Sunday, December 13, 2009

Safer than at home?

Safer than at home?--The Tennessean provides lots of inches to push Schools Under Surveillance: Cultures of Control in Public Education by Vanderbilt Professor Torin Monahan. A lot of 'duh' statements in this overview such as:

"Generally speaking," [Monahan] said, "surveillance is not good for preventing crime. It's more useful for catching people after the fact."

But this statement certainly wasn't.
"Schools are some of the safest places you can be," Monahan said. Students are "significantly safer there than on the streets or at home." [Emphasis added]

Add this to the already growing pile of "expert" statements that are being collected to prove that government knows better than parents how to keep children safe and raise them correctly.

Another take on school safety: School Choice Reduces Crime, Increases College-Attendance...: According to Harvard researcher, David Deming:
Seven years after random assignment, lottery winners have been arrested for fewer and less serious crimes, and have spent fewer days incarcerated… The reduction in crime persists through the end of the sample period, several years after enrollment in the preferred school is complete. The effects are concentrated among African-American males whose ex ante characteristics define them as “high risk.”
Maybe we should say YES to choice so we can save that $2.2 million in security costs for curriculum, paying good teachers well or maybe even fixing a roof or two.

No comments: