I learned a new acronym today, STPP. It stands for school to prison pipeline, a summary of how the current educational system seems to funnel certain types of students directly to prisons. I feel simultaneously heartbroken and justified. Part of the reason I began my PhD journey is because I was working as a middle school reading specialist, and I was worried that I didn't know all I needed to know to help my students. I am a white female, and the majority of my students were male students of color reading below grade level. They were frustrated. Many of them were ready to give up, and I was worried that I didn't have the necessary credentials to get them to stay the course. I knew that the demographics of the average prison looked very similar to the demographics of my classroom, but I didn't have the statistics to back up the connection between the lack of ability to read on grade level and the probability of ending up in prison.
In February of this year the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) passed a resolution on dismantling the school to prison pipeline. The resolution cited research that shows correlations between school practices and the likelihood that certain demographics of students will go almost directly from school to prison. For anyone who has been paying attention to social justice issues over the past decade, this information should not come as a surprise. The purpose of the resolution is to provide a united front for all stakeholders to work together and find the best ways to address the issue.
After the publication of the resolution, two NCTE blogs were devoted to the topic. The first one, by Llmarys Caraballo, talked about the shared responsibility of all educational stakeholders in addressing this issue. She opened with an example of a school administrator who viewed a student's path to prison as inevitable. Many educators blame students' home environments for both their current educational problems and their future trajectory. While home factors do play a huge role in students' development, that does not release schools from the responsibility of doing everything in their power to help students find a productive path in life. It is essential for educational systems and individual teachers to examine the long term impact of their policies.
The second blog, by Jamal Cooks, focused primarily on community support and removal of zero-tolerance policies in schools. He also pointed out the important role that literacy educators play, which I strongly agree with.
While I will continue to advocate for big picture changes, there are a couple things that teachers can do on a smaller scale that can still have a big impact. The biggest thing that needs to change is people's attitudes, and so I'm sharing two blogs that each advocate for rethinking how we approach students who are not doing well in school.
The first one, by Rebecca Alber, talks about students with behavior problems and encourages teachers to be curious, not furious with these kids. Alber points out that when students misbehave it is usually a call for help. Teachers should work to create a caring classroom environment where students understand that the focus is on their well-being. A curious teacher tries to find the underlying issues that create disruptive behavior and seeks to help, rather than simply punish, students.
The second blog, by Andrew Miller, focuses on grading practices and advocates for a do no harm approach to grading. Again, the focus is on the underlying reason for a student's poor performance, not the punitive power of grades. Grades are a barometer and a communication device. They are not meant to be used for punishment.
Fully dismantling the school to prison pipeline will require large scale effort from many stakeholders, but there are lots of small things that any teacher can do to help contribute to this necessary social change.
