The Minnesota legislature is doing a long list of unwise things this session, but the Safe and Supportive Minnesota Schools Act – HF 826 / SF 783 (SSMSA) – exemplifies and crystalizes what’s wrong with so much of recent legislation on societal issues. Not only is it costly and ineffective, I believe it is actually destructive of its purported ends. This is not serious lawmaking, but a vehicle to make legislators and voters feel good about having “done something”. It is law not as a sober, thoughtful action, but as a magic elixir to cure fashionable ills, without regard to cost or likely unintended consequences.
We all know that kids can be cruel. Everyone I know has at least one story from childhood about some sort of abuse in the schoolyard. Boys, girls, grade school or high school, public or private – it doesn’t matter. Kids in school are a microcosm of society, but without the skill and wisdom to deal with conflicts and disappointments. They don’t yet have adult understanding, and adult self-discipline. They have not yet learned that living together in peace is usually far more important than getting your way. They tend to shoot from the hip, and ask questions later. They’re kids. They’re learning.
Like it or not, working through these conflicts is an unpleasant, but necessary, part of childhood. Human beings don’t learn well from books, or from instruction. They learn by doing. They repeat what works. They learn from the pain of making mistakes not to repeat them. Adult supervision is helpful in guiding that process, and in some cases can smooth the path, but no parent, no teacher, no playground supervisor can hope to eliminate kids’ conflict. It is a fact of life and a necessary rite of passage. Kids have to learn to deal with one another. It’s like gravity. You may not like it, but there is no alternative.
Teachers, administrators, parents, know this. They also know that every child is different. Every school is different. Different situations are treated differently in different places. This is both necessary and good. The flexibility to respond according to the good judgement of those closest to the situation is essential for keeping a balance between compassion and good order. Parents and school officials consult each other and determine what to do. I can’t imagine wanting to handle it any other way.
Enter the Minnesota legislature.
Legislators are not advisers who sit down over coffee to discuss problems and offer ideas and resources to those responsible. Legislators write law. Law is imposed on everyone – statewide.
Vocal activists have convinced legislators that “Bullying” is a serious problem, and of course the state legislature should impose a “solution” to fix it.
The Safe and Supportive Minnesota Schools Act – HF 826 / SF 783 is a 19 page marvel. The SSMSA repeals and replaces this statute:
121A.0695 SCHOOL BOARD POLICY; PROHIBITING INTIMIDATION AND BULLYING.
Each school board shall adopt a written policy prohibiting intimidation and bullying of any student. The policy shall address intimidation and bullying in all forms, including, but not limited to, electronic forms and forms involving Internet use.
The SSMSA will not eliminate conflicts or “bullying” behavior. Even its most ardent supporters would probably admit this. Kindness and civility cannot be compelled through law. I believe that the SSMSA won’t eliminate “bullying” behavior any more than No Child Left Behind eliminated academic disparities. Gravity is not trumped by legislative intent.
The SSMSA will, however, reduce the teacher-time available for teaching by mandating a long list of actions that educators must take. There are reports to be generated, statewide and local bureaucracies that must be set up, and specific types of student conflict that must be managed in prescribed ways. Numerous written policies must be developed. The definition of “bullying” is broadened to the point where it is hard to imagine any offensive behavior that is NOT covered:
Subd. 3. …(d) Intimidating, threatening, abusive, or harassing conduct may involve, but is not limited to, conduct that is directed at a student or students based on a person’s actual or perceived race, ethnicity, color, creed, religion, national origin, immigration status, sex, age, marital status, familial status, socioeconomic status, physical appearance, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, academic status, disability, or status with regard to public assistance, age, or any additional characteristic defined in chapter 363A.
It seems to me that yelling “your mother wears army boots” across the playground would run afoul of this law.
Nor does the SSMSA end at the edge of the schoolyard. It reaches into the homes of students by “encouraging” school districts to “formally adopt and implement a parent and family involvement policy”, including promoting “parenting skills”. Do we really want our school districts telling us how to be parents?
The worst part is that the legislation actually destroys the very sense of ownership and personal responsibility that is essential to handling conflicts sensibly and ensuring that children learn from them. Anyone who runs an organization knows how destructive it can be to tell people you don’t trust them, take away their sense of ownership, and give their responsibilities to someone else. The SSMSA does this to parents, teachers, administrators, and worst of all, to students. The personal responsibility of handling conflicts and behaving well is replaced with mandatory policy boundaries administered by state and local boards. Effort and creativity in solving behavioral problems is no longer required or even wanted. The new regimen is to observe, note, count and report. Follow the rules. Everyone becomes a bureaucrat.
This legislation is far worse than doing nothing. It ignores the individual nature of schoolyard conflict and its handling. It ignores the protests of school officials who have to deal with the costs of administering statewide standards and reporting. It takes from teachers, parents, and students the freedom and responsibility to handle their own problems, and replaces it with mandates and bureaucratic rules.
Quick! Do something!
Nineteen pages of micromanagement might solve the politicalproblem, but it will not help our students.
Our legislature is society in microcosm, too. Our legislators reflect us. They reflect our character, our wishes, our foibles and our failures. They often grandstand to attract our favor, and our votes. It is up to us to want what is wise. It is up to us to see through the grandstanding and pandering.
The SSMSA is a good example of political correctness run amok. No one wants to support “bullying”. Imposing state “control” on schools seems like a reasonable thing to do, as long as you ignore the cost, and ignore the fact that mandates will accomplish nothing of value, while undermining the very character, sense of ownership and personal responsibility required to handle the issue.
The law is not a magic elixir. Passing a law imposes permanent and inflexible burdens on those who have to implement and enforce it. Mandating the impossible simply erodes respect for the law. Educators have enough to do without being the “crash test dummies” for our legislators in their attempt to “do something”.
Take Action.
Call your legislator and remind him or her that the legislature’s job does not include reaching inside every classroom in the state and micromanaging student behavior problems. Adult understanding should know better, and adult self-discipline should prevent legislators from butting in where they are neither wanted nor beneficial.
Get involved. Be a serious participant in the writing of our law. You can find your legislator here: http://www.leg.state.mn.us/leg/districtfinder.aspx
