This is wrong on many levels. Here are some problems. 1a. This policy favors parents who can pick up and leave a school (and ship their kid somewhere else) if

This is wrong on many levels. Here are some problems. 1a. This policy favors parents who can pick up and leave a school (and ship their kid somewhere else) if they're not happy with it. For low income parents, school often doubles as day care and this may not be feasible. 1b. We are ignoring the reason why this school might be failing your kid. Maybe it's a bad school. Maybe your kid has an undiagnosed learning disability. If it's the latter, and we flood the hardest-to-teach students to the best schools, what happens? In real life, schools have to worry about composing teachable classrooms, and this policy is a great way to destoy that balance. 2. This policy, in practice, will likely prove to be both sexist and racist. Boys are WAY more likely to disrupt classrooms especially at a young age. This policy is a good way to segregate the sexes. Not that that's necessarily bad, but certainly its an undeclared side effect. On the race front, black kids are way more likely to be punished harshly for similar offenses as white kids. Who determines what is disruptive and what's kids being kids? Why on earth you think any (every??) teacher is qualified to make these distinctions is beyond me. When you're talking about public dollars, this matters. 3a. Please show me a successful school where this policy is 100% implemented. It's absurd. For teenagers, you are dealing with people at the most emotionally volatile time of their life. Any school system should seek to first serve the student, and this policy flatly fails that test. Also, why just physical assault against teachers? What about physical assault against other students? How about sexual assault? Hate crimes ok? How about libel or slander? Kids, it turns out, will be kids. There's a reason we don't let them vote or drive or buy guns. Zero-tolerance policies are unlikely to be enforceable without devastating effects on outcomes. 3b. A 1-strike policy of expulsion for outbursts will guarantee a higher dropout rate, which costs taxpayers (that's you) hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost tax revenue over the dropout's lifetime. Still a great long-term idea? I could go on.