Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Division report: cellphone incidents drove large part of discipline increase at Orange County High School

6438343 · September 23, 2025
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 the annual SBAR (student behaviors and administrative response) report showing a large increase in discipline referrals tied to cellphone use at Orange County High School, while elementary school incidents showed smaller changes.

School staff told the Orange County School Board that reported discipline incidents rose at the high school and that more than 1,000 of the increase were related to cellphone referrals, according to the division’s SBAR report.

Susan, a student‑behavior and reporting staff member who presented the SBAR data, said the increase at the high school included a large number of cellphone incidents and accompanying noncompliance codes. “The total number of incidents... over a thousand of those incidents are related to cell phones,” Susan said. She explained that cellphone referrals often come with a second code — for example, failure to comply with staff requests — and that both codes are entered in the incident-management system.

Susan described the SBAR reporting process and the administrative responses the system captures. She said not every incident results in a sanction; the division records instructional and behavioral interventions such as parent contact, administrative conferences, positive behavior support plans, referrals to outside agencies and restorative practices before sanctions are applied. The presenter said the number of recorded incidents is larger than the number of formal sanctions because many recorded events are addressed through nonpunitive interventions.

The report includes comparisons by school and by year. At the elementary level, changes were small: Lightfoot Elementary and Unionville showed little change, Gordon Barber and Orange Elementary saw decreases in certain codes (classroom interference and negative‑relationship behaviors, respectively), and Locust Grove Elementary had an increase largely tied to refusal to comply. At the secondary level, Locust Grove Middle and Prospect Heights showed modest increases with common codes including refusal to comply, speaking uncivilly and reckless behavior. The presenter also told the board that the division recorded one category‑3 point at Locust Grove Middle (possession/distribution of a controlled substance) in 2023–24 and one category‑3 point at Orange Elementary in 2024–25 related to a gun found at school; she said the division did not meet statutorily defined thresholds to be labeled a persistently dangerous and unsafe school.

Board members asked how incidents are entered and whether teachers must record every classroom intervention; Susan said referrals are entered by each school, that a teacher would only document routine interventions if they rise to the level of a formal referral, and that the state uses specific incident codes for reporting to the Virginia Department of Education. The board asked for the code lists and supporting documentation; Susan offered to provide them.

The board received the SBAR report and asked staff to provide supporting code lists and follow‑up materials as requested.