DUXBURY HIGH SCHOOL
SCHOOL COUNCIL AGENDA
May 20, 2015
5:00pm – DHS Library
Julia Adams, Abby Manning, Jessica Manning, Mary Lynn Carson, Joe Lamothe, Chris Leaverton, Kristen Rappe, David Slayter, Leann Slayter, Coleen Slocum, Selden Tearse, Sue Clark, Tim McMahon, Dan Hickey, Owen Clark, Greg Morris, Peter Quigley
NOTE: The Comments from the Public section of the meeting is an opportunity for members of the community to address issues of concern about policy, budget, or administrative matters or share ideas about how we can work together to improve the Duxbury Public Schools. We value your input and respect divergent views; we only ask that you limit your remarks to two minutes and refrain from airing grievances with individual members of the school community. Thank you.
Public Comments:
Sue Clark: Thank you to Mr. Stephens for the opportunity to serve on handbook, made many changes that will help and clarify the current handbook. She firmly believes code of conduct needs further review, the 24/7 language and one on one interview needs to be looked at and dissected. We are close to litigation. The current language removes role models, no wiggle room, no mistakes, stress of policies…this is her opinion. Turn to others with greater expertise. Glenn Kutcher, executive director-mass association of school committees-not enamored of this policy.
Greg Morris: seconds everything Sue said. His letter read:
As many have stated previously, page 17-code of conducting “in the knowinglyin the unlawful presence of” NEEDS to be removed. I (and others) believe in the theory however, the pitfalls outweigh the gain. As we’re all aware the school council advised this to be removed (9-3( and many others support it’s removal. Please remove it.
If our son/daughter is being questioned/interviewed about their actions outside of school by administration, then the parent, guardian or representative has every right to be there. (especially if it’s the “Monday morning list”), anything less is unacceptable. This procedure needs to change, because our (parent/student) rights ARE being compromised
What are the legal repercussions if our young adults refuse to answer?
Thank you for your attention to this matter and I do hope we can find some workable solutions to these challenges for our young adults, parents and staff. Please restore our rights. The world and community need more folks with courage to help make a positive difference. These that stand up for your beliefs-this is admirable.
Andrew responds: his decision has been made. In the end, it is his decision, what he thinks is best for the kids. This is a strong deterrent. 850 kids do co curricular activities. This gives parents leverage. He stands by his choice. He respectfully agrees to disagree. In 8 years he normally goes with the advice of the council…in this decision he feels like he has made the right choice. Not out of disrespect or ignoring what has been advised. There was a lot of reflection on this. He firmly believes in his choice. He will not create 2 separate choices with the way discipline is handled. Kids have a right to state their case. Parents will be informed. There is a segment of the community that does not trust the administration…this is not a reflection of the larger group in the community. We always talk to kids alone in other other serious student situations that will go on their permanent record and parents are not called in on the first discussion. It is not practical or necessary from a legal standpoint to make separate set of discipline. MIAA rules dictate that we discipline off of school grounds, not only drinking but with bullying, sexting, etc. The role of the school has changed and the reach the school has outside of the school has also changed. This standard has been in place for years and he is not inclined to change that.
Colleen Slocum: Can consequences change? Suggestion: 1st offense, if determined by police that they were not drinking, can make this educational piece and a parental contact piece. They have a chance to make a mistake…they did not leave in a timely manner…but they were not drinking.
Julia Adams-we are only an advisory role. The principal has full responsibility when making decisions. We have no statutory standing. All the fall out comes back to Andrew. We need to respect the fact that all negative outcome comes back to the school.
The consequence was reduced to 25% from 40% and from 4 weeks to 2 weeks and do not have to see a counselor if a child has been found in the knowing presence of.
Peter Quigley: feels that Andrew has personalized this. He feels that this is a community issue, police, kids, parents…but ownership should not be all his. When this decision was made there was a task force that made this procedure…why is this soley his decision. His thought is to have an unbiased community team to work through this. Why is this Andrew’s sole responsibility?
Andrew: school council looked at this 5 years ago. Looked at other similar schools…school council has always reviewed this. We have had a healthy discussion and debate around this. When it comes down to it…this is a handbook item….Andrew makes the call.
Andrew presented it to school committee…
There is an interesting climate in this town. The people that attend are of a certain mindset. Other parts of the community do not want to be part of this discussion because they may be afraid to voice a differing oppion. How do we create a forum for a healthy discussion?
Julia: Not only the parents should be heard, but all tax payers. If people are serious and want to view it in a community place…school committee is the best place for this decision to be truly representative.
Sue: school committee has told them to start with school council.
Andrew welcomes a community wide review. But it does not change what is happening today. Our handbook changes will be shared with school committee next week.
Selden: This started last year bc of one administrator and the way the one on one was handled. She trusts the principal…she does not always trust the process. Upsetting stories with some administrators….that is why she is here. Not about the rules, but how they were being delivered.
Student Lyons: When did school become us vs them….people in the community, against the school. Why is the culture like this? How can it be changed? He does not feel like he (or other students) have ever been asked? If there is no dialogue how can there be any trust?
Andrew: What is anecdotal and what is in actual existence? We need a validated survey. What is going on from the perspective of parents, teacher and students.
Sue: Kids need to be heard, their opinions matter, they can go to war, but can’t make these choices…she asked if we could talk about this with the kids in advisory. She mentions Andrew said in the past “this is an adult conversation.”
Greg: What happens if the child does not speak?
Anddrew: If they do not speak, that is their choice. It depends on the context…safety, illegal substances,
Wendy: Can a child be punished for not answering a question?
Andrew: Yes, but it depends on the context. Depends if it is a legal issue.
This is different than a police investigation. Completely different.
Discipline has to be the same, can’t make it different only for “knowing in the presence of” You can’t pick and choose when this is going to happen.
Respectfully submitted by Dave Maimaron-not present at meeting
In light of the School Council advising Mr. Stephens (9 votes to 3) to remove the "knowingly in the presence of" language from the student handbook, and his decision to keep the language, I would like Mr. Stephens to reconsider this matter tonight before the handbook gets sent to the school committee. We have a very dedicated and professional school council who deeply care about education in the town of Duxbury. Although Mr. Stephens has the authority to ignore our advice in this matter, I feel it is not in accordance with best practices. In order to preserve the meaning and value of this committee, I strongly feel that we must be heard on this matter. Mr. Stephens, please reconsider your decision and show the council tonight that we have a say in this decision and any and all future decisions. I would like this to be read tonight and included in the minutes.
Andrew’s Reponse
I would like to say that, in eight years as the principal at Duxbury High School who has worked with the School Council on a number of hot button issues during that time, I have never made a decision that has gone against the wishes of the Council. As a best practice, one would need to have a very good reason in my position to do so. That said, we are all well-versed in the role that School Council plays in providing me with perspective(s) and advice on matters of school procedure. In a perfect world, we would agree on all matters all of the time. When that does not occur (as is the case here), I need to be able to listen to the different perspectives and wishes of the Council (and community for that matter), and then decide what I think is the correct course of action. 'Best practice' does not preclude me from making my own mind up on a particular issue. Rather it requires that I undergo and can articulate the process by which I arrive at that decision. It is often the case where such a decision (especially with the issues at hand) will make someone or some people upset. My job is to provide a forum by which I can listen to and reflect on the different perspectives that I am given in order to make my own mind up. My job is to communicate my thought process and reasoning behind my decisions. At the core, my job is to make decisions that I think are ones that are in the best interest of the kids. I have done so here and have communicated at length the opposing persectives and my thought process as I made my decision. I feel I have done so thoroughly. I am sure that folks will want to share their opinions again from the community side and some of you may wish to as well. From my perspective, I have given and put more than ample time and energy into the process I went through before making my decision. I do not see myself being swayed from that tonight. I do not take lightly that I am not in agreement with the majority of you, and it is not intended to be arbitrary or as a sign of disrespect to you or the process. Although some of you may see this as me ignoring your advice, which connotes that I did not listen and did not value your opinions, I assure you that I did not and have not. At the core, I truly believe that the procedure as it stands is an effective deterrent for a majority of our students that is based purely on the principle of keeping kids safe and I believe that this is the right decision. I hope that any of you who know me well understand how seriously I have taken this issue as I have reflected upon it. In the end, I have made my decision and will stick with it.
1. Approve minutes from May 13 meeting-Joe motioned, Jessica approved. *Discussion around hierarchy on conflicts with music and sports-please update May minutes to reflect, no specific hierarchy. Also add language on page 17 of handbook in front of the councils vote for chemical health in March minutes.
2. Student Handbook review-see attached proposed changes
Sue: need a webmaster to help with handbook. If one page changes…impacts other links
Joe- #17 thinks kids should be able to decide if they were elected by other students if they should lose their position. Andrew was not comfortable with this.
In regards to NHS and any cocurricular…Kids are made aware of their responsibilities…they should be able to make informed decisions. If you water it down it weakens the deterrent.
Peter Quigly Dux NHS is at a higher level than the norm.
Andrew: It is not like MIAA. Most is left to local chapters to decide character. Sue: How many kids are not finishing bc they are not finishing their hours bc things have changed.
I think giving kids a different standard or second chance bc you are rewarding kids that are at the top of the bell curve.
One transgression that would not prevent them being considered.-Andrew has already started this conversation.
“minimum consequences”…do we need minimum?
Athletic handbook with be updated as well.
#18 What is reasonable? By the end of the day. Serious matters are contacted
very quickly.
Joe: What is the extent of contact?
Andrew: Depends on what we are talking about. Call/message, follow up again.
Serious…call all emergency numbers.
#24 issue this year with that are temporarily handicap…they get temporary parking in handicap parking….this language puts that in.
#27 This came from the superintendent that makes clear that accumulation of absenses tied to credit. This is how it is coded to decide if a student will get credit.
Within 1E is incorrect-this is specific to college visits. It should also be in the paragraph after F.
Debate over how many days to give documentation. Should it be 5 or 10? 10 is probably more realistic.
Motions-Approval of changes: chris, and Joe
3. Updates:
*Prom-Chris liked it at Gilette, felt like it was an event. In the Putnam suite, soccer game was going on…event moved quickly. Later finish time was great. Limited kids choices for kids driving and late parties.
Each class is picking the venue a year and a half in advance. Hold the spot to with deposit with a revolving account.
*Climate Survey -- May 20 – Webinar
June school council we will discuss this at length. Next year we will analyze and break this down…it is a year long process. Maybe work on this over the summer.