Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Forsyth board hears draft 2025–26 code of conduct updates; motion to table for further review

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Staff presented proposed edits to the 2025–26 student code of conduct, including wording changes (school officials), new behavior-support language, removal of obsolete discipline codes and limits on tribunal requests; the board moved to table the draft until next month.

Forsyth County Schools officials reviewed proposed edits to the 2025–26 student code of conduct and the Board of Education voted to table the draft for additional review.

David Fierbach, a staff member, told the board the draft code incorporated feedback from schools, attorneys (Dr. Salome and Parker Poe) and a board member. He said changes include replacing the term “employee” with “school official” (as defined in Policy JR), adding “behavior support plan” language to align with state discipline matrices, and removing nonworking website links and obsolete DM discipline codes cited in OCGA.

Fierbach described substantive additions: language clarifying that an “intentional physical attack” could be against other school officials as well as teachers, adding the phrase “request a tribunal hearing” (rather than just “request”), and adding a provision that a second tribunal request during a student’s career “may lead to additional semester consequence at the alternative school.” He also said coursework at Gateway Academy would be limited to courses offered by Gateway Academy or Forsyth Virtual Academy; if families desired additional coursework, that would be “at the student and family's expense.”

Fierbach said attorneys recommended replacing a gender term with the recommended phrasing (transcript placeholder). He noted updates to the responsible-use guidelines tied to the district learner profile. He said attorneys and staff recommended the edits and that the changes were primarily language clarifications.

After discussion and member questions about additional forthcoming changes (including cell-phone-related language), Mr. McCall moved to table the draft until the next work session; Mr. Grimes seconded. The motion passed unanimously. No substantive policy action was adopted at the meeting; staff will continue drafting and seek additional board review during the 30-day comment period typically used for code revisions.