School leaders present 2026 Code of Behavior revisions; board and public press for clearer enforcement on assaults, bullying and in‑school suspension

Prince William County Public Schools staff presented a revised 2026 Code of Behavior to the School Board on May 7, outlining restructured offense codes, grade‑banded response recommendations, and implementation steps including online reporting, professional development and new dean of students positions.

“Available responses are now outlined by grade level pre‑K through 2, 3 through 5 and 6 through 12,” Associate Superintendent Denise Huebner said as she summarized the package. The revision also incorporates Virginia Department of Education student behavior administrative response (SBAR) codes, updated terminology for exclusionary discipline, and hyperlinks to make an online code more navigable.

Huebner told the board the division has introduced a single online referral platform (the “hub”) so teachers and staff document incidents consistently; she reported 199 bullying/harassment reports had been filed through the new online system and that 64 percent of those did not meet the reporting criteria. The revision package also adds recommended discipline responses broken out by age group, guidance on cell phones aligned with the division’s 2025–26 policy, and additional administrative resources, Huebner said.

Board members and public commentators used the Code of Behavior presentation to press staff on implementation details. Parent Courtney Goode described her 7‑year‑old daughter’s March assault and said she was denied a school transfer; she asked the board to define “violent crime” in policy, to adopt a victim‑centered protocol, and to guarantee a transfer right for assaulted students when an attacker remains at the same school.

Board Member Jeffrey Wilk urged staff to elevate incidents such as strikes against staff or persistent bullying to higher‑level responses and asked whether certain offenses should automatically trigger law‑enforcement reports. Huebner said the revised code includes recommended interventions and “it is not a one‑size‑fits‑all” process; administrators must consider patterns of behavior, developmental stage, and individualized needs. Huebner and other staff emphasized ongoing scenario‑based training, data literacy work for leaders, and plans to use deans of students to help normalize consequences and monitor implementation.

On the topic of in‑school suspension, Huebner said some secondary schools already use the option but not all do; she agreed to provide the board a memo identifying which schools have in‑school suspension and to evaluate the program’s effectiveness before wider implementation. Huebner said expansion of in‑school suspension depends on personnel and local school circumstances.

Other points from the presentation and discussion:

- The Code of Behavior now references cell‑phone and wireless communication guidelines and links to reporting options for harassment, bullying and discrimination. - The division has increased professional development for administrators, including scenario‑based norming and training for new administrators and security specialists. - Teachers are being asked to enter incident referrals directly into the online hub to create a single, auditable record and assist central office monitoring.

No final board vote on the Code of Behavior changes occurred that night; the presentation was informational and staff said the revised Code will return to the board for formal consideration, with additional implementation materials and data requested by board members.

Board members and staff agreed the policy changes aim to increase consistency, but multiple board members urged clearer statements in the code and better divisionwide norming so similar incidents yield similar responses across schools.