Roots of Youth Violence - Ministry of Children and Youth Services

Volume 3: Community Perspectives Report
What was underlined for us was the result of suspending or
expelling so many students from schools:
• Once expelled or suspended, students who are
already struggling with their academic work
fall further and further behind, until success
becomes impossible.
• Youth in complex-needs neighbourhoods, if
not in school, have limited options and are
most likely to “hang out” with other youth
with similar problems. We actually heard the
original Safe Schools Act referred to as the “Gang
Recruitment Act.”
• Youth expelled from school are often banned
from school property, so even if the school offers
after-school or other social programs, these youth
are unable to access them. This simply makes it
all the more likely that they will drift towards the
streets and become easy prey for gang recruiters.
Because of the timing of our community visits, many of
the viewpoints we heard were based on experiences prior
to the recent amendments to the Education Act that were
designed to correct these problems. The need for formal
reviews of every expulsion, the requirement for alternative
programming for students suspended for more than five
days and restrictions on the use of disciplinary transfers
will, we hope, change the way schools deal with troubled
youth. We believe there is more to be done, however.
For example, students should not have to wait five days
for alternative programming. As an administrator at the
Aboriginal high school in Thunder Bay told us: “We
cannot afford to lose a student for even one day.”
The second problem with the education system is that, within
the disadvantaged communities, staff and administrators
usually do not reflect those communities. One participant
at the Strategizing Minds forum that led to the GYC Report
captured the sense of alienation this way:
“If you are disconnected from something how can you then
be engaged in it, when you are learning about something that
is other than you . . . These students don’t see themselves,
but yet they know that they are there.” (p. 119)
The third systemic problem highlighted in our
Neighbourhood Insight Sessions and the reports concerns
the practice of “streaming” – directing students into
particular courses based on something other than their
abilities and interests. In Ottawa, one student participant
referred to those who engage in this practice as “dream
killers” because of the way they dealt with students from
visible minorities. The GYC Report had this to say:
“Streaming has increasingly become an issue in limiting
the opportunities for higher education among racialized
and marginalized youth. [The For Youth Initiative’s]
report 4 cites a study released by the Coalition of Visible
Minority Women, which reveals that “often times
Black students and parents have found that teachers
and guidance counsellors have expected less from Black
students,andhaveencouragedthemtotakenon-academic
courses or focus on sports suggesting that ‘the student did
not have the ability to go very far.’” (p. 120)
4
This refers to a report published by FYI in 2003, entitled Exploring Empowering
Education for Marginalized Youth in Toronto. To obtain a copy of the report,
contact FYI at fyi@foryouth.ca
16 • Roots Review