We need to build an understanding and knowledge of our students.

Classroom Community must be established.

Multi-disciplinary team approach. Tiered interventions supporting the classroom and building.

"Solution focused compassionate accountability" for ALL.

Non-Negotiables

• Common language

• Clearly defined behavioral expectations

• Tiered system of behavioral supports

• Collaborative Approach

2. Ensuring we provide students a "fresh start"

3. MTSS and tiered interventions - need some support and consistency

4. Opportunities for our staff with expertise (BCBA, counselors, social workers, psychs, Lakeside) lead professional learning for staff.

Culture shift

Time for implementation

Systems

Impact of Society

What does a restorative intervention look like? What supports do we put into place for teachers who are new and/or uncomfortable with this work?

TIME

Make the connection with responsive practices

ownership issues...

"Every behavior is a message."

"Hurt people hurt people." - How do we become more trauma-informed educators?

How do we make using restorative practices not only a SCHOOL but a SYSTEM/DISTRICT expectation/priority?

*Communication loop that involves the parties in need of restore

*Community education and buy-in for restorative practices, transparency

*Logistics of restoration (e.g. class coverage to work with student)

*Regularly engage with key stakeholders such as families, teachers, and other staff

*Clearly defined behavioral expectations that are taught and consistently reinforced

* A tiered system of behavioral support to meet each student's needs

*Communication around students with special education

Are we rewarding unexpected behaviors? example: Student see the counselor after low level behaviors.

Teachers might think that student may believe that having a conversation is the only consequence regardless of the level of behavior.

We need to be clear about what restorative practices and justice are.

How do these practice work with gross behaviors/outside the norm behaviors?

Wonder: How discipline is coded: difference between conduct vs. violence

• provided options to respond to infractions

• language and expectations clear

• staff development and training

• re entry conference requiring parent participation

"Hang Ups?"

• similar responses to infractions

• community service- what looks like and possible barriers

• time and implementation

  
  

Classroom/School Disturbance section outlines what disrespect, defiance is in class.

Mentions appropriate "conduct" but doesn't necessarily define what "conduct" is. Is it the way you look at someone, words used, volume/tone of voice?

The levels of discipline are confusing. For example, fighting and cutting class are listed under level 2. Fighting is also listed in level 3. In reflection, a class cut and fighting seem to be very different types of infractions.

It may be helpful to include in the policy what the code will be on the students' permanent records in the LMS. In addition, it would be helpful for there to be transparency in what codes are being used and when they should be used.

Currently, we use the coding with an "R" for racial incidents. Is there a way to code in a similar way for someone who targets other groups, ex. trans population.

Regarding weapons...we currently have verbiage about look-alikes, which I think is important. However, I think it is important to make mention that if something is used as a weapon (ex. a pencil, stapler, plastic knife from lunch) even if it isn't classified as a weapon.

The language from social media should be expanded upon.

• provide examples socially acceptable behavior

• Wordy- length- clear, concise

• user friendly option

• Reclassify: Elementary classified as k-5; Middle 6-8 and secondary . . .Needs to fit current model.

• equity, inclusion evident throughout policy

Strength?

• numerous examples are identified with levels

• provides graduated disciplines systems with instructional alternatives to exclusion

• interventions options provided

• procedures/interventions options are outlined

2. PBIS is mentioned but is this something we are doing as a district?

3. Consider developmental appropriateness even within a level (ie. Kindergarten is way different than 4th grade) - could reference Yardsticks

4. Appreciate the wide ranges of "intervention options."

5. page numbers please!

6. staff member directions on how to handle.

7. Should we include responsive approaches and restorative practices

• Swarthmore has a purpose, GVSD could include that - addresses equitable administration, student conduct and academic outcomes, what we expect of them.

• Addressing hate speech

• Some clear consequences for more serious issues (drug, violence, etc.)

Opportunities:

• Include the idea of "if you put yourself, your peers, or the school community in danger"

• Create a purpose that sets the expectations of behavior as a district

• Clarify and make more clear what some of the infractions mean

• Language needs to be updated - "conform," "disrupt," "handled by individual staff members"

• Creating a policy similar to Swarthmore with a more clear tiered system.

We need to have a clear understanding of defiance, disruption, disrespect so that the discipline policy is more clear for all.

Needs more responsive language. The offense should take inti account other considerations, age, prior disciplinary record, special circumstances.

Intervention options are appreciated.

Wondering if Elem should be divided more based on age appropriateness.

Should restorative conversations be included in a student record?