufacturer/.
* ↑ POLICY STATEMENT ON DISCIPLINE AND THE SCHOOL-TO-PRISON PIPELINE - 2021 NEA Annual Meeting. (2021). Retrieved 9 December 2021, from https://ra.nea.org/delegate-resources/policy-statement-on-discipline/
* ↑ Learningforjustice.Org, 2021, False Sense of Security https://www.learningforjustice.org/sites/default/files/general/False%20Sense%20of%20Security%20-%20TT50.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2021.
* ↑ Theriot, M. (2009). School resource officers and the criminalization of student behavior. Journal Of Criminal Justice, 37(3), 280-287. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2009.04.008
* ↑ Arends, B. (2019, October 16). Black kids are more likely to be suspended than white kids over the same behavior. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2019/10/16/black-kids-more-likely-to-be-suspended-than-white-kids-over-same-behavior/.
* ↑ Arends, B. (2019, October 16). Black kids are more likely to be suspended than white kids over the same behavior. New York Post. https://nypost.com/2019/10/16/black-kids-more-likely-to-be-suspended-than-white-kids-over-same-behavior/.
* ↑ Bridging the Technological Divide in Education - Harvard Political Review. (2020). Retrieved 9 December 2021, from https://harvardpolitics.com/education-tech-gaps/
* ↑ Nickelsburg, M. (2018). Safety over privacy? RealNetworks to offer free facial recognition technology to K-12 schools. Retrieved 9 December 2021, from https://www.geekwire.com/2018/realnetworks-debuts-facial-recognition-software-k-12-schools-raising-ethical-questions/
* ↑ LDF. (n.d.). Dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline. Retrieved December 9, 2021, from https://www.naacpldf.org/wp-content/uploads/Dismantling_the_School_to_Prison_Pipeline__Criminal-Justice__.pdf.
* ↑ McClure, L. (2016, October 10). Bringing restorative practices to your school. Edutopia. Retrieved December 9, 2021, from https://www.edutopia.org/article/bringing-restorative-practices-to-your-school-laura-mcclure.
* ↑ Washington, K. (2021, May 24). School resource officers: When the cure is worse than the ... Retrieved December 9, 2021, from https://www.aclu-wa.org/story/school-resource-officers-when-cure-worse-disease.