This is very important to the direction of school district. We are currently in the process of re-writing our policies. I would like some input on our policies good and bad.
Our policy handbook can be found here.
I have had several parents talk to me about a policy that allows law enforcement to sometimes go beyond their legal authority when interrogating suspects while they are in school.
Read the St. Pete Times article and let me know your thoughts on this policy. When principals stop being advocates for the student in the parents absence and start becoming the accuser the child has no legal representation. Do children have the same legal rights as adults?
Are there any policies you feel need to be looked at? Let me know.
10 comments:
I apologize for the previous post that I removed. I put the wrong link in the first one and it went to my dashboard.
I see that you interpreted the article similarly to the way I did.
I wrote my comments about it here
I have another post about this
here.
I don't see in the policy manual where it speaks to the requirement that the District must positively address behavioral issues of students with disabilities and (unknown to at least a few site administrators) this is afforded to students who are suspected of having a disability but have not been evaluated. References to this can be provided if the District can't locate it.
In case you don't know, the delay to a real evaluation may be because the SP&P's are being followed as to how observations, screenings, numerous meetings, etc and then maybe finally a real evaluation may be conducted because we all know those cost money. In the mean time, the student who is exiting behaviors that are a manifestation of their disability go unaddressed or punished because, in the mind of the unknowing, the student has not been found eligible for special education services.
If the answer is that there is a special education policy manual, then that may answer the issue of why sometimes site administrators get it wrong because they don't realize that a student can have a disability without having the proper paper work filled out.
Also, is there any policy that speaks to "behavior education" for the students?
I see that a teacher who removes 25 per cent of their class is provided a course on classroom management skills, free of charge 95.230. Maybe the student could attend a similar school behavior education class that is professionally developed for their age. Sort of like a professionally developed sex education class.
oop's
that should have been "exhibiting" behaviors.
My suggestion refers to 8.27
School sites and facilities shall be named for individuals who have rendered outstanding public service to public education, for geographical locations and for groups and clubs as indicated:
1.elementary, middle, and secondary schools-for Presidents, school board members, educators, outstanding citizens and geographical locations;
2.other facilities, such as libraries, playgrounds and stadiums-for educators, outstanding citizens or for groups or clubs which assisted most in the establishment of the facility.
When naming a new school or other existing facility, input shall be solicited from neighboring schools and/or the community at large. A new school or facility shall be named after the construction contract has been awarded.
I would ask that "school board members" be moved from 8.27.1 and be relocated to 8.27.2. Too often politicians feel the need for a concrete and steel legacy. A library or wing is more than enough. Whether its Centro Ybor, the Riverwalk or Former Superintendent High these monuments to myself are exhausting.
Then again it looks like it dosen't matter since the Steinbrenner High naming appeared to violate the proper procedure (at least as I read it, but I may be mistaken. If so I readily apologize. I'm perfectly fine with a school being named after him but Lutz? More aptly in south Tampa, Interbay, Westshore than Lutz.)
Keep up the great work. All of your effort is greatly appreciated.
This pertains to 2.05 Rules of Practice. At their discretion, the Board members will remain to hear comments from the audience regarding items not on the agenda. This is patently ubsurd. Let me see if I get this right. The School Board moves it's meeting time to make it more difficult for one of the three stakeholders in the equation - student, family, teacher - to attend to meetings. They move the start time because they can't take the heat from the move in high school and some of the criticism that came with it. Instead of showing some brass and moxie, they try to insulate themselves from the critics. They conveniently move the start time to three to make it more difficult for teachers to attend. Bravo. Now that I am there I have three minutes to speak and "at your discretion" you can choose to remain. How about you stay and take the heat. If you want the gravy you have to take the bone with it. It is insulting to have teachers, parents, community members take time to express themselves - knowing of the repurcussions that will follow - only to see Kurdell laughing it up with buddies in the lobby. I'll be sure to laugh myself on Election Day.
Also, 2.05 A - Move the start time back to 5 or 6. It is sad that you would purposefully move the meeting times so as to avoid criticism.
Anonymous February 8, 2008 1:12 PM,
I can only speak for myself. I always stay and listen to speakers. Also because of the public and their time slot I voted for a later start time of the meeting. As you can see, I lost that one.
I feel public input is essential to our ability to do our job as public servants which I hope is evidenced by this blog. There are positive comments about me and some negative ones. I post them all regardless.
At your service, April
April,
In light of yesterday's embarassing action by the Chair and Chief Security Guard - speakers coming before the board "will be called out of order if you use anyone's name" is sad and embarassing. Perhaps the board should also be probibited from using names. I'm sure if we all use only pronouns, business will proceed easily. So as to not use names, please tell the lady with the gavel that the persistant older lady from the beach is not going anywhere anytime soon. This type of affront on free speach is generally not welcomed by the public, 1st amendment lawyer Luke Lirot, or the ACLU. If you can't take the heat, don't take the office.
Please review policy 3.13: "The school board chairman, superintendent or designee shall inform a person who is disrupting or interfering with a school board function or activity that he or she may be found guilty of a second degree misdemeanor. The person shall be advised immediately to leave the school premises or facility where the function is being conducted."
This essentially gives them carte blanche to kick out anyone at anytime for any reason. I live in a country where our President yearns to spread democracy to the Middle East and Cuba, he should look into 901 E Kennedy.
Thanks for keeping up the fight.
Anonymous February 20, 2008 10:21 PM,
I have a phone call into the superintendent to address Tuesday's meeting. I can't speak to the board about my concerns until the next time we are in a publicly noticed meeting next week because of sunshine. But it is my intention to raise my concerns at the first available opportunity. I have long been an advocate for the 1st amendment and do not condone abridging anyone's constitutional rights. I may not agree with what people say, but will fight for their right to say it. Please stand by for more on this issue.
At your service, April
Post a Comment