The committee reviewed 2151P as requested during the first committee meeting. Members were asked to bring additional concerns, questions, or areas they believed to be important for review. Areas/ideas focused on during this discussion included:
- Sanctions:
- Problem exists that sanctions are not equitable within a school and between schools. Different individuals provide different consequences in similar situations.
- Interpretations of the language in 2151P may be different between administrations, etc.
- A suggestion was provided to have the committee think about the creation of one ‘body’ to determine sanctions – this ‘body’ would provide decisions for all four schools.
- Problem exists that sanctions are not equitable within a school and between schools. Different individuals provide different consequences in similar situations.
- Investigations: needs to be conducted by more than one person. There needs to be more than one person involved in gathering information.
- During an investigation – there needs to be a full review of self-reports and how these can be treated as educational in nature.
- A question was raised regarding the training of individuals on how to recognize students/individuals under the influence.
- Committee dug into topics discussed during the first meeting deeper – there were no new areas in 2151P that the group felt needed to be added to the list created in the first meeting.
- The committee discussed the language used – described as too wordy and difficult to access in some instances, especially for parents and students.
- The need for clear definitions to be added to the language was discussed, without become too ‘lawyerly.’ There needs to remain the opportunity for schools to apply the procedure
- Sanctions / Consequence / Discipline / Corrective Action (used in 3241P)
- Self-Report
- Honest
- Cooperative
- Non-Sport Activity
- “Double Jeopardy”
- Minimum standards for an investigation
- This should be a stand-alone section
- 3241P: In this procedure the guidance to take into account the maturity of the child is important. This guidance is lacking in 2151P.
- The use of exhibits / examples to help guide implementation would be beneficial to athletes, parents, coaches, and administrators.
- What are a menu of options for a ‘corrective action?’ Can this be added?
- Vaping as it applies to tobacco v drugs, etc. is important.
- 3241P: the language specific to drugs is very clear and also flexible. How can this be replicated in 2151P?
- How to balance corrective action as outlined with safety concerns for athletes who are using drugs/alcohol?
The group would like to see the current language in 2151P reordered to mirror 3241P, to include areas that need clarification / gaps in the language. Jeff will work to complete this ahead of the next scheduled meeting.
Next Meeting: February 2, 2017, 5:00pm-6:30pm at the ESC-West Suite 308.