Stoughton School Committee debates handbook updates: tardy policy, middle‑school 'structured day' and AI guidance

The Stoughton School Committee took up proposed student handbook updates May 20, focusing on middle‑school disciplinary procedures, tardiness consequences and a new reference to artificial intelligence in cheating and plagiarism language.

Principal Crowley outlined changes piloted at the middle school this year, including an early‑Thursday program used for professional development that the school repurposed to allow administrators to meet with students assigned to a short “structured day” in lieu of in‑school suspension. Crowley said the school defined “repeatedly late to school” for the pilot as seven or more tardies within a 30‑day window; students make up lost time and deans supervise the program. She told the committee the pilot typically handled one or two students at a time because of staffing constraints.

A parent‑and‑community letter from the Community Partnerships Advisory Committee (CPAC) raised concerns about potential disproportionate impacts on special education students, public privacy and how often administrators might use structured‑day placements for smaller infractions such as hall pass violations or excessive tardiness. The letter — signed by CPAC co‑chairs Megan Teixeira and Kimberly Cavey — asked for guidance that structured‑day placements be limited to more serious cases and called for safeguards for students with disabilities.

AI language and plagiarism

Committee members pressed principals about a new line in the handbook that treats use of artificial intelligence within the district’s cheating and plagiarism policy. Principal Crowley said the intent was not to issue an all‑out ban, but that, because the handbook places the language alongside cheating and plagiarism, some parents and students might interpret it that way. The committee requested clearer district guidance and noted the state association (MASC) is drafting model policy on AI.

Transparency and process

The committee also debated the handbook approval process and the committee’s role. Superintendent Dr. Baeta read policy CHCA (approval of handbooks) and Mass. General Laws (MGL 71 §37H) was cited for context on committee responsibilities; he noted handbooks originating from school councils generally do not require a committee vote unless the handbook proposes changes that affect school committee policy. Multiple members pressed for greater transparency and earlier timelines so school councils conclude reviews earlier in the spring and materials reach the committee in time for more public consideration before final publication.

What happens next

The superintendent said administration will collect questions, respond via the superintendent’s office and return information to the committee. Staff also committed to follow up with the OMS principal and CPAC on the group’s letter and to share data on implementation if the structured‑day program is continued or expanded. The committee did not vote to adopt or reject handbook changes at the meeting; several members said they want additional review and clearer wording on AI and the appeals process for discipline.

Ending note

Key operational clarifications recorded during the discussion: repeated tardies defined in the pilot as seven or more in 30 days; structured‑day placements generally limited to one or two students at a time and typically one‑to‑two days in length; counselors remain available for check‑ins and the district will monitor outcomes and return with data if implementation proceeds.