The organized study of incentives

I've had a warm spot for "zero tolerance" policies for quite a while. Think along the lines of Dante's Eighth Circle.

Yesterday I was talking to a man who is pretty involved at my son's school. We were talking about the school principal and he relayed the following story. He and [the principal] were talking about fighting, and he said that if his son were attacked, he'd expect the boy to defend himself. She replied that the boy would be suspended or perhaps expelled if he did; rather, he should curl up on the ground in a ball and hope someone else runs to get help.

Dear Lord. That's the most obnoxious thing I've ever heard of. I can't think of any situation in which I'd hope a child of mine would go into a fetal position and wait for someone to come to his aid - especially if he's at risk of danger. Darren also notes that the school in which he teaches treats aggressor and victim alike, punishment-wise, after fights, and one of his commenters wisely points out the unintended consequences of this:

Our school hands out a 10 day suspension, no questions asked, for anybody involved in a fight. It doesn't matter who started it and who is defending himself. One consequence of this rule is that kids who are defending themselves see no reason to refrain from beating the crap out of the other kid. Once you have been goaded into taking a swing, you are suspended anyway, so why not really let loose? That's a great system, isn't it?

What's the old saying? In for a penny, in for a pound?

I always wonder what the principal in one of these cases would do if punched.