This isn’t intended to be an indictment or exoneration of Grant Washburn, the once-suspended Los Alamos football player whose trace-marijuana-laced plastic baggie spawned an online petition and raging local debate about the effectiveness of the school district’s zero-tolerance policy.
Washburn appealed the decision, had a hearing in front of the Los Alamos school board Tuesday night, and had his yearlong suspension from participating in sports and extracurricular activities vacated by a 3-2 vote. He’ll return to practice Wednesday.
The school looked at the preponderance of evidence instead of sticking with its black-and-white rulebook. It was the right call considering a battery of drug tests after the fact supported Washburn’s claims of innocence.
The board’s decision validates everything we know about parenting, punishment and the psychology behind it.
Many times, educators equate their jobs with parenting. It’s an implied leap. They’re dealing with impressionable kids, most of them well-intentioned, who rely on them for guidance to an extent. Sometimes those students interact with these teachers, coaches and administrators more than their parents.
They are cogs in a system that doesn’t always recognize or care about the individual. It’s how cases like Washburn’s can slip through the systemic cracks.
This was an instance when reasoning trumped rubber-stamping.
The school took a parental approach to Washburn’s case. If a parent suspected his or her daughter of dabbling in drugs, they would thoroughly deliberate their course of action.
Undoubtedly, there’d be a punitive component, but there would also be a compassionate one. That compassion can often times be the overriding factor in correcting the misbehavior.
With zero-tolerance policies, there’s no room for empathy. It’s an understandable consequence of schools trying to safeguard themselves against accusations of favoritism or preferential treatment.
The danger in this draconian, one-size-fits-all style of punishment is it often has an inverse effect.
The American Psychological Association published a study in 2006 that zero-tolerance policies failed “to increase the consistency of discipline across student groups.”
Cecil Reynolds, the task force chair, notes these policies “may exacerbate the normal challenges of adolescence and possibly punish a teenager more severely than warranted.”
There is general consensus among psychologists that an authoritative approach is the preferred parenting style. Authoritative figures establish rules they expect their children to abide by, but they’re more democratic and willing to listen.
When the child makes a mistake, the emphasis is on nurturing and forgiving rather than punishment.
In Los Alamos’ case, this was an instance when it could have imposed an inflexible, because-I-said-so approach. Instead it chose that, at this crucial juncture in Washburn’s life, the best course of action was remedial, not punitive.