Lexington (MA) High School Senate

LEXINGTON HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT-FACULTY SENATE

2001-2002

Moderator Ilana Kessler, Assistant Moderator Michael Fiveash, Secretary Sara Enders

<http://lhs.lexingtonma.org/senate>

Agenda

For the November 29, 2001 meeting:

1. Announcements

2. Committee Reports

3. Poster Policy Bill

4. Course Recommendation Bill

5. MCAS Resolution

6. New Business

Minutes

From the November 15, 2001 meeting:

[Minutes Approved]

[Agenda Approved]

Announcements

S. Girondel: I suggest that committee chairs announce their meeting times to the Senate. Social Action meets at 7:15am in room 520. Would the members of that committee please meet with me at the end of today's Senate session?

Kieft: Policy meets Wednesdays at 2:30 in room 232.

S. Enders: Communications meets at 2:30, Wednesdays in 231.

Collins: Climate meets at 2:30, Wednesdays in 628.

Dhanani: Oversight meets at 2:30 on Fridays in (H)520.

Fiveash: I would like to commend Secretary Enders for her summary of Dr. Seasholes' address in the minutes.

Committee Reports

Kieft: Policy met and discussed revisions to the Ten Minute Rule Bill. An administrator will be present at our next meeting. We also discussed a policy regarding students being allowed to sleep in study halls, and reviewed the Course Recommendation Bill. A final draft of an MCAS resolution was approved. Also, we looked at a suggested resolution regarding permissible behavior in the library.

Conklin: Climate drew a heading for the Wall of Rejection. We talked to the school librarians about having a quiet study area in the library; they suggested the Media Center as such an area.

Dhanani: Oversight finalized a letter that has been sent to Dr. Seasholes regarding the Poster Policy. We expect to hear back from him, shortly.

S. Enders: Auditions for readers of the morning announcements will be held this afternoon at 2:35; we'll meet outside the main office. A reminder to the members of Communications to please be there.

Honor Code Violation Policy Bill

K. Girondel: Let's reconsider this bill after fully implementing the Honor Code Policy. In high school, students should be allowed to learn from various experiences. While I don't condone cheating, and I agree that students should face consequences for such actions, I don't think this emphasis on punishment is appropriate at this time.

Dhanani: Concerns were expressed over students being punished twice for a single act; I don't have a problem with this. Colleges have a right to see an applicant's academic integrity. It was said that those with poor academics are most likely to cheat, but that is simply not true. In my experience, "A" students are just as guilty as anybody. As a transcript depicts a student's academic record, it is an appropriate place to note actions which would unfairly affect this record. Cheating needs to stand out, here, not just fade away into one fourth of a year's grade for a subject.

Catsouphes: Do any other high schools post honor code violations? If not, such a policy at LHS could be detrimental to our students. Safeguards need to be placed to limit individual teachers' jurisdiction regarding this policy. I think a third party should be involved in the decision to record a violation.

Conklin: I agree with Senator Dhanani. Also, a zero for an assignment is not a punishment in itself; it is the grade that we must assume the student would have gotten without cheating. Thus, concerns about double-punishments are unfounded.

Kessler: Can anyone answer Senator Catsouphes?

Burson: Private schools will suspend or expel students who cheat.

Inouye: There is much discussion about inevitable inconsistency in the enforcement of this proposed policy. Any punishment will be enacted at the discretion of the teacher. What we need to ask ourselves is: Do we want the violation to appear on the transcript? It shouldn't matter what other schools' policies are.

Hemond: I propose we table this discussion until the Honor Code Policy has been implemented [seconded] as it is unfair to punish students for a policy that is relatively unknown.

[Motion passes, 29:6]

Poster Policy Bill

S. Enders: There is a Poster Policy Bill already in existence, passed in August of 1990. What I have brought before you is basically this bill, only slightly updated, so that we may discuss the school's policy around the hanging of posters with something concrete in front of us. It is a relevant topic for discussion, as this year students have found that the posters they hang around school are torn down, apparently at the request of the administration, shortly thereafter.

Dhanani: I move to amend the revised policy to omit "and on the end sections of lockers." [Seconded] These words reference the big groups of lockers that used to be in A,B,C, and D,E,F, houses. Since the renovation, there are no such lockers that stick out into the hallway, anymore.

Shield: Could we add other places to the bill where students may hang posters, instead?

S. Enders: Yes. Just keep in mind that the places here referenced, metal lockers and brick and concrete walls, work because posting paper on them would not present a fire hazard. Any surface we would add would have to be similarly inflammable.

[Amendment passes]

David: Maybe this is gratuitous, but I would like to add, "and on available bulletin boards." [Seconded]

[Amendment passes]

K. Girondel: I would like to change the title to "Revised Poster Bill," to make it clear that this bill replaces the old one.

Burson: We have been talking with Dr. Seasholes about the treatment of posters hung by students, as many posters were being torn down, and we will continue that conversation.

Kieft: Are the new walls flammable?

K. Girondel: The school was built according to strict codes, so I would imagine not.

Kieft: Would it be possible to include this new material as an appropriate surface for posters?

Kessler: Dr. Seasholes' concerns regarding posters on the wall include a concern about the content of the posters. I encourage an amendment that would address what is permissible content. Also, we should address the question of under what circumstances an outside group may post posters at the high school.

Fried: I question the need to clarify a "reasonable amount" of posters. The only time I see a lot of posters up is around Elections. I don' t think a line has ever been crossed, and this doesn't seem to be an issue.

Hemond: I agree with Senator Kieft that students should be allowed to post posters on the new walls.

Kafrissen: I notice that doorways were not mentioned as a permissible site for the posting of posters. Were they omitted for any reason regarding safety?

S. Enders: Not by me.

Kafrissen: Those doorways are very visible. I would not be opposed to adding them as an available space.

Lessin: What does "approval" mean? As posters must be signed in order to be hung, the teacher signing them should judge whether or not their content is appropriate.

Shield: To echo what Senator Lessin said, further written policy about censoring posters is not necessary. As far as outsiders posting on school grounds, this is generally not a problem. I think the problem is that now, there are no posters up around school; they are being torn down, and this is a problem. Also, I agree with Senator Kieft: It is hard to stick a poster to brick or concrete. Students should be given more options if they are available.

Catsouphes: Senator Kafrissen's concern is valid. I think we can add doorways, because they do not present a hazard.

Rehman: Are we discussing censorship of posters? Do advisors also monitor the number of posters to be hung? One group shouldn't be able to dominate the walls with its posters.

K. Girondel: I don't think this has been a real problem. As an advisor, I tell my kids not to overdo it.

Dhanani: I think teacher discretion does work. Regarding whether outsiders may post material, I don't have a problem with it. The only such things that have been posted in the past were things students would be interested in.

Burson: I propose an amendment to read "posters must…. and signed". [Seconded] We need to clarify what "approved" means.

Irvin: Could we change that to "with full signature"? [Friendly amendment accepted]

Kafrissen: Perhaps the procedure should be clarified that the posters should be signed, then photocopied.

Jehle: Wasn't that a concern of Dr. Seasholes &endash; that Xeroxing an already signed poster was not acceptable?

Girondel: I think a full signature is unnecessary. When the advisor only needs to sign one paper that will then be photocopied, there is no issue, but a student could have several original posters that they wish to have signed individually. A full signature then can make a great difference in the size of the task.

Kieft: If a poster is inappropriate, teachers may always take it down.

Lessin: If the rationale for the full signature is that initials are hard to read, signatures can be just as indecipherable. I disagree with Senator Kieft: No one should be able to tear down posters that are hung.

Kafrissen: Years ago, Folio posters that were approved by Arthur Dulong were torn down by other teachers. This is unacceptable. If this policy passes, it should be quite clear that teachers, administrators, custodians, may not simply rip down a poster.

List of Senators Absent from the November 15, 2001 Meeting

T. Shen

A. Gong

K. Ly

D. Nagiel

S. Yang

M. Finnegan