Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee to revisit Chapter 25 after transfers raise concerns about disciplinary limits
Summary
Members said recent transfers and what they described as limitations in Chapter 25 warrant renewed review of the district’s student-discipline rules, with plans for outreach to principals, data requests, and a draft resolution for consideration this summer and fall.
Representative Goule opened the committee’s substantive discussion by urging a fresh review of Chapter 25 and the definition of bullying, saying the committee has been “speaking since last year” and that new transfer cases demonstrate the need to act. “When I had internal conversation, the answer was, ‘we can only do what Chapter 25 allows us,’ ” Goule said, framing the policy constraint that prompted the review.
Goule described a recent transfer of a student at the end of the school year and asked why that student — and not the other involved student — was moved. That anecdote led members to question whether internal procedures, paperwork burdens, or the written rubric for transfers may be producing inconsistent outcomes across schools.
Committee members agreed to take some of the work offline to consult principals and administrators to identify operational barriers. Dr. Fleer recommended an administrator debrief and a potential data request to identify schools with high transfer rates across DC Public Schools and public charter schools.
Members stressed balancing restorative practices and school safety. Goule said past reforms narrowed suspensions after disproportionate use against Black and brown students, but added that “there is a time for suspension and then also a time for restorative justice” and the committee needs clear tools to distinguish those circumstances.
Next steps: members plan outreach to principals and council offices, additional research over the summer, and drafting a resolution to circulate before the June meeting with an eye toward fall implementation and possible parallel legislation if warranted. The committee did not adopt any formal policy at the special meeting.
