Practitioner-Oriented Articles

Interestingly, an issue that is often not addressed by community organizations attempting to dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline is the current lack of educational opportunities within the juvenile justice systems themselves.12 Most reforms focuses on the creation of initiatives that combat the pipeline within schools. However, attacking the problem at the opposite end, outside the school: within the juvenile justice system and even within surrounding urban environments of a disadvantaged student could serve as an effective way to ameliorate the consequences of being funneled into punitive justice systems and pushed out of the classroom.

Two practitioner-oriented articles, Juvenile-Justice System Not Meeting Educational Needs, Report Says by Alyssa Morones and Thoughts on Breaking the School-to-Prison Cycle by Matthew Lynch, highlight the detrimental effects of the school-to-prison pipeline. However, both articles take diverse and distinct approaches. Lynch positions his article in support of strict discipline in schools, stating that many students come from broken home environments and as a result have discipline problems that are in need of remediation.12 Interestingly, Lynch does not critique school discipline policies, but rather argues that they are crucial in order to “preserve the educational experience” and teach young individuals with discipline problems how to behave.12 However, Lynch distinctly objects the use of zero-tolerance policies, as he believes that the removal of disadvantaged youth out of the education system is simply “another form of abandonment” that directly causes the school-to-prison pipeline.12 Thus, Lynch argues that disciplinary policies in schools serve a purpose, but should be handled with precaution. He states that disciplinary policies should be meditative and confront the wider lived issues of students such as poverty and abuse.

On the opposite end, Morones argues that such restorative justice should occur within the juvenile justice system.11 When minority youth enter the juvenile justice system at disproportionate rates their educational opportunities become significantly reduced. Similar to Lynch’s argument, Morones questions how the system is failing to help students who actually do have behavioral issues. The juvenile justice system does not meet the needs of students, just as a punitive classroom does not. Specifically, education within the juvenile justice system has become non-existent. Everyday 70,000 of the nation’s students sit inside juvenile-justice systems without educational opportunity.11 Both articles argue that we have essentially given up on the disadvantaged youth that need remediation, education and structure the most. Students are ill prepared to enter back into educational facilities. Subsequently,once returning to school, students are only to be pushed out by the harsh discipline policies that Lynch advocates against. This ultimately creates a revolving door that shuffles a student in and out of punitive environments. Given the increasing incarceration rates, it is an imperative that students are provided with educational opportunities within the juvenile justice systems.11 Right now, only 9 percent of students within the juvenile system were on track to receive their high school diplomas.11 Ultimately, Morones argues that juvenile justice reform may be the answer to dismantling the school-to-prison pipeline. Both authors highlight the responsibility of the educational system to help students escape their environments and lived experiences. Additionally, both authors emphasize the extreme monetary costs of both the juvenile justice system and zero-tolerance policies. Overall, while the authors approach the school-to-prison pipeline from diverse angles, their arguments are valid and elicit reform on both ends of the pipeline: within juvenile justice centers and within the classroom.

CaliforniaPrison

13