Meet FCPS At-Large School Board Candidate: Sheree Brown-Kaplan

Patch has asked the candidates running for an at-large seat on the Fairfax County School Board a series of questions on discipline policy reform - a topic fast becoming a key issue in this race.

1. Do you think the recent reforms passed by the school board changing the discipline policy were appropriate?

I don’t believe the school board went far enough in making these long overdue changes to FCPS discipline policy.  To be honest, the school board made the changes it did only because parents and advocacy groups pushed hard for them.  For all the improvements the school board made to its discipline policies, including lessening involuntary school transfers of students, the most critical component of the “Student’s Rights and Responsibilities” policies – parent notification – failed. 

Parent notification was one of the core demands of parents and advocated by Fairfax Zero Tolerance Reform.  As it currently stands, your child, or the child next door, can be interrogated by school officials and coerced to give a confession for a non-criminal offense before FCPS officials have to notify the parents that an interrogation is taking place. 

During the debate, some members of the school board argued that the school’s duty “in loco parentis” – to stand in the parent’s place – essentially means that parents rights over their children end at the school door.  No parent in Fairfax County would agree. 

Apparently neither would the US Supreme Court.  It ruled shortly after the school board’s vote that that juveniles cannot be questioned for possible criminal offenses as if they were an adult.  Stating that a child is more likely to feel pressed by the demands of adult authority figures, Justice Sotomayor added that this is “self-evident to anyone who was a child once himself, including any police officer or judge.”  However, this isn’t self-evident to members of the school board.

Another glaring omission was the school board’s failure to address the elephant in the room:  the inequity of FCPS discipline policies with regard to students with disabilities.  According to FCPS data from 2009-2010, students with disabilities (who comprise only 14 percent of the total students population) make up 44 percent of all discipline cases.  Although repeatedly urged to address this glaring issue, the school board refused to take action.

2. How would you have voted on this issue?

I would have insisted that the school board expand upon the superintendent’s recommendations and fully address the concerns of parents and others in our community before voting yes.  For example, I would have worked to pass a measure guaranteeing that parents be notified as soon as their child is targeted for questioning by any adult at school.  Parent notification is vital to ensuring the adequate protection of the newly enhanced Miranda rights of students.  In addition, I would have had the school board address the disproportionality of FCPS discipline policies on students with disabilities.

3. What is your opinion on the involuntary transfer policy that allows schools to move students to other schools as punishment?

I believe involuntary transfers should be used only as a last resort, and they must be in the best interest of the student and school.  Moving a child, especially a teen, without careful consideration can have disastrous results.  The suicide of two FCPS students clearly show what the blanket use of that policy can wreak. 

Each child’s situation should be evaluated with the goal of seeking restorative justice to those affected by the behavior and helping the student to reform the choices that led to the behavior.  This takes more than just taking a child from one school and dumping him/her in another school.  These students need adults around them who have the resources and a plan to help them.

We should also be looking at this issue as taxpayers.  Moving students out of their neighborhood schools for violating the code of conduct and shuffling them around the county is expensive.  The cost/benefit of involuntary transfers needs to be evaluated to see if it’s a wise use of the public resources with which the school board has been entrusted.

4. Do you think the discipline policy needs to be further reformed? If so, what recommendations would you make?

Yes.  FCPS must address two glaring omissions in its discipline policies.  A parent notification measure must be included in the Students Rights and Responsibilities.  In addition, steps must be taken to effectively address the disproportionality in the rate of suspensions and reassignments of students with disabilities identified by the FCPS Hearings Office. 

With regard to the disproportionality in the rate of suspensions and reassignments of students with disabilities, I recommend the following:

First, there must be a comprehensive review of the nature and implementation of schoolwide “positive behavior interventions and supports” (PBIS) programs.  While PBIS programs have greatly reduced the number of suspensions and reassignments of general education students, these programs have not prevented the increase in the percentage of discipline cases among students with disabilities. 

Second, there needs to be better implementation of the Virginia special education regulations regarding Manifestation Determination Reviews (or MDRs) – the process of determining if a student’s behavior was related to his/her disabilities.  The number of MDRs, which afford certain federally guaranteed protections for students with disabilities, has significantly decreased over the years.  In 2003-2004, 22% of MDRs were found “causal.”  More recent data collected by the FCPS Hearing Office demonstrates that, in 2009-2010, 14% of MDRs were found “causal.”  FCPS needs to annually collect and centrally maintain data on the number and outcomes of all MDRs.  Without clear and accurate data, no effective review may take place.

Third, the school board must implement new special education procedures that it approved last September that commit FCPS to take corrective measures in response to evidence of disproportionality in long-term suspensions of students with disabilities.  To date, this has not occurred.