School board discusses consequences for using a restroom designated for the opposite sex and setting a minimum grade of 50% for all assignments, narrowly approves A/C for NHS locker rooms

BY JENNIFER CABRERA

GAINESVILLE, Fla. – At their June 18 meeting, the School Board of Alachua County discussed changes to district policies, including consequences for students who use a restroom or changing room that is designated for the opposite sex and setting a minimum grade of 50% for any assignment. The board also voted unanimously to keep two books that had been challenged and voted narrowly to proceed with adding air-conditioning to the gym locker rooms at Newberry High School, with two Board Members arguing that they should not put any capital funds into Newberry schools right now.

Two book challenges pulled from the agenda

During the adoption of the agenda, two of the four book challenges (Empire of Storms and FADE) were pulled from the agenda, to be considered at a future meeting. Staff Attorney Susan Seigle explained, “I believe the books are currently off the shelf, but because the books were determined under too restrictive policy, the District Media Advisor wishes to have them re-evaluated. They still may make the same decision, but they haven’t had a chance to… re-evaluate them… so we tabled it at the last meeting for, I think, to permit it to be read.” She said she would like the books to “stay on the table” until August so the District Advisory Committee can meet and re-evaluate the books under the “new standard.”

New Staff Attorney and Transportation Director

Superintendent Shane Andrew announced that a new Staff Attorney will take over on July 22; the new Staff Attorney will be Will Spillias, who has been General Counsel for the Leon County School District since 2021. Member Sarah Rockwell made a motion to accept the Superintendent’s recommendation, and Member Tina Certain seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. 

Andrew also announced the appointment of a new Transportation Director, Desiree Fisher. Fisher has over 19 years of transportation experience and has been Director of Transportation for two school districts; she will start on June 24. Certain made the motion to approve the appointment, and Rockwell seconded the motion; the motion passed unanimously. 

Code of Student Conduct: defiance, head coverings, and restrooms

The board held public hearings on three proposed changes to district policies; the first was the Code of Student Conduct. A public hearing is the second step in adopting new policies: the board already approved the first reading of these policies, and the second reading will be at a future meeting. The public hearing is an opportunity for board discussion and community input, but a vote is not taken.

Chief of Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement Anntwanique Edwards said that concerns with the Code of Student Conduct were raised at the June 18 meeting regarding three issues: the definition of “defiance,” head coverings on school buses, and restrooms and changing facilities.

Edwards said staff looked at other districts to see how they defined “defiance,” and staff’s recommendation was to remove “defiance” and “focus instead on what is already in the Code of Conduct as it relates to disruption.” She said staff would need to outline how behavior is disruptive to the learning environment and the instruction that is taking place and the impact it has on learning.

The second issue was head coverings on school buses: Edwards said that after hearing concerns about religious or other reasons to wear a head covering, staff recommended allowing principals to waive the requirement on a case-by-case basis “for reasons such as, but not limited to, medical necessity or sincerely held religious belief.” She said that aligned with the current Code of Conduct for head coverings in school buildings. 

Restrooms and changing facilities

The third issue concerned restrooms and changing facilities; School Board Members had expressed concerns about disciplinary actions that could be taken against a student who did not leave a restroom when asked by staff members. Edwards said Board Members didn’t want that to be “punitive, especially for specific populations of students.” 

Edwards suggested changing the “vast outline” in the draft policy to a paragraph like, “Students should be provided the use of restrooms and changing facilities, for instance, locker rooms and dressing rooms for their use, respective to their biological sex at birth. Students may use single-occupancy restrooms, and students that willfully enter a restroom or changing facility designated for the opposite sex and refuse to leave when asked by instructional personnel, administrative personnel, or other employees of the district, are in violation of the code and will receive a referral and could be disciplined.”

“It is important that we highlight and make clear to the public that students who receive referrals do not necessarily have discipline connected to them.” – Chief of Equity, Inclusion, and Community Engagement Anntwanique Edwards

Edwards added, “It is important that we highlight and make clear to the public that students who receive referrals do not necessarily have discipline connected to them. Referrals must be coded by our deans and considered an offense before it is actually in their disciplinary history as something that is looked at as punitive. So the word ‘referral’ does not necessarily mean, for instance, that a child would go to [in-school detention] or something like that. They could be, with a referral, counseled and warned. It could be a phone call that goes home. It could be a conversation that happens with students… We would say that they could be disciplined, not necessarily that they would be.”

