nothin How Should Schools “Restore” Kids Who Attack? | New Haven Independent

How Should Schools Restore” Kids Who Attack?

Aliyya Swaby Photo

Ifill: The system’s stacked against the student.

A black male seventh-grader was considered for expulsion last year for assault using a dangerous weapon — burning a student with a hot screwdriver after heating it with a lighter.

Stupid mistake? Or vicious attack?

Given just this information, participants at the second meeting of a restorative justice” working group disagreed on whether the student who used the screwdriver deserved to be expelled.

A parent argued that the seventh grader might have been playing around with friends and deserved more constructive in-school consequences, while district staff said the safety of the community came first.

The ultimate goal of the group is figure out how to decrease suspensions and expulsions, while increasing methods such as peer mediation that restore” the offender’s relationship with the school community. The teachers union received a $300,000 grant to implement restorative practices in a handful of public schools, part of a larger city initiative to keep troubled kids in school instead of pushing them out into violence.

Cicarella (left) and Velazquez (right).

At the first working group meeting, participants delved into the code of conduct for district schools, discussing potential revisions to make it less punitive and more restorative. At the second meeting, held this past Friday, teachers union President Dave Cicarella, part of the committee the developed the code, explained that the document was written to establish uniform guidelines for all schools to follow, while allowing for administrators’ discretion.

In the past, students could commit the same offense at two different schools, such as starting a fistfight, and would be suspended for five days” at one school but just reprimanded at another, Cicarella said.

At Friday’s meeting, Gemma Joseph Lumpkin, the district’s executive manager of district strategy and coordination, handed out a packet with details on 2014 – 2015 expulsion hearings. The information included the students’ offenses and an administrative summary of each of 31 incidents heard between Aug. 26, 2014 and Jan. 9, 2015. Most personal details, including names and schools, were removed from the summaries.

All participants agreed restorative justice is important. They disagreed on how that would work in practice.

The student who burned his peer might not be a bad kid, parent Megan Ifill argued. The administrative summary given contained so few details that it automatically condemned the student. Some of these could be they’re friends and they’re being absolute knuckleheads,” she said. At the expulsion hearings, the adults speak first and the kid is supposed to sit there getting more and more heated.” By the end, he would be yelling and definitely be expelled,” she said. The system is rigged against the student, so that most people would think, this sounds like a dangerous kid.”

District staff, some of whom were familiar with the particular incident, disagreed with Ifill’s take on the situation. Lumpkin said that details of that particular incident only get worse” in the full report.

Carolyn Ross-Lee, district survey coordinator, said school staff have to protect all students,” especially in a society that believes in suing people.” She said teachers and principals have lived through incidents like those in the packet. These cases happened, and somebody did get hurt,” she said. As a parent, how do I respond to someone doing this to my child?”

I am the parent of a child who is a victim,” Ifill said. But she said she fears the system is stacked against students who are in trouble” or not liked,” who will then be pushed out too easily.”

Lumpkin handed out the state statute on expulsions and asked participants to divide into small groups to discuss the document. Others agreed with Ifill that children are at a disadvantage in the expulsion process, punished for speaking out instead of being heard.

Lobo and Keen: students need to learn how to self-advocate.

Earle Lobo, representing the city’s youth services department, and Julie Keen, a psychologist at Integrated Wellness Group, discussed the power differentials” that may exacerbate that disadvantage in schools, especially with low-income black children and white administrators.

Lobo said racial and cultural differences play a large role in that dynamic: If I say, Miss, you wildin,’ a white administrator is going to say …”

‘Did you just curse at me?’” Keen said, finishing his sentence.

That administrator may not understand the real meaning of the statement: You’re reacting strongly, instead of listening to me in the way that I need.”

It can be internalized as something completely different than what the kid means to say,” Lobo said later, explaining their discussion to the larger group. He said students should be taught to advocate for themselves, way before they get to the point of disciplinary action.

Dolores Garcia-Blocker, district supervisor of guidance and counseling, said one problem with the statute is that it doesn’t include any language on re-entry plans” — How do you bring that kid back after a suspension” for 180 days? Or even three days? Now, students come back from a three-day suspension and are expected to have all their work done, with no formal academic or social support for readjustment, she said.

The state requires local districts to provide at least two hours per day of formal instruction to students who have been expelled — a program called Homebound.” Superintendent Garth Harries and city leaders have been planning to expand the program for at least a year in order to provide either more instruction or more options for these students. Jason Bartlett, the city’s director of youth services, said in an earlier interview that the city and district are workshopping ways to extend instruction from two hours to full days.

Homebound teacher Pat DeLucia said he uses part of his time with his students to talk,” to find out who you are, where you’re going.” Some kids just made a bad mistake and would never do it again,” but they have to spend 180 days out of the classroom.

Transitioning back is the difficulty,” replied Kyisha Velazquez, who runs the local Juvenile Review Board.

Expelled or suspended students can tell when the school community does not necessarily want them back, DeLucia said.

Participants agreed that there is room in the statute to implement restorative practices. Velazquez said adults need to have the behavior we want [students] to imitate.” Ensuring students have adequate resources and support throughout the expulsion process is a way to hold adults accountable.”

Bartlett pointed out rules needing reform: The statue allows New Haven to appoint an officer for the expulsion hearing, and that officer is considered impartial” in the proceedings. What qualifies the hearing officer to have that position?” he said.

Parents also need increased support and access to resources, said JoAnne Wilcox, parent of a student with a history of disciplinary issues. There should be someone there to say, I know what this looks like’” and to help you create a path that’s right for your family.”

At the next meeting, members will delve deeper into individual expulsion cases and talk with a panel of school community members., Lumpkin said.

Tags:

Sign up for our morning newsletter

Don't want to miss a single Independent article? Sign up for our daily email newsletter! Click here for more info.


Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry

Comments

Avatar for Blue

Avatar for Gretchen Pritchard

Avatar for disconnect

Avatar for robn

Avatar for THREEFIFTHS

Avatar for beaverhills

Avatar for Perspective

Avatar for RussellMama

Avatar for Kids First

Avatar for Brutus2011

Avatar for Philippe Egalité

Avatar for Teachergal

Avatar for THREEFIFTHS