In last week’s meeting, school board members discussed at length a proposed policy that would provide an avenue for school administrators to report parents to Child Protective Services for refusing to be involved with their child’s education.

“We have a critical mass of students in their freshman year failing to pass three or four classes a trimester; this is to get their parents engaged,” said Thomas Warmke, superintendent.

“It seems ironic to me that we would turn in a parent to Child Services for a student being absent 10 times, but not for failing all these classes.”

The proposal would give the administrators the discretion to require parents to review assignments, pick up their children from school in a timely manner, and/or attend meetings, behavioral testing, counseling and detentions. Noncompliance would be considered educational neglect, and Child Services would be contacted.

“This policy is not a first line of defense,” Warmke said. “It is a last resort.”

Some board members thought the language was not strong enough, while others were uncomfortable with the policy altogether.

“This concerns me and sets alarm bells off in my mind,” said Mike Gaskill, new assistant secretary. “This looks like Big Brother looking over your shoulder to me. There are parents who love their kids and are doing their best, but their high school kids are just choosing to do wrong.”

“Administrators know who those parents are,” Warmke countered. “This is aimed at the parents who are failing to get involved.”

“Those parents have been cooperating and administrators would not use this policy with them,” agreed Joe Buck, chief financial officer.

Gaskill expressed a desire to talk further about it, mentioning the intrusiveness of the government on the lives of individuals already and his concern about strengthening it.

Terry Auker and Chris Boots, both new board members, expressed a desire to make the language stronger and less subjective. Boots commented that, since the policy could be used at the discretion of the administrators, some might argue that it is used unfairly.

Several board members mentioned that if the policy’s flexibility was erased, then it would become a first line of defense rather than a last resort. Little support was given to the idea of insisting all parents review every assignment their child completes and attend every detention meted out.

--------------

In other school board news:

• New officers were elected as follows: Jon Trippeer, president; Patricia Valentine, vice president; Amy McGinnis, secretary; Mike Gaskill, assistant secretary.