3 ms·

I wonder how much the massive adoption of zero tolerance policies has to do with the name "zero tolerance" itself. It sounds indisputable. Why should we tolerat

by gruseom 13y ago

I wonder how much the massive adoption of zero tolerance policies has to do with the name "zero tolerance" itself. It sounds indisputable. Why should we tolerate things like weapons or drugs in schools? Those things are bad. If you're against "zero tolerance" of them, it sounds like you're in favor of tolerating them. The truth is that there are many ways of not tolerating those things, and "zero tolerance" is an extreme one that causes harm. If it were named more accurately—"extreme enforcement", say—this would be easier to see.

whiddershins 13y ago
Until 1947, the United States had a Secretary of War. Now we have a Secretary of Defense. A lot can be hidden in a name. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_War
- tptacek 13y ago
  The renaming of the Secretary of War to "Secretary of Defense" has an interesting history that is not at all to do with manipulation of the language, but rather the fact that the War Department and the Navy were separate bureaucracies prior to WWII. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rhQc666Sg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rhQc666Sg
njharman 13y ago
It's all to avoid responsibility and blame. Something happens, hysterical parents throw fit, parent/reporter/boss you don't have a policy against that, or you used common sense/judgement. Well fu! Your job/career is over and we are suing/charging you. Or, Why, yes we have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy and I just say no to everything or pass the buck so no one can blame me. Well darn, I guess we'll have to blame rock'n'roll, drugs, or sex then.
- gruseom 13y ago
  You're probably right that that's why administrators like it, but I'm talking about public opinion, which is different. Tacit public support is a necessary ingredient here.
DanBC 13y ago
In the past I would have thought "zero tolerance" meant that all minor bad behaviour was addressed by the school. I can understand why parents would support teachers who want to improve behaviour of pupils. And zero tolerance got a good name after it worked in New York. (Did it work? Or am I wrong? I'm aware of the freakonomics abortion-reduces-crime thing).

by gruseom 13y ago

whiddershins 13y ago

Until 1947, the United States had a Secretary of War. Now we have a Secretary of Defense. A lot can be hidden in a name. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_War http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_War

tptacek 13y ago
The renaming of the Secretary of War to "Secretary of Defense" has an interesting history that is not at all to do with manipulation of the language, but rather the fact that the War Department and the Navy were separate bureaucracies prior to WWII. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rhQc666Sg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rhQc666Sg

njharman 13y ago

It's all to avoid responsibility and blame. Something happens, hysterical parents throw fit, parent/reporter/boss you don't have a policy against that, or you used common sense/judgement. Well fu! Your job/career is over and we are suing/charging you. Or, Why, yes we have a ZERO TOLERANCE policy and I just say no to everything or pass the buck so no one can blame me. Well darn, I guess we'll have to blame rock'n'roll, drugs, or sex then.

gruseom 13y ago
You're probably right that that's why administrators like it, but I'm talking about public opinion, which is different. Tacit public support is a necessary ingredient here.

DanBC 13y ago

In the past I would have thought "zero tolerance" meant that all minor bad behaviour was addressed by the school. I can understand why parents would support teachers who want to improve behaviour of pupils. And zero tolerance got a good name after it worked in New York. (Did it work? Or am I wrong? I'm aware of the freakonomics abortion-reduces-crime thing).