In the ongoing debate over crime prevention, one of the most overlooked factors is the role of school discipline. Education is often framed as a pathway to opportunity, but what happens when schools fail to enforce discipline effectively? Do they inadvertently create environments that nurture criminal behaviour, or do harsh disciplinary measures push students further toward criminal behaviour? This question is particularly relevant in Darwin, where issues of youth crime, school violence, and educational disengagement continue to challenge the justice system and community stability.
Discipline in schools is not just about maintaining order in the classroom, it is about establishing behavioural norms that extend into adulthood. The basic principle is simple, children who learn self-control, respect for authority, and consequences for their actions are less likely to become habitual offenders in the future.
When schools fail to enforce discipline, they create an environment where disruptive and even criminal behaviours take root. The absence of consequences emboldens students who push boundaries, reinforcing the idea that rules are optional. Over time, this lack of structure manifests as entitlement, defiance, and eventually, more serious offenses outside of school.
In the Northern Territory, youth crime, particularly property offenses, car theft, and violent assaults, has been a growing concern. A significant number of these offenders have a history of repeated school suspensions or complete disengagement from the education system. This raises a critical question, Are these young offenders the result of overly harsh school policies that alienated them, or did the lack of meaningful discipline contribute to their descent into criminality?
The argument in favour of strict school discipline is grounded in deterrence theory. If students understand that negative behaviours will have immediate and significant consequences, they are less likely to engage in disruptive actions that could escalate into criminal conduct.
A structured school environment, with firm but fair enforcement of rules, teaches students about accountability. This approach does not simply punish wrongdoing but instils a respect for the rule of law. Schools that fail to establish authority create an environment where students learn that misbehaviour carries no real risk. The natural consequence is that these same individuals, when placed in broader society, carry this belief into interactions with law enforcement, employers, and the legal system.
Security professionals that deal with juvenile criminals on a regular basis, have long noted that early intervention in disruptive behaviour is crucial. A student who is allowed to engage in small-scale defiance without consequence is more likely to escalate into more serious delinquency. This is particularly relevant in Darwin’s high-crime youth demographics, where many young offenders began their trajectory with seemingly minor infractions, skipping school, bullying, or vandalism, that were met with ineffective disciplinary responses.
The matter is close to home, I have two children in High school now and a student who bragged about poisoning a teacher at school, remains at the school, whilst the teacher is on leave and with “who knows?” what sort of long-term physical damage, let alone the trauma of such an assault. The other members of the faculty dismissing the incident as “isolated”. Whilst I have made it clear to my children to avoid the psychotic offender who is currently being rewarded by the public education system.
What if he did it to my child? To yours? or to someone you loved. How safe do you feel with your kids sharing attendance with someone emboldened by a dysfunctional education department?
On the other side of the debate is the argument that excessively harsh disciplinary measures do more harm than good. Suspensions, expulsions, and zero-tolerance policies remove troubled students from the school environment entirely, placing them in situations where they are more likely to associate with juvenile criminal peers.
This argument suggests that instead of preventing crime, harsh school discipline might accelerate it by pushing students into the criminal justice system earlier. A student expelled at 14 is not likely to return to structured education. Instead, they enter a world where authority figures have given up on them, and their only support network consists of similarly disenfranchised individuals.
Studies have indicated that students who experience repeated suspensions are more likely to drop out entirely, and dropout rates strongly correlate with future criminal activity. In Darwin, where youth unemployment and disengagement are persistent problems, harsh disciplinary measures risk creating an underclass of young people who see crime as their only viable option.
Many suggest that schools should balance discipline with intervention to ensure real consequences for misbehaviour and provide pathways for reform. Some Australian schools have adopted restoration discipline models, requiring students to make amends rather than punishment. In-school suspension and alternative education programs allow students to serve consequences while continuing their education. Early intervention programs, such as mentoring, vocational training, and behavioural counselling, are reported to help identify at-risk students before they become habitual offenders. Stronger collaboration between schools and law enforcement is also essential to address early warning signs and prevent escalation in areas like Darwin where youth crime is a persistent issue.
These are all great potential solutions if enacted upon. However, any parent with a student in the NT education system is blatantly aware of the ideology and lack of real action in schools. They talk a good talk, use Chat GPT like champions, but ask them to step up, and step in, and there is a widely known lack of support for teachers. The faculty has hundreds of ways to make reports disappear and are ever vigilant to protect those whose parents and the students alike will brutalise, bully and harm others.
Schools are not the sole factor in determining a child's future behaviour. Parental involvement plays a crucial role in reinforcing discipline and teaching personal responsibility. Schools could implement the most rigorous discipline policies available, but if children return home to environments that do not reinforce the same values, their behaviour is unlikely to change. Proximity is power and if the kid is surrounded by crap, they will inadvertently become crap. (My personal response to Bruce lee’s “be like water”)
A growing problem in modern education is the abdication of responsibility by parents who view discipline as solely the school’s duty. When parents fail to establish expectations at home, schools are forced into an adversarial role rather than a complementary one. In Darwin, where social issues such as substance abuse, family breakdown, and economic hardship contribute to crime, schools cannot be expected to act alone in preventing delinquency.
School discipline can either prevent or promote crime, depending on the enforcement method. Lack of discipline leads to students breaking rules without consequence, increasing the likelihood of criminal behaviour later in life. Excessive punishment alienates at-risk youth, while a balanced approach combines discipline with rehabilitative support.
In Darwin, where youth crime is both a symptom and a cause of broader social issues, school discipline must be part of a broader strategy that involves education, law enforcement, and community engagement. Schools must neither coddle nor condemn troubled students, but rather provide a structured, accountable environment where bad behaviour is corrected before it escalates into a lifelong pattern of criminality.
Ultimately, the goal of school discipline should not be mere punishment but the cultivation of responsible, law-abiding individuals who understand that actions have consequences. The way schools handle misbehaviour today determines the kind of citizens society will inherit tomorrow. It is obvious many teachers need to be re-educated, many administrators, principles and the faculty as well. But how? The most effective way to support innovation and improvement is through competition and reward. The current public school system in the NT rewards bad behaviour and they have almost a monopoly on education due to the high cost of the private alternative and a lack of choice. The highest educational marks in the NT are still predominantly held by home schooled students, so the massive infrastructure and greater spending is obviously a failure. The answer lies in de-regulation and charter schools. However, the largest union in the NT is the teachers union, and both major parties are too scared to take them on. From the author.
The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.
Comments