During public comment, Amy Trask said the rule was “a bit terrifying and unnecessary… It’s unclear… and it feels like it’s been copied and pasted from the Florida law… I would challenge the Board to find wording that protects students in this space.”

Abbitt: “We’ve got to be consistent with how we handle behavior”

Rockwell said she had “some concern with the bathroom one immediately going to a referral.” She called for the district to develop a Discipline Matrix that specifies the consequence for each level of offense.

Rockwell continued, “It’s particularly concerning to me with the restroom one, because we’re saying you’re going to go straight to a referral, and it seems like the first thing would be a behavior contract or a teacher-student conference. To me, I feel like that shouldn’t be the very first thing that happens… I think it’s really important to have it very clearly defined, particularly when you’re dealing with a piece in the Student Code of Conduct that only impacts one particular group. And when you have a vulnerable minority population that we are required to have rules about by the state, I think it’s incredibly important to make sure that those rules are implemented consistently from school to school and in a fair manner, so that we’re not creating unnecessary fear or unnecessary inequities within our district.”

Chair Diyonne McGraw said she agreed with giving people a warning, “but it needs to be consistent.” She said schools are having trouble working with some parents because the parents block the school employee’s phone numbers when staff members try to follow up with parents about their student’s behavior. 

Member Kay Abbitt agreed that the district should have a “cheat sheet” so everybody knows what the consequences will be for first and subsequent violations of every disciplinary offense. She added, “We’ve got to be consistent with how we handle behavior so kids – they have those parameters and they know that I’m not going to get away with this, no matter how hard I fight back or how hard my parents fight back.”

Edwards said, “People may sometimes see differences, and there’s definitely differences we have to take into account with students. However, there is a matrix that does exist for our deans.” She said deans take into account disabilities and the number of times a student has received disciplinary referrals. 

In response to a question from Rockwell, Edwards said that if a behavior results from a disability, then the consequence might be a behavioral intervention rather than a suspension. 

Student Progression Policy: setting a lowest possible grade of 50%

The second policy was the Student Progression Policy, and Chief of Teaching and Learning Jacquatte Rolle said the notable change is an amendment to the grading scale that “reflects the lowest possible grade for any assignment is to be 50%,” so scores in the 50-59 range will now be an F.

Rolle said, “This revision is more equitable for our students; it’s just a few missed assignments that permanently keep our students at either an F or a D for the entire course. This new grading scale better enables our students to recover from the assignments in which they do not perform well and increase student engagement in school.”

During public comment, a middle school civics teacher said he was concerned about the change: “One of the things that has come to my attention as an educator in our district is the amount of student apathy, as well as the lack of accountability that is expected from our student population. I do not believe that this grading policy will aim to solve those issues. I don’t see how this grading policy tackles apathy. In fact, I think it exacerbates apathy… The number of students that are currently failing our courses here in Alachua County – it’s not because of a lack of ability, it’s not because of a lack of equity. It is simply because we need to tackle this issue of student apathy.”

Abbitt said she opposed the policy and agreed with the teacher: “You know, there could be a student that works really hard and tries their best, and 50 is all they can get, but someone who has not even been motivated enough to turn something in can also get that 50. And I don’t know what problems we’re hoping to solve with this, but I don’t think this is the answer for doing that.”

African American History standards

Certain said she was “split” on the issue, but “I’m gonna kind of yield that to y’all educators.” She said she had put her light on to speak “because I’m really concerned about these African American History standards. And I’m pretty sure y’all are just going with what… the Board of Education… put out. But I’m gonna be real upset if any parent calls me and tells me that the teacher teaches a student of African descent that… they got some benefit from being enslaved because that’s in the standards that were revived. I am surely hoping that that is not something that is focused on.” She said she was “not really for” a recent statute that requires schools to teach students about victims of communism. 

Rockwell responded that she agreed with Certain “completely, but I don’t want us to direct teachers to do something that could get them in trouble if they don’t teach the standards… and it could affect students’ scores on the tests. But I would say that we can encourage our teachers to have open discussion of multiple viewpoints in their classroom, so that when they cover state standards that present a completely false narrative – because let’s be real, slavery in no way benefited black people – students feel comfortable and safe pushing back.”

Andrew: “With grading, what we want to focus on is the fairness of an equitable scale.”

Andrew said, “With grading, what we want to focus on is the fairness of an equitable scale.” He said the 0-4 grading scale has equal increments between each numeric grade, and “what we set up in education was an unfair grading system when it’s zero to 100 because you have a 59-point spread for an F.” He said that mathematically, the scale should be “zero to 50” with 0-10 an F, 11-20 a D, and so forth, “and that way, when a student does nothing, they get the zero, but it’s not a 59-point penalty in an average.” He said that if a student gets a zero on one assignment and a 100 on another assignment, their average is currently an F, and that can cause students to “give up if they miss an assignment or two or get really, really low scores like a 20 out of 100 on an assignment.”

Rockwell suggested using a letter grading scale, in which the average between an A and an F is a C, and also suggested having a lower score like 25 for an assignment that is not submitted at all “because when we average that, we get something that’s still lower than the student who really struggled and just couldn’t do better than a 50%.” 

Rockwell added, “Overwhelmingly, the research supports having more statistically even grading scales, but the research against it has found that it might increase absenteeism because students don’t feel like they have to do makeup work… but I think there’s things we could do to mitigate that and find a happy medium.” 

Deputy Superintendent Cathy Atria said the district had consulted with principals and some teachers before making the recommendations, and she said some teachers already use “this type of grading practice.” She encouraged board members to read several articles she had sent them.

Abbitt said she didn’t think students should be rewarded “50 points for doing nothing. I think that teaches a bad lesson.” She said she had read the research.

Certain asked staff to “figure out something” before the policy comes back for a second reading.

Book Challenge Policy

The third policy concerned book challenges, and Seigle said the changes include removing the ability of objectors to present testimony or call witnesses, although they can still provide documents. The policy also includes a provision that allows the the district to immediately implement new procedures if the state modifies any statute or rule, and then come back to the board to pass formal rules, which takes longer. In addition, any books that were removed may be reconsidered if the statutes or rules change. 

The “representative loophole”

During public comment, Amy Trask expressed concern about the ability of objectors to have a representative speak for them; she said, “I think, by not allowing representatives, we force challengers to address the issues they have by coming to the table themselves, and it allows us to find middle ground, if there is one, if we can find a way to alleviate their concerns for their child and not all children in the district… but allowing someone to have a representative allows them to dodge responsibility and it allows them to pass the buck, and that creates, for me, a safety concern.”

Rockwell agreed, saying that the use of a representative could allow non-parents to “undermine the intention” of a new law that limits the number of book challenges for people who do not have children in the school district because they could use a parent as a “proxy” to file the challenge. Rockwell said that would present “a loophole that undermines the intent of the law… And I also think that if you are passionate enough about a book being problematic to object, that you should be willing to attend the meeting and present your case yourself. And if someone is, for instance, ill [or traveling], we do have a phone-in option.”

Certain agreed that she would “like to close that loophole.”

Seigle said everyone has the right to be represented by legal counsel in a proceeding, but she could change the wording to “legal representative” to limit the representatives to “people who are authorized to practice law in the state of Florida.”

Rockwell asked Seigle to include specific wording about that because “I just don’t want there to be any wiggle room or loopholes, because it’s very easy for those to be exploited.”

Two book challenges

The school board voted unanimously to keep both Storm and Fury by Jennifer Armentrout (grades 9-12) and Julian is a Mermaid by Jessica Love (grades K-3) on school library shelves. 

During public comment on Julian is a Mermaid, a young boy said, “I think banning books are wrong… I’ve been growing up with books, reading them, and it’s hard to see books be taken away. So like one person doesn’t like it. It doesn’t mean to take it away from other people who do. Like Julian, people who are gay or transgender should be celebrated and not be judged from the way they are.”

Amy Trask said, “The fact that this book that depicts love and acceptance and inclusivity and freedom is even being criticized seems antithetical to so much of what we do and should stand for. Banning this book would tell students that who they are is unacceptable and it’s unworthy… Stories that depict differences can be beautiful, and books that celebrate our differences in who we are is incredibly impactful, and it’s incredibly special and needed in today’s day and age where everything is being banned.”

