The Broken Classroom Theory

Theres still one left!! Let's smash it!!

A recent Huffington Post article does an excellent job explaining all the reasons that zero tolerance policies tend to fail. As I was reading it I started thinking about about a chapter I read in a book called Freakonomics.

Freaknomics was one of the most influencial books I've ever read in terms of changing the way I look at the world but the chapter that really stuck with me discussed the concept of the Broken Window Theory. The theory also gets a interesting treatment in The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell.

The Broken Window Theory goes like this:

You are walking by a old abandoned building. The building is obviously deserted and decrepit, the sidewalks are cracked, the walls are stained with graffiti and nearly half of the windows are completely shattered. You notice a chuck of concrete sitting next to your foot. You take a glance around and realize that if you were to throw that rock into one of the still intact windows, nobody would ever know. How likely would you be to smash a window, or at least throw the rock?

Now imagine the same building, still deserted, but now the building has been kept clean looking. The windows are all intact, and graffiti that has been painted on it has been removed and there have been attempts to fix any cracks in the sidewalk that may have formed. You have the same chunk of concrete in your hand and are still the only person around. Now how likely are you to throw the rock at the building?

According to the theory, people constantly monitor their surroundings to determine the social norms of that place. In a surrounding that people feel is already negative, they are more likely to act negatively. In a positive and protective surrounding they are more likely to protect the things and people around them.

Think about how a riot breaks out, all it takes is one person to begin tipping over trashcans, and as people see that act going unpunished the violence can spread very quickly.

New York City famously employed this theory in order to turn around the rise in crime in the 1980's. By increasing enforcement of small crime (like turnstile jumping) they were able to show that no small crime would go unpunished and therefore would deter more people from committing that same crime. By whitewashing graffiti immediately after it was finished, they took away the incentive of those that would tag those areas.

Zero Tolerance policies seem to be based around a similar method, however they have perverted the very aspect that makes it work. The theory does not call for every small crime to be punished the same as every large crime, simply that it be punished. The turnstile jumpers were not treated to the same punishment as someone who robbed the local convenience store, but instead was attempting to show that even a small crime cannot be overlooked.

I feel schools should take on this same mentality. Instead of treating a child who brought a LEGO toy holding a gun to school like a columbine shooter they should punish him in a manner that is more fitting to the crime. Students are not criminals. They are not in jail and should not be treated as such. We expect them to enjoy going to school and then arrest them for doodling on a desk. 

As we continue our forward thinking about the method in methods used to educate our students, we need to address other reason they don't want to come to school, including some of the more inane discipline policies.

This post expresses the thoughts of the author alone and is not indicative of the thoughts of the authors employers or any school district or school.