![]() The solution, they asserted, was increased resources to support rehabilitative responses such as more guidance counselors, social workers and special clinical schools for the “emotionally maladjusted.” On the other side, educators, academics and mental health professionals called for rehabilitative responses focused on treatment, guidance and the creation of nurturing relationships and child-centered environments. These groups argued that the Progressive Era’s emphasis on child psychology and mental hygiene had led to responses based in “psychiatric mumbo jumbo” that coddled delinquents and emphasized self-expression over traditional academic skills. On one side the grand jury would be joined by conservative politicians and frustrated teachers who called for punitive and coercive responses to prevent and deter unruly behavior. Leibowitz, who according to the The New York Times, knew how to turn a trial into a "public spectacle,” concluded Kessler’s first hearing by calling for a grand jury investigation into crime "in and about schools." Subsequently launched in November of 1957, the grand jury investigation would provide a platform for Leibowitz to rail against the city’s "soft in the head" approach to the problem of disorder in the city’s schools.Īs the grand jury met, over the next few months a debate would play out in the press over the causes and solutions to the problem of juvenile delinquency in schools. Kessler was arrested and eventually found his way into the courtroom of Judge Samuel Leibowitz, a tough-on-crime judge who had long been critical of the city's handling of the "veritable procession of kids" in its criminal courts. The attack was apparently aimed at 16 year-old David Ozersky, who was reported to be partially blinded in the attack. The bottle exploded, splattering the teacher and 18 pupils with corrosive liquid. On the morning of September 19, 1957, seventeen year old Maurice Kessler walked into an American History class at Thomas Jefferson High School in Brooklyn and tossed a bottle of lye. All of this would change following a series of headline grabbing incidents beginning in September of 1957. This system reflected the belief that schools and social welfare agencies had an in loco parentis responsibility for students and thus needed to act as surrogate parents by playing an active and intervening role in their moral development. ![]() At no time would a student be outside of the supervision of a school or custodial institution. At the hearing, the Assistant Superintendent could decide to place the student in a special school for “maladjusted” students or refer them to the Children’s Court for placement. Instead, if a principal was concerned about a student's behavior they could refer them to a hearing with an Assistant Superintendent. Students were pushed out, sent home early or even encouraged to be truant in all sorts of informal ways, but there was no policy allowing a principal to suspend a student's education or remove them from school temporarily. Prior to 1958 in New York City, there was no such thing as a formally sanctioned suspension from school in its current form. The origin story of contemporary suspension policy in New York City clearly suggests otherwise. These answers assume that there is some pedagogical rationale for suspensions, that there is some link between suspensions as a disciplinary tool and ideas and knowledge about what is best for student learning and development. We suspend because the Chancellor’s Regulations require us to. We suspend to address dangerous behavior and keep kids and teachers safe. We suspend to send a message-to other students, to parents, to teachers. We suspend as a form of discipline-to teach a lesson or set a boundary. The responses come quickly and are remarkably consistent. It is seemingly not a hard question for them to answer. “Why do we suspend?” Over the past 3 years, as part of a workshop series on the historical roots of discipline policy in New York City (NYC), I have posed this question to hundreds of educators.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |