With media coverage of school shootings in areas such as Oakland
and Los Angeles, parents and students might be surprised to hear
there are no
”
persistently dangerous
”
schools in the state.
According to the federal No Child Left Behind Act, or NCLB,
schools considered persistently dangerous must allow students to
transfer to schools that are not dangerous.
With media coverage of school shootings in areas such as Oakland and Los Angeles, parents and students might be surprised to hear there are no “persistently dangerous” schools in the state.
According to the federal No Child Left Behind Act, or NCLB, schools considered persistently dangerous must allow students to transfer to schools that are not dangerous.
The fact that no schools in the state are considered persistently dangerous can be attributed to the fact that the state calls for a school to meet the definition for three straight years, something that’s not possible since NCLB is less than two years old, said Jean Burns Slater, superintendent of the San Benito High School District.
Each state determines the definition of persistently dangerous, and California’s rests on the number of violent criminal offenses and expulsions at a school. While school shootings are played up in the media, educators argue most safety issues involve vandalism, truancy and fights.
“With shootings at schools – if they aren’t addressed or taken care of, I can see how they can be dangerous schools,” Gutierrez said. “What we have is fighting every once in a while, which does not constitute by definition a dangerous school.”
Educators believe San Benito County is safer than other counties in the state. People in the county “don’t live in a stereotypical urban” school area, said Peter Gutierrez, assistant superintendent of the Hollister School District.
“The city and police department have helped to make the city safer, which means the schools will be safer,” Gutierrez said.
According to California’s definition, a state public elementary or secondary school is considered to be persistently dangerous if each of the following conditions exist for three consecutive fiscal years: the school has a gun-free violation or a violent crimes offense has been committed and the school has expelled students for a number of offenses. The number of expulsions must exceed one expulsion for every 100 students enrolled, or 1 percent.
The U.S. Department of Education is expected to approve or deny definitions submitted by the states sometime this fall. The point of the requirement is to ensure students are being educated in a safe environment so they can concentrate on academics, according to the U.S. Department of Education Web site.
Educators and parents argue California’s two conditions are too restrictive because a broader definition of persistently dangerous would have triggered too many transfers and bad publicity for schools.
Others argue the requirement will cause schools to stop expelling students to stay below the 1 percent expulsion threshold.
Gutierrez disagrees because the State Education Code determines when a student is to be expelled.
“It’s set out by law when a student has to be recommended for expulsion and when a student has to be expelled by the Board (of Trustees),” he said.
Neither district in the county is close to the 1 percent threshold according to the latest statistics from 2000-01.
The biggest safety issues San Benito High School faces is knife possession, according to Slater. Last school year, the school expelled three students for the infraction.
“Kids just aren’t waking up to what they have,” Slater said.
In the past, school districts would not report statistics accurately, but California has more clearly defined categories as of late, Gutierrez said.
Many educators hope the federal requirement will force schools to keep track of records more accurately that could ultimately help prevent crime.
