There’s hidden danger in No Child Left Behind

During the first months of President Bush’s administration he spoke of the “soft bigotry of low expectations” which he suggested was responsible for the educational achievement gap between white and minority students. What resulted was a controversial and often maligned effort at reform known as No Child Left Behind. The law created achievement standards for students starting in grade three and continuing through high school. Schools that failed to meet standards, or to make progress, were subject to corrective measures including the loss of funding and the loss of students to school districts that were succeeding.

Congress and the next president will consider the reauthorization of NCLB. As that process approaches, it is important to note a little known provision of NCLB that may be making America’s schools less safe.

The law allows parents to remove their children from schools that have been designated “persistently dangerous.” The federal government mandated that each state establish criteria for designating schools as persistently dangerous.

In Pennsylvania, based on a school’s enrollment, a specific number of dangerous incidents can result in the label of persistently dangerous. For instance, a school with 1,000 students that has 20 or more dangerous incidents is designated persistently dangerous. A dangerous incident is defined as possession of a weapon that results in arrest or a violent incident (homicide, sexual assault, kidnapping, robbery, and assault) resulting in arrest. As of 2006-2007 there were nine persistently dangerous schools in Pennsylvania, all in Philadelphia.

Since the enactment of NCLB, Ohio has not designated a single school as persistently dangerous. Ohio, Pennsylvania and every other state have separate thresholds for violent and weapon-related incidents. The New York Times reported that a school with 1,000 students in Ohio could, within one year, experience four homicides and seize weapons from 19 students and still not be labeled persistently dangerous.

Although school violence has declined, including a one-half percent decline in assaults on teachers, there is concern that the decline is more a reflection of under-reporting than an actual decline in violence. The U.S. Department of Education, Office of Inspector General has found that only eight states reported having a persistently dangerous school; and in 2007 only 46 schools in the entire country were considered persistently dangerous. None of those schools were in Los Angeles, Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland or Miami.

Weapons-related offenses

There is no incentive for school administrators to report incidents that may reflect poorly on their schools.

A 2006 National Center for Education Statistics report found a dramatic decline in serious school-related violent crime. In 2003, there were six incidents of violence for every 1,000 students. In 2004, there were only four incidents per 1,000 students. Is school related violent crime on the decline or are school districts failing to report it?

The under-reporting of violent crime results in the public, particularly parents, not receiving reliable information about the safety of their community schools. Under-reporting also reduces a district’s eligibility for funding for school violence prevention programs.

The stigma attached to the label of persistently dangerous appears to be putting students at-risk. Some members of Congress suggest a new name will solve the problem. However, real change will not come with merely relabeling a miniscule number of schools. Real change will come with comprehensive, standardized reporting requirements and adequate funding to address the needs of those districts that are not making the grade.

X Matthew T. Mangino is the former district attorney of Lawrence County and a feature columnist for the Pennsylvania Law Weekly. He can be reached at matthewmangino@aol.com.