An Analysis of Zero Tolerance Weapon Policies Related to the School-to-Prison Pipeline Phenomenon by Cheryl Rosylin McAbee B. S. in Chemical Engineering and Economics, Carnegie Mellon University, 1977 J.D. in Law, Duquesne University, 1983 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the School of Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education University of Pittsburgh 2018 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF EDUCATION This dissertation was presented by Cheryl Rosylin McAbee It was defended on November 26, 2018 and approved by R. Gerald Longo, Clinical Associate Professor, Administrative and Policy Studies Rosalie Smiley, Associate Professor, California State University of Pennsylvania Dissertation Advisor: Noreen Garman, Associate Professor Emeritus, Administrative and Policy Studies Dissertation Co-Advisor: Michael G. Gunzenhauser, Associate Professor and Associate Dean ii Copyright © by Cheryl Rosylin McAbee 2018 iii An Analysis of Zero Tolerance Weapon Policies Related to the School-to-Prison Pipeline Phenomenon Cheryl Rosylin McAbee, JD, Ed.D. University of Pittsburgh, 2018 Pennsylvania schools adopted zero tolerance weapon policies to comply with the federal Gun-Free Schools Act (1994). Weapon definitions in school policies are broader than federal or Pennsylvania statutory definitions, and disproportionately affect racial minority students (Joint State Government Commission, 2016) and low income students and precipitate the school-to- prison pipeline (Giroux, 2003). Twelve Allegheny County school districts’ weapon definitions and high schools were studied utilizing a socio-ecological model to examine external socio-economic status and internal weapon policy (Capp et al., 2017). The purpose of the study was to determine if weapon definitions and memorandum of understanding (MOU) creation and implementation is influenced by socio- economic status and race. Schools’ economic disadvantage was used to designate six as working class and six as affluent. Findings were first, all schools had a weapon policy broader than the Pennsylvania statute. Second, Office for Safe Schools (OSS) Historical Comparison Report Data demonstrated that the working class schools had over four times the arrests as affluent schools while law enforcement was called only twice as many times; working class schools had over four times the referrals to alternate education for disruptive youth, two times the out-of-school suspensions, and five times the expulsions as the affluent schools. Third, no schools were updating policies based on court decisions and interpretation of weapon policies. Fourth, while each district was required to have iv an MOU with local law enforcement and provide explanations to OSS for substantive differences, one district had none, and two districts provided no explanation for differences. Fifth, applying the OSS analyzes to 12 Dauphin County schools revealed similar results, law enforcement was called to the affluent schools almost one-third more, while twice as many students were arrested in the working class schools. The socio-ecological implications are that low income and racial minority students were affected by expansive district weapons policies more than their counterparts in affluent districts and all districts need increased oversight. The number of racial minority students entering the criminal justice system from schools implies that criminal justice reform must be accompanied by educational reform and zero tolerance policies expose schools to claims of educational malpractice. Keywords: zero tolerance policies, Gun-Free Schools Act, weapon policies, socio-ecological approach, memorandum of understanding, discipline, Office for Safe Schools, school safety, local law enforcement, school-to-prison pipeline, cradle-to-prison pipeline, militarization, juvenile justice system, juvenile incarceration, alternative education for disruptive youth, Pennsylvania weapon statute, federal firearm statute, school resource officer, school law, active shooter, racial discrimination, restorative justice, mental health, educational reform, criminal justice reform, educational malpractice, collaboration v Table of Contents List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... IX Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... X Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background of the Study..................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background to My Involvement ......................................................................... 2 1.3 Research Questions Considered ......................................................................... 6 1.4 Overview of Study Methods ................................................................................ 7 1.5 Significance of the Study ..................................................................................... 9 Review of Related Literature .................................................................................... 11 2.1 The School-to-Prison Pipeline Explained ........................................................ 14 2.2 The History and Evolution of the School-to-Prison Pipeline ......................... 17 2.3 Zero Tolerance Policies ..................................................................................... 22 Zero Tolerance Explained............................................................................. 22 Militarization ................................................................................................. 24 Alternative Education for Disruptive Youth............................................... 29 Research Data Collection .......................................................................................... 34 3.1 Research Questions ............................................................................................ 34 3.2 Research Design ................................................................................................. 34 3.3 Limitations and Assumptions ........................................................................... 39 vi Results ......................................................................................................................... 41 4.1 Weapon Data Collection by School District .................................................... 41 Federal Firearm Definition ........................................................................... 42 Pennsylvania Weapon Definition ................................................................. 44 Affluent Schools Weapon Definitions .......................................................... 44 Working Class Schools Weapon Definitions ............................................... 49 Findings ....................................................................................................................... 53 5.1 Comparative Analysis ....................................................................................... 53 Comparison of Allegheny County and Dauphin County School District Weapon Definitions .................................................................................................... 62 Comparison of Allegheny County School District Weapon Definitions to the Pennsylvania Statute............................................................................................ 63 Analysis of 12 Allegheny Co. High Schools by Socio-Economic Status .... 68 Safe Schools Historical Weapon Data Analyzed by Socio-Economic Status ......................................................................................................................... 72 5.2 Memoranda of Understanding With Local Law Enforcement ..................... 79 5.3 Summary ............................................................................................................ 87 Action, Improvement and System Change .............................................................. 90 6.1 Areas for Collaboration .................................................................................... 91 Mental Health Issues and Incarceration ..................................................... 94 6.2 Judicial Influence on School District Weapon Policy ..................................... 96 Memorandum of Understanding ................................................................ 101 6.3 Equity and the School District’s Powers ....................................................... 102 vii Federal Guidance to Ensure Nondiscriminatory Administration of School’s Discretionary Powers ............................................................................................... 105 Power to Reduce Discipline in Lower Socio-Economic Status Schools .. 110 Educational Malpractice ............................................................................. 112 6.4 Future Research ............................................................................................... 116 Appendix A Relevant Caselaw ............................................................................................... 120 Appendix B - IRB Approval .................................................................................................... 126 Appendix C - Permission to Use Joint State Government Commission Data ....................