“Teachers, please close and lock your doors” is at this point a phrase ingrained in the minds of all Albany High Students. Hall sweeps, usually occurring about five minutes after the late bell has rung, are resulting in multitudes of students sitting out a period in the school auditorium and detention if they’re swept three times in a day. These policies invoke a myriad of responses in students.

“They should take [the policies] away,” said Jaden Carr, a tenth grade student at AHS. “It only starts more problems. Sometimes it’s not [the students’] faults” and they shouldn’t be penalized for accidents. Khalel Hamlin, a junior, agreed, saying that the measures taken are “ineffective to motivate students to go to class”. Among students informally polled, it appeared that a majority oppose hall sweeps, especially those who were swept in the past. “Students can’t go to the classroom and do their work,” argued sophomore Kyliek Brown. But ten minutes is enough to get to class, argue the proponents of these policies. Anybody loitering should be disciplined.

“Hall sweeps are good because they make kids go to class on time,” said student Xavier Sydnor. “They should do them more often”. Some people take a much tougher stance, including a sophomore that wished to remain anonymous, who said “not only should hall sweeps be between every class but those swept should be arrested for wasting taxpayer money.” While some may consider this position extreme, it just underlines the polarization of students on this issue.

The main arguments for the anti-sweep side include an optimistic outlook on student behavior and a belief that they can motivate themselves to go to class, while administrative actions such as this only deter from education opportunities. However, the pro-sweep coalition coalesce under the notion that students will only learn the correct path through academic discipline, and lax security policies are ineffective towards bringing up good, punctual citizens.

The Albany City School District has it written on their website that “truancy is an early warning sign for a student headed toward school failure and dropping out. Truant students also are at greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse, teen pregnancy and delinquency”. Indeed, studies can corroborate this, and skipping is definitely bad. But are the anti-skipping measures too harsh? That’s not really up to the students.

No matter what the public opinion is, the school will undoubtedly continue with its action, especially with the continued danger of it being sent into receivership. According to the New York State Education Department, “meeting attendance for gateway courses” at Albany High is one of the three criteria that the school failed last year, putting it in danger of receivership, with only 77.8 percent of students showing up for core classes. If the attendance stays below 79%, the school will be delegated to state control. A memo by Ira Schwartz, the State Education Department Assistant Commissioner for Accountability, called for the “creation of a system to track and improve chronic absenteeism”.

In short, the hall sweeps aren’t going anywhere; they may even increase, much to the chagrin of many students. As AHS draws closer to its deadline in the spring, they’ll start really cracking down: between every period instead of three or four random times. Students will stop playing the odds and either go to class or leave the school entirely, and only time will tell if the procedures are actually effective.