The Warren County R-III School Board has aligned with the Missouri School Boards Association (MSBA) on updating nearly all district policies.

At its December meeting, the board summarily approved by unanimous vote 18 of the 19 MSBA recommendations governing topics such as release of information, artificial intelligence use, reductions in professional staff workforce, special education, admissions, enrollment eligibility, dress code, weapons at school, discipline, discipline reporting and records, behavioral threat assessment and suicide awareness.

The group tabled the measure approving the language regarding child abuse and neglect until the policy language is more well-defined.

Before the vote, Board Secretary Carolyn Spraggs posed a series of questions about various policies.

Her first query to Superintendent Dr. Gregg Klinginsmith concerned policy EHBD-AP1, which addresses training on the use of artificial intelligence.

“Who are they training for AI?” Spraggs said. “Is that staff or students?”

“Mostly our technology department is training on it,” Klinginsmith said. “Our building administrators (are as well) a little bit.”

Next, Spraggs asked about JFCA, the student dress code policy.

“Does (the policy) allow for hats and hoodies?” Spraggs asked.

“That’s something we allow at the middle school and the high school,” Klinginsmith said. “It’s not in this exact policy. We outline that in JG (student discipline).”

The final policies the board acted on, which raised questions for Spraggs, were JHDE and JHDF, which address the existing behavioral threat