SMMUSD HDQTRS — The Board of Education tried to walk a fine line between leniency and excessive force as it weighed in on a draft revision of the substance abuse policy presented at its meeting Thursday.
Over the summer, staff, led by Director of Student Services Marolyn Freedman, researched state recommendations on policy, as well as the punishments that other school districts already had in place.
School principals, parent groups and members of the district advisory councils also weighed in.
The result was two documents rather than one; a board policy outlining the general philosophy behind punishment, and an administrative regulation that gives administrators and teachers exact repercussions for actions.
“The format has been revised to include a philosophy statement and then administrative regulations that detail the steps to upholding that policy,” Freedman said.
The original board policy was brought into question when three 18-year-old Samohi seniors on a choir trip overseas were found in a bar with beer on their table.
Although they were of legal drinking age in England, the girls were punished under school rules because they were participating in a school-sponsored trip.
Under the old policy, students were required to serve a five-day suspension, complete 40 hours of community service and 24 hours of drug and alcohol counseling and were placed on academic probation, which barred them from all school events, including graduation.
Parents and students complained that the punishment did not fit the crime, and that the problem reached farther than just the three girls on a school choir trip.
Dr. Lisa Golden Balfous, a psychiatrist and parent in the district, said that the revision was necessary to make sure that students were not punished so excessively that they couldn’t recover academically and risk alienation.
“If intervention can be done in a positive way, i.e. counselors and house administrators follow up with kids in a regular and constructive context, then kids are more likely to build trust and want to come to school,” she wrote in an e-mail.
In June, the board decided to suspend the old policy and allow the three girls and all others under academic probation for drug or alcohol offenses to attend graduation if they had already met the other terms of the punishment.
That policy expired on June 30, however, and reverted back to the original system under which all students had been punished previously.
Since then the school district has been trying to reform the policy and get it in place despite the start of the new school year.
The version that Freedman brought back to the board had a few key revisions.
Under the new administrative policy, students would only have to complete 24 hours of community service rather than 40. The 24 hours of counseling would remain the same, although parents would have to also attend 12 hours of counseling focused on them.
Students would also no longer be prevented from taking part in co-curricular activities like sports and music during their 10-week academic probation, as long as they prove that they are making headway on the counseling and community service.
They can also attend graduation as long as they either complete or provide proof of progress on that work.
Extra-curricular activities are still a no-go under the policy. That includes fun things that are not connected to course work, like dances, rather than the after school activities including sports and music which, technically, require students to be enrolled in a class.
Administrators also get more flexibility. They would no longer be required to put students up for expulsion on a second offense.
Students that sell drugs get a short shrift. They would be suspended for five days, and administrators would have to call the police. The student would also be up for expulsion unless a principal intervenes.
In large part, board members focused on cleaning up language to clarify key points, like the applicability of the rules to students on school trips or how the regulation would apply to a student caught in the act versus one that came to a teacher or administrator for help with a problem.
Board President Jose Escarce hit a wall with the realization that student athletes and musicians would be allowed to participate in their after-school activities with no interruption.
“In truth, nothing will be lost because there aren’t that many dances,” Escarce said. “If you’re not losing dances, concert performances or ball games or anything else, what are we losing? Very little.”
The five-day suspension component also worried board members, who put forward the concept of in-school suspension as a way to prevent students from falling behind in their classes.
Freedman said that it was possible, but that the board should make sure to draw a distinction about which students would be allowed on campus.
“Students don’t want to be next to someone who is intoxicated or in possession because it makes them feel uncomfortable,” she said. “The message is primarily for the student.”
Staff was asked to return with a policy that addressed board members’ concerns about an in-school suspension policy, a time period where students would lose sports and music privileges and how to let parents know if the police have been called on their kids for a sales offense.
ashley@www.smdp.com