Keep schools safe but apply law fairly
When the former provincial Conservative government passed the Safe Schools Act in 2000, supporters and critics were typically polarized. One side supported the tough new law, which imposed stiff penalties in the form of suspensions and expulsions for behaviour such as bringing a weapon to school, dealing drugs or assault. The other side felt that the law focused too much on “ zero tolerance” and not enough on allowing school board officials to consider “ mitigating circumstances.” The recent release of statistics compiled by the Ontario education ministry detailing the number of suspensions and expulsions before and after the law came into effect has not made the picture much clearer. Instead, they raise deeply troubling questions about how fairly the rules are applied from one school board to the next.
Also, the report shows that the number of suspensions, which can last up to 20 school days, has risen dramatically across the province, up almost 50,000 from 113,778 since the act came into force in 2001. Even more startling, the rate of expulsions, which can last up to a full school year, has risen sharply, from just 106 province- wide before the act came into effect to 1,909 in the 2003- 2004 school year.
Education Minister Gerard Kennedy is right to express concern over the large range of suspension rates across Ontario, from a low of 0.5 per cent at the York Catholic District School Board to 36.1 per cent at the SuperiorGreenstone District School Board, northeast of Thunder Bay. Surely, students in Nipigon and Terrace Bay are not that much more unruly than students in Markham and Richmond Hill.
Also shocking, special- needs students with learning disabilities or behaviour problems accounted for 18 per cent of all suspensions, despite comprising less than 10 per cent of the student population. In his final report in July as head of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, Keith Norton attacked the Safe Schools Act for unfairly targeting black youth and students with disabilities, although he admitted he could only cite anecdotal evidence in making the charge. The commission also launched a probe into the Toronto District School Board’s discipline policy. In a settlement agreement signed earlier this month, the board said it would direct school principals to look for other alternatives to discipline. More important, the Toronto board also agreed to begin collecting racebased statistics on suspensions and expulsions. Having solid numbers is essential to determine whether bias in any form exists. Other school boards should consider collecting their own data. Kennedy is wisely taking a prudent go- slow approach. He needs time to digest these numbers and their implications before offering change to make the law work better. The Ontario government is conducting a review of the law, including holding public hearings. Two hearings will be held this week in the Greater Toronto Area. Whatever comes out of the review, the Ontario government must put two guiding principles above all else: All children have a right to a safe school environment, free of weapons, violence and intimidation; and the act must be applied in a manner that does not unfairly target any group.