Re: “State of WA schools: Too many kids are absent, too many on phones” (Jan. 16, Opinion):
Now we have the authority to ban telephones in school rooms, however we hesitate to take action as a result of enforcement would require disciplining college students who refuse to conform. That self-discipline might escalate to suspensions for repeated defiance, and college leaders stay deeply involved about contributing to the “school-to-prison pipeline.”
Equally, state regulation permits courts to fantastic mother and father for power truancy, but this software is never used, largely as a result of issues about racially disparate impacts.
These issues are well-intentioned, and the will to keep away from racism at school self-discipline is comprehensible. However intent and outcomes aren’t the identical. When insurance policies designed to keep away from inequitable punishment lead colleges to tolerate absenteeism and in-class disengagement, the result’s that many minority college students miss instruction, fail to grasp core expertise and graduate much less ready to compete academically or within the labor market.
A system that avoids uncomfortable enforcement right now however produces predictably worse outcomes tomorrow must be judged by its outcomes, not its intentions. Avoiding disparate self-discipline can not come at the price of accepting disparate outcomes.
Jeff Nguyen, Seattle
