Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates whether student discipline policy should prohibit withholding recess
Summary
Directors debated language in revised student‑discipline policy 3241 and accompanying procedure 6701 about withholding recess as a disciplinary measure; some directors urged an explicit prohibition, while the superintendent and counsel said legislative intent and WASDA guidance led to model language that "discourages" withholding but does not prohibit it.
Board discussion on policy 3241 at the April 30 meeting centered on whether the district should explicitly prohibit withholding recess as a disciplinary action or leave language that "discourages" the practice in the accompanying procedure.
Director Gold (speaker 3) urged the board to make the prohibition explicit in policy rather than rely on procedure, saying the RCW and legislative intent support not depriving students of recess. In opposition, the superintendent (Superintendent Goodpaster, S7) relayed legal counsel's advice and WASDA's drafting history: "The legislature's directive to WASDA was to issue a model policy that discourage the practice but not prohibit it," he said, and noted that during the bill's pendency language like "strongly discouraged" had been removed prior to passage.
Board members questioned whether changing the policy would limit administrators' ability to address safety concerns that might require temporarily restricting a student's access to the general recess environment; staff described alternatives such as providing an "alternative recess" or supervised physical activity at a different time or location.
Why it matters: The change affects how schools handle day‑to‑day discipline and balancing student movement and safety. Directors noted the practical difficulty of spelling out all operational details in the policy and discussed whether codifying stronger language in policy is necessary so the board can vote on it.
What happens next: Board members requested additional legal clarity about procedure language and whether the prohibition should be explicitly restated in policy. Staff said the procedure (6701) currently references recess guidance and that the procedure is not on the night’s vote; the board may return to procedure language and policy wording at a later meeting.
