photo by: Dylan Lysen

Superintendent Anthony Lewis explains actions the Lawrence school district is taking to improve safety and security in school buildings during the Lawrence school board meeting on Monday, Nov. 25, 2019.

What’s the appropriate way to resolve — or even talk about — severe behavioral problems in schools, like fighting, sexual misconduct, theft and drug use? That’s a question the Lawrence school board was divided on earlier this month, and one that might come up again in the coming week.

At its meeting on July 10, the school board rejected a set of revised disciplinary measures for the upcoming school year on a 4-3 vote. The revision exclusively focuses on the most severe infractions seen in middle and high schools, known as “Tier 3” infractions — many of which involve violence or threats and may warrant intervention from law enforcement.

For the board’s meeting on Monday, the policy is on the board’s consent agenda, which is a list of items that are considered and approved in one motion without discussion. But on July 10 the board pulled the guidelines off of the consent agenda for discussion, and they sparked a heated conversation.

The problem, according to some board members, is whether the rules fit in with the district’s “restorative justice” disciplinary model, which involves resolving conflicts productively and repairing relationships rather than simply punishing students for misbehavior.

On July 10, board members Paula Vann and Bob Byers both raised concerns about the new guidelines for Tier 3 infractions. Vann said that the policy, which primarily prescribes suspensions for students who commit Tier 3 infractions, “still feels very punitive” instead of restorative. And both Vann and Byers objected to the repeated use of the word “offense” to refer to these infractions.

“Just the term ‘offense’ reminds me of somebody going to jail, or someone being criminalized,” Vann said. And Byers said that “for educational purposes, if you’re trying to get staff to move into restorative processes, you get rid of the discussion of an ‘offense,'” because this is really about (student) behavior.”

Vann, who is a member of the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate tribe, also said the language in the guidelines didn’t “sound like it is deeply rooted in the practices and values of Indigenous people,” apparently referring to a statement in the meeting agenda about restorative justice being “deeply rooted in the practices and values of Indigenous Peoples around the globe.”

But other board members, including Shannon Kimball, said there were times when stricter disciplinary measures were warranted.

“When you reach this level of behavior that happens within a building, you move beyond calling it ‘student behavior,'” Kimball said. “I was looking through this list, and these are all crimes. So I’m a little concerned with this conversation we are having.”

Superintendent Anthony Lewis eventually interjected that many of the offenses on the Tier 3 list are required to be reported to the state and often require law enforcement to get involved.

Some board members also had concerns about how the disciplinary guidelines had been crafted. Board President Kelly Jones questioned district administrators Cynthia Johnson and Bill DeWitt, who both played a prominent role in creating the policy, about why the district’s equity advisory committee was not involved.

Jones said the district deviated from its equity policy by not including the advisory committee, and that the equity policy “clearly stated” that the committee should be included in discussions about restorative practices. But Lewis told the Journal-World after the meeting that “that’s definitely not our interpretation” and that he thought these policies should be shaped mostly by administrators.

He also told the Journal-World that he hadn’t expected board members to push back on the policy for severe infractions like this.

“My surprise came because these are Tier 3 behaviors,” Lewis told the Journal-World.

He also said that the discussion of restorative justice can only accomplish so much: “Restorative practices will not replace all disciplinary consequences, but our ultimate goal is to keep students in seats.”

The guidelines on the consent agenda on Monday will have at least one change: In an email, district spokesperson Julie Boyle said they had been modified to replace the word “offense” with “behavior incident.” She didn’t mention any other changes being made.

Lewis, for his part, is hoping that the guidelines won’t be held up any further. He said additional delays could impact the district’s ability to add the guidelines to the student handbook prior to the start of the upcoming school year.

The school board meets at 6 p.m. at district offices, 110 McDonald Drive.