Oma on Board

APS student standards of conduct compared to APS Supt Winston Brooks' standards of conduct

They should be the same right? They aren't. There are two standards of conduct in the APS,

the one that applies to students and
the one that applies to their adult role models; the people who write the standards of conduct that apply to the people who write the standards conduct.

The one, manifestly so very much higher than the other.

If you go to APS' award winning website and search for "student standards of conduct" you will find Student Rules, link.

You will find the Student Behavior Handbook, link.

A quick check on the readability of the SBH demonstrates that the handbook isn't for students. It is written by lawyers for lawyers.

There is no more useless book ever handed to students for them to not read. Nor will they take it home to their parents who, unless they are lawyers, likely can't read it either no matter the language in which it is printed.

We (teachers) used to read it to our students word for word.
It used to be called a rights and responsibilities handbook.
Now only lawyers read it, and only to other lawyers.

You will find the APS Athletic and Activity Code of Conduct, link, and its admonition;

Students who are involved in athletics/activities are held to a(n unspecified) higher standard of conduct ...

and their

Participation in all athletics and activities is a privilege offered to students, and may be withdrawn on the basis of failure to adhere to the high standards of personal conduct and ethical behavior.

Frankly, I was surprised to find the word "ethical". And then I found the weasel clause;

Professional judgment will be used by coaches, sponsors, and administrators ...

Professional judgement is not subject to review. It requires neither defense nor explanation. It is what it is; "best" judgement.

When an administrator uses bad judgement, it can easily covered up as their best judgement. "Easily", because there is no review.

You will not easily find, link, the school board's Code of Ethics, link.

By their own frank admission it is utterly unenforceable.
The title is the last time the word ethics appears.
Like school board policy, it contains no role modeling clause.

It does require them to

Establish an open, two-way communication process with ... the community.

Like I said, their Code of Ethics is utterly unenforceable.

As far as I can tell, aside from the "best judgement" of administrators, the lowest standards of conduct that students are specifically and explicitly required to meet is the law; the lowest standards of conduct acceptable amongst civilized human beings.

The highest standards of conduct mentioned anywhere on APS' award winning website are the Pillars of Character Counts!, link;
a nationally recognized, accepted and respected code of ethical conduct.

According the Student Behavior Handbook, students

are expected to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts!.

There is only one way to model the Pillars of Character Counts!
and that is to model honest accountability to them.
Character is taught by personal example.
Character is taught only by personal example.

Students are expected to model honest accountability to higher standards of conduct than the law.

The folks who established those standards for students, are not themselves honestly accountable to them. When they removed the role modeling clause from their own standards of conduct;

In no case shall the standards of conduct for an adult
be lower than the standards of conduct for students.

it was by a unanimous decision to abdicate en masse from their duties and obligations as role models of student standards of conduct.

The leadership of the APS won't tell you the truth about that.

And the establishment media isn't going to tell you the truth about the deliberate decision of the leadership of the APS to, not tell you the truth about executive and administrative standards of conduct and accountability.

The establishment media has decided to not tell you the truth about the ethics and accountability scandal in the leadership of the APS.

APS "communications" effort disengenous at best

During the APS school board meeting Wednesday, there will be a public discussion around their goal number 3:

APS will meaningfully engage families and enhance partnerships with the community to maximize student achievement.

Conspicuously absent from the recently reworded goal to improve communication with interest holders, is any mention of the word "communication", in particular, any mention of "two-way" communication.

By "public discussion" it is meant that their discussion will take place in front of the public, not that the public will actually be "meaningfully engaged" in the discussion about how to meaningfully involve them.

School Board enforcer Mary Esquivel

The leadership of the APS, let's say School Board President Marty Esquivel and Supt Winston Brooks to put faces to it, do not want to engage in two-way communication with stakeholders.

It is the last thing they want.

Winston Brooks

They refuse resolutely, to create a venue, or allow anyone else to create a venue, where stakeholders are allowed to ask questions, and where the leadership of the APS is fully expected to respond to those questions.

Not only to "respond", but to respond
candidly, forthrightly and honestly.

Esquivel and Brooks prefer public forums where questions are not allowed. They specifically and explicitly prohibit anyone from asking questions during the public forum of regular school board meetings.

Anyone who insists on asking questions anyway, will be ejected by their Praetorian Guard;

their publicly funded, private police force.

Esquivel and Brooks will do everything they can to postpone the day when they will have to stand in front of interest holders and respond to their legitimate questions about;

the core curriculum,
test scores,
truancy,
the abject lack of respect for nearly 100,000 years of teaching experience in the APS and
declining staff morale,
the effects of the lack of student discipline and the number of chronically disruptive students,
the inadequacy of administrative and executive standards of conduct and competence,
their lack of honest accountability to those standards,
the lack due process for whistleblower complaints,
the abdication of every single solitary senior role model of the student standards of conduct; the Pillars of Character Counts!,
the public corruption and incompetence in the leadership of their Praetorian Guard; their publicly funded private police force, and,
whatever the hell else any one of us wants to know about their wielding of our power and their spending of our resources.

The Citizens Advisory Council on Communications stands ready, willing and able to establish open and honest two-way communication between the leadership of the APS and the community members they serve.

The leadership of the APS stands in foursquare in opposition to their efforts.

Nobody knows about the struggle, because the establishment media is in cahoots.

To put a face to it, how about Journal Managing Editor Kent Walz?

Kent Walz is responsible for the Journal's failure to investigate and report upon the Citizens Advisory Council on Communication's efforts to establish standing before the leadership of the APS.

Kent Walz is complicit in an effort to protect the leadership of the APS from legitimate questions about the public interests and about their public service.

There, I said it. Again.

photos Mark Bralley

APS has put a document together.

They call it Community Input on Goals.
It represents everything they learned during their
community meetings on APS Goals setting.
I do mean everything.

Even for APS, it is not to be believed.
It is 109 pages long, link.

I can't begin to guess how much it cost taxpayers,
nor can I begin to describe,
of how little use it will be to them.