Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board committee debates raising suspension age and weighing restorative alternatives
Summary
The policy committee discussed requested changes to Policy 4351 to raise the minimum age for out‑of‑school suspension; staff and a principal noted declining suspension rates and urged study of capacity and restorative supports; no formal policy change was adopted at the meeting.
The New Hanover County Schools policy committee heard a substantive discussion about Policy 4351 — the district’s short‑term suspension policy — after Dr. Merrick requested the item be examined for raising the minimum age for out‑of‑school suspension.
Dr. Merrick said community members have suggested gradually adding another grade to the policy’s existing carve‑out, which currently prevents suspensions for students younger than age 8 or below grade 3 except for extreme safety exceptions. "If we've been able to lower the incidence of K‑2 suspensions ... perhaps next year we add on one more grade," Dr. Merrick said, framing the proposal as incremental.
District staff and a principal urged caution and recommended a teacher/principal consultation. The assistant superintendent referenced data presented to the board showing district suspension rates have fallen and emphasized the need to align capacity and staff supports if suspensions are further restricted. A district staff member summarized trend data from the district’s teacher working conditions survey, noting declines in measures such as classroom disorder and bullying.
Principals present said they are comfortable with current policy given supports in place; staff warned that changing the policy without assessing building capacity and supports could hamper principals' ability to maintain safe learning environments. Dr. Merrick proposed convening a group of educators to study alternatives and volunteered to serve on that group, but procedural questions arose about whether the committee could make that motion or whether it should be brought to the full board. The committee did not adopt a policy change at the meeting and instead agreed that staff should assemble data and that the superintendent and administrators should be consulted before any formal motion is forwarded.
What happens next: staff will compile additional data, and Dr. Merrick plans to convene educators (pending board direction) to explore restorative approaches and capacity needs before any formal policy revision is proposed to the full board.
