By the time the holiday recess in our schools is over, one month will have passed since two teachers were raped in their classrooms and another teacher brutally assaulted by the leader of a publicly funded community group in the Bronx. As on previous occasions when the city was shocked by school violence, a certain ritual followed -- a ritual which included newspaper editorials, a denunciation of the violence by the Mayor, and an announcement by the Chancellor (and the Board of Education) that violence would not be tolerated and that specific measures would soon be announced to insure greater security systems in schools. The question, after this new round of violence, of whether this time action will replace earlier promises remains unanswered.
The Chancellor has appointed a special committee on school security which includes representatives of the United Federation of Teachers, the Council of Supervisors and Administrators, the Police Department, and his own staff This committee should be making some recommendations soon, especially on the question of securing buildings from outside intruders. The intruder is an important part of the problem, as recent assaults clearly show. However, the greatest incidence of school violence does not stem from outside intruders, but from students within the school. Security measures designed to keep intruders out are, of course, necessary, but the major problem must not be ignored.
In 1967 the UFT asked the Board of Education to adopt a clear policy on the "disruptive child." It was pointed out that a single student could, through violent behavior, usurp the full attention of both the teacher and the students; that no education was possible under these conditions; and that such students frequently presented a danger to both themselves and to those around them. We asked that, after all possible means had been exhausted in trying to adjust some students to the regular school problem, other facilities are made available to them. (It is interesting to note that the success that some recently appointed black principals have had in keeping their schools free of violence has been due to their willingness to remove disruptive and violent students even when such removal was contrary to Board of Education policy.
In 1967 the old Board of Education used the "disruptive child issue to pit minority groups against the union. The existence of a large number of such students was vehemently denied. Teachers were charged with provoking most of the incidents of violent behavior by students, and the UFT was accused of seeking to expel thousands of minority group students from our public schools.
In recent months, however, there has been a dramatic change of attitude regarding the disruptive child -- partly as a result of an evaluation of the Head Start programs throughout the United States which showed that the programs have had little or no impact on the children participating in them. There was great concern in educational circles as to the reasons for the apparent failure. Recently officials of the National Institute of Mental Health expressed the judgement that the Head Start program may have suffered because of the presence of large numbers of children who are victims of a disease known as "hyperkinesis" -- children deeply disturbed by what the officials call "inner tornadoes."
The chief of the child research branch of the National Institute said that 11 % to 14% of children in normal samples have cases of hyperkinesis "sufficiently extreme to require special handling." The National Institute is allocating nearly $1 million in grants for testing the possible efficacy of drugs, including amphetamines, in hyperkinetic children. While the use of drugs in such cases has stirred and will continue to stir widespread controversy, the facts about the disease can no longer be ignored.
If the schools are to become places where teachers can teach, and the overwhelming majority of students learn, Chancellor Scribner must enunciate a clear policy by which every effort is made to retain every student in a regular school setting. But, when the effort fails, as it will in some cases, students, parents, and teachers should know that those students regularly and frequently involved in violence and disruption, will have to be separated from the group. Such a policy should be put forward by the Chancellor now, while the Legislature is still in session, so that the necessary legal changes may be made without our having to wait yet another year.