Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Phoenix Union proposes updates to student code of conduct, adds hate‑speech term and re‑entry skill‑building
Summary
District staff proposed revisions to the student code of conduct including explicit 'hate speech' language, restructured alcohol/drug progressions, added in‑school skill‑building for re‑entry after suspensions, and clarification that certain items (e.g., laser pointers) may be treated as dangerous; trustees asked for clearer wording and training plans.
District staff presented proposed revisions to the Phoenix Union student code of conduct (JKE exhibit) at the April 2 meeting, describing changes intended to clarify consequences and pair disciplinary actions with instructional skill‑building.
Miss Tarkington said additions include explicit mention of "hate speech" in the glossary and violation categories, new or clarified consequences for vandalism (including possible one‑day off‑campus suspension in some cases), and a restructured progression for alcohol and narcotics violations that incorporates a required in‑school skill‑building day for re‑entry after suspension. She emphasized the district's continued emphasis on restorative work and developing behavior skills rather than only punitive measures.
Trustees asked detailed implementation questions: Clerk Meyer and others asked whether community service could be used as a sanction and how supervision, timing, and tracking would work; multiple trustees requested more explicit policy language for technology misuse and emerging risks tied to AI and deepfakes that could misrepresent faculty or students; and questions were raised about classifying laser pointers as dangerous items. Staff explained that training for restorative conversations has been provided to assistant principals, student support staff and administrators, cited the train‑the‑trainer model used with internal coaches, and said more targeted training and checklists will be part of rollout.
Miss Tarkington said the code changes are the result of a multi‑stage review including campus focus groups, feedback from parent and superintendent advisory councils, and job‑alike administrator meetings. Trustees asked staff to refine wording (for example, to clarify suspension duration and re‑entry process) and to return with more detailed operational procedures and, where applicable, a vetted list of community service placements that could be used as restorative assignments.
No formal vote on the code exhibit was taken April 2; staff characterized the presentation as an annual review and invited further board feedback prior to any required future action.