Trask added, “I want to thank the board for everything that they’ve done – or how they have handled the dozen-plus challenges that have been hurled at your feet. Thank you for interpreting the law the way that you have and upholding fundamental truths when it comes to having freedom to read, despite knee-buckling pressure by a small, loud faction of dissent, especially when sometimes those loud voices can be intimidating and aggressive. I appreciate you interpreting the law the way that you have and really giving everything a full and thorough examination before rendering decisions. You’re seen and valued, and I appreciate the comments that you have made and the motion that has been made to retain this book.”

Another young boy said, “Just because one person doesn’t like the book doesn’t mean another person won’t, so you shouldn’t ban any books.”

Air conditioning for the Newberry High School gym locker rooms

The board was next asked to approve the 100% Design Development/Construction Documents for air-conditioning in the Newberry High School gym locker rooms; the item had originally been on the consent agenda, but Certain asked that it be changed to an action item.

Abbitt made a motion to approve the documents, and Member Leanetta McNealy seconded the motion.

“I’m hoping it’s just rah-rah-sis-boom-bah and the vote did not pass, but there’s still a lot of question marks on that, it seems. I haven’t heard anything from our leadership here, as well as from the attorneys, which seems that we’re in this holding pattern.” – Member Tina Certain on the vote to convert Newberry Elementary School into a municipal charter school

Certain said she thought the project should wait until there is a prioritized master plan, but “we’re also dealing in a situation where we’ve got a group of folks who tried to take the schools from us out in that area, and we still have one that – I’m hoping it’s just rah-rah-sis-boom-bah and the vote did not pass, but there’s still a lot of question marks on that, it seems. I haven’t heard anything from our leadership here, as well as from the attorneys, which seems that we’re in this holding pattern. But I really think that this project needs to wait, because we’ve got the other issues that we have that are more pressing.” 

Rockwell concurred: “I too share concerns that we have a group in Newberry that has expressed that despite all three votes failing, they have no interest in dropping their charter conversion plans and have said that they will hold a vote every year for as long as it takes to pass, and I am reluctant to invest more capital funds into a facility that might, in the near future, not belong to this district if they get their way, which I hope that they never do. But this is where we are.”

“The last high school that has no A/C in the gym locker rooms.”

Chief of Operations Maria Eunice said she wanted to point out that Newberry High School is “the last high school that has no A/C in the gym locker rooms.”

McGraw said, “This is not political for me at all. We do not agree with anybody taking taxpayer dollars’ building. However, children are still going to be in those facilities, and we have to do what is needed for our students.”

Certain said her position was “not political in nature,” but “these are capital dollars that are limited in nature, and if that school is not up under district control, we still have to provide some place for our other students to play.” She mentioned a number of middle schools that do not have air conditioning in their gyms. 

“I don’t want to send a message that we’re trying to punish, because that’ll be the message that’s out there tomorrow.” – Chair Diyonne McGraw

McGraw responded, “We’re all fiscally trying to be responsible. But the other thing is, I don’t want to send a message that we’re trying to punish, because that’ll be the message that’s out there tomorrow.”

Director of Planning and Construction Suzanne Wynn said Newberry and Hawthorne are the last two high schools with no air conditioning in the locker rooms, and they are both in the works. She said there are middle school gyms that are not air-conditioned, but that is a big expense because the buildings were not designed for air conditioning, so it’s very expensive, and the district has to decide whether to spend money on that or on classroom spaces.

Rockwell said, “My concern is that we have gyms that are not air-conditioned, and I think that poses a bigger risk to students than having an air-conditioned locker room.”

McNealy said, “I’m not sure I know what a gym locker room looks like. It sounds like it’s a part of the gym at Newberry High.” When she was told that was correct, she said she thought the vote had failed for the high school, and Certain said, “Well, they said they plan to do a vote… after the 12 months have gone.”

“I can’t agree on this one. If they take it, they take it – they’ll get it with air, but I want to move forward.” – Member Leanetta McNealy

McNealy said, “We are all about the students, and if we are going to work toward these last two high schools,… I cannot see any student being in exorbitant heat. I just don’t, I just can’t see it… I can’t agree on this one. If they take it, they take it – they’ll get it with air, but I want to move forward.”

The motion passed 3-2, with Certain and Rockwell in dissent. 

Back to the 50% minimum grade

During member comment at the end of the meeting, Certain said she had just realized that the Student Progression Policy gave students 50% credit even if the work was not handed in, and she asked whether other board members would support removing that part and just leaving the minimum grade of 50% for work that is at least handed in. There was no further discussion about that, but the policy will be discussed again at its second reading.