This Long-Neglected Law Can Help Parents Get Their Kids Out of Violent Schools
Despite persistent violence in schools, very few states designate schools as "persistently dangerous."

On Wednesday, the Department of Education published a letter reminding states of a little-known school choice provision that allows students attending dangerous public schools to enroll in another public school or charter school in their district.
The provision, called the Unsafe School Choice Option, was originally passed as part of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act and was continued under the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act. The law allows students attending a school deemed "persistently dangerous," as well as students who were victims of violent crimes at school, to transfer out and into another school in their district. However, the law has gone largely unenforced.
In all, just eight states had ever designated a school as persistently dangerous, according to a 2019 analysis from education news outlet The 74. Of those eight states, only New York and Pennsylvania have made more than 100 designations. Why have so few schools received this designation? Since individual states were allowed to define persistently dangerous themselves, most have chosen criteria that are almost impossible for schools to meet. For example, in Ohio, a high school of 1,000 students could have four homicides and 19 weapons possessions without being deemed persistently dangerous.
In a letter sent to state-level education officers, the Education Department encouraged states to reconsider their definitions of persistently dangerous schools and "ensure that they have clear and robust communication protocols to ensure that parents know if their child's school has been identified as persistently dangerous and understand the school choice options available to them."
"The number of persistently dangerous schools reported nationwide appears low particularly given the number of violent offenses in schools reported through the Department's Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC)," reads the letter. "For example, not a single school was designated as persistently dangerous in the 2021-2022 school year, while public school districts reported through the CRDC approximately 1.2 million violent offenses in that same school year (with physical attack without a weapon and threats of physical attack without a weapon accounting for 93% of these offences)."
If states develop reasonable definitions of persistently dangerous, more American parents may soon have the ability to remove their children from public schools plagued by violence—and schools with safety problems could soon face pressure to improve conditions.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Obligatory Dead Milkmen
+1
You've gone from entirely useless to nearly entirely useless.
Perhaps his liver will fail tonight so he can go out on a high note.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaaZZN9VYs
And how sad is it that George Costanza is huge success compared to Sarc.
If states develop reasonable definitions of persistently dangerous, more American parents may soon have the ability to remove their children from public schools plagued by violence—and schools with safety problems could soon face pressure to improve conditions.
One almost wonders... even wonders aloud of there may be an incentive to consistently find the school experience as "mostly peaceful".
Is she really stupid or naive enough to not understand that the union and the system itself has no reason to find itself to have any problems.
>Is she really stupid or naive enough
Yes, actually. She is.
'Public' institutions have NO pressure to 'improve' anything because they Lobby for 'Gun'-Forces (Gov-Guns) to get ?paid?. Something, something about empty-classrooms post COVID not only getting the same PAY but having the nerve to complain for MORE PAY.
a high school of 1,000 students could have four homicides and 19 weapons possessions without being deemed persistently dangerous.
Cool! Now do *cities*!
No US city has a homicide rate even close to that. Many have homicide rates 1/100 that high.
Mostly peaceful
Lets define persistently dangerous as schools where teachers and administrators have their kids in private schools at a greater rate than that of the community in which the school resides.
After all, who knows better that the public school is dangerous, and has taken action to that end.
Just get rid of public schools entirely. It's not that hard. It can be done.
Great idea. Create legions of illiterates. What could possibly go wrong? I suppose they could go MAGA. That would make you happy. Better than learning from teachers who might instill them with knowledge. Better to be ignorant.
With the exception of SGT, who is an odd one, all of you Trump defenders celebrate your dearth of understanding of things like economics, math, statistics, logic, morality, and such. That stuff is abhorrent.
So yeah, I can see why you'd want to eliminate schooling for the masses. Ignorance is strength.
The libertarian case for government funded school?
Sarc is totally not a neo Marxist globalist shill who is a minion of Alex Soros. He also doesn’t get serially sodomized by all the other hobos on exchange for bottom of the barrel liquor, while fantasizing that Trump is pounding his ass.
Don’t you remember how no one was educated before public schools?
Conclusion without evidence. Just because you are too simple-minded to conceive of successful, private-sector education solutions doesn't mean they cannot or would not be developed.
Our public schools are creating legions of illiterates.
Sarc being exhibit A.
Do you mean government schools? Always substitute the word ‘government’ for ‘public’.
Sarc doesn’t believe in the private sector. He believes in democrat controlled institutions. As he is the One True Libertarian.
Even the illiterate would know the definitions of more words than he does.
There are no such solutions not involving large expenditures of government money.
Spoken like a big state socialist.
Thank the teacher's union.
Just shut thw whole thng down.
Why waste resources on failed ibstitutions?
""Conclusion without evidence. ""
Lying by projection.
Haha, man we really broke sarc.
The article claims schooling has failed.
What factual claims do you dispute?
Uhm. Because it would make schools look bad.
Might be legal ass-covering—if a school was sued because a student was a victim of violence, that designation could affect the outcome of the litigation. Sort of a confession in advance.
This is the kind of policy that looks good on paper but encouraging schools to self identify as dangerous is probably not going to make any difference. Somewhere, somehow, somebody is going to have to write a sternly worded letter under an official looking letterhead.
You want schools that aren’t slaughterhouses? Move out of heavily blue cities.
Blue is not the color that's to blame.
Then what is?
The safest cities in the US are all blue. San Diego. San Jose. Boston. El Paso. San Francisco. New York City.
Parody.
That’s hilarious! Or are you being serious?
I looked at a few lists. None of them backed you up.
A Philadelphia officer has been shot while trying to break up a brawl at a high school. Officers should flee these cities and leave them to burn
https://x.com/DissidentMedia/status/1920434326023311680
In many states, school districts are so small that there is no alternative school for them to attend. New York has about seven hundred school districts. Texas about 1,200. Too small to allow choice.
Like everything you say, this is again false.
https://www.k12.com/new-york-online-schools/
https://www.time4learning.com/homeschooling/new-york/state-associations.html
For being a professor, Harvard grad, political campaign expert, etc.. you sure don't know a lot.
You and your fellow travelers fight tooth and nail to keep those kids in those situations.
What about choosing not to go?
If states develop reasonable definitions of persistently dangerous, more American parents may soon have the ability to remove their children from public schools
Make sure you include the LGBT Pedo groomer garbage.
I promise you, disgruntled students are not the future of school shootings. It's going to be enraged parents, and they're going to target the rainbow people.
And rightfully so.
Just eliminate compulsory attendance.
Children did not take any oath. Why should they be forced to go where their parents are not forcing them to go?
American public schools are safe, healthy and paragons of educating and enlightening our young little dears.
Just ask any teachers' union rep.