Board reviews first reading of revised student code of conduct; AI, IDs, PUNS notice and athletic eligibility change debated

Galesburg CUSD 205 trustees reviewed a first reading of a revised student code of conduct Monday that adds required PUNS database notice, new language addressing use of artificial intelligence, and changes to student identification and athletic eligibility.

Tina (surname not stated) presented a summary of changes, noting the district must publish PUNS (Pupil/Unit Notice System) information in the code and wanted to add guidance on artificial intelligence and the use of IDs and lanyards. The proposal raises the replacement fee for IDs and lanyards to $2 each "to offset the cost of replacement," the presenter said.

Athletic eligibility: The draft aligns high-school eligibility to the 7–8 grade policy, requiring students to pass classes to participate. A probationary week would allow a student with one failing grade a chance to catch up; however, if a student has three failing grades, the district must comply with IHSA rules and remove eligibility immediately. Board members asked clarifying questions about disciplinary consequences for possession or use of THC vape pens in relation to athletic participation.

On marijuana and vaping, a district administrator said consequences for drug use are in the code under drug policies and that a student found with a THC vape pen would face suspension and potentially community-service consequences, but that suspension does not automatically permanently bar a student from participating in a sport for the remainder of the year.

Why it matters: The code changes affect discipline, equity of enforcement and daily school operations. Several trustees asked for more precise language to avoid loopholes (for example, possession versus consumption) and asked the committee to compare neighboring districts’ language. One board member said any suggested edits be provided to the committee before the next meeting so changes can be prepared for the second reading.

Next steps: This was a first reading; the board asked staff and the code committee to consider suggested edits, including tougher athletic-disqualification language if the board wishes, and return a revised draft for second reading next month.

Ending: The board took a first-reading vote to advance the draft and invited trustees to send proposed changes to the committee in time for next month’s second reading.