Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Discipline Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews discipline policy for students with disabilities, underscores manifestation safeguards
Summary
The committee reviewed Policy 113.1 to clarify procedural safeguards for disciplining students with disabilities, including manifestation‑determination meetings, placement‑change thresholds and exceptions for drugs/weapons/serious bodily injury.
The Policy Committee examined the proposed Policy 113.1, which revises how the district disciplines students with disabilities to align with IDEA and Pennsylvania guidance. Cassandra Jones explained the policy clarifies when the district must conduct a manifestation‑determination meeting before changing a student’s educational placement and detailed thresholds that count as a placement change: suspension for more than 10 consecutive days, or expulsion beyond 15 cumulative days in a year; removals that accumulate to a pattern (11–15 days) also trigger the safeguard.
Jones described the ‘‘big three’’ exceptions—drugs, weapons and serious bodily injury—under which the district may place a student in an interim alternative educational setting for up to 45 days even if the conduct is a manifestation of the student’s disability. She also said that when removals reach a pattern, teams must consider functional behavioral assessments and whether the IEP is being implemented as written.
Board members pressed on reporting to law enforcement for incidents that might be discretionary rather than mandatory. Jones said the student code of conduct identifies which offenses trigger mandatory reporting under the Safe Schools framework, and that the district can and should develop consensus with building administrators on when to report discretionary incidents. Member Myers said she will bring a request to the board for a legal opinion on areas that might be pulled back from reporting requirements.
The committee did not adopt the policy at the meeting; staff indicated the code of conduct will be revised in parallel to make mandatory vs. discretionary reporting explicit before board action.
