Dr Sheffield’s amended discipline code raises the question of priorities in RSD205
I do not wish to get into semantics concerning whether the discipline code has changed or not under Dr Sheffield. Nor a debate if there were too many out of school suspensions or expulsions under Dr. Thompson using the previous discipline code.
I agree that students can’t learn if they are not in school due to suspensions and expulsions. However, students that come to school prepared to learn must also be given consideration in the amended code, especially if disciplined students remain in, or return to the classroom in a shorter period of time.
What also concerns me about the draft of the amended discipline code being discussed by the school board, is that administrators will be asked to categorize staff assault as being with or without injury. What difference does that make? Teachers should not be subjected to assault of any kind and the punishment should fit the crime. Assault is a crime, not simply misbehaviour.
Finally, weapons infractions will have two levels of classification in the amended discipline code: use or unauthorized possession of a firearm, destructive device or illegal object. That differs from a new entry, “possession of a dangerous object or look alike weapon.”
What is the difference between a “dangerous object” and a “destructive device?” And does the amended discipline code meet state law requirements? What happened to zero tolerance?
Education should be the primary goal of the Rockford schools, not behaviour modification. What are these kids taught at home anyway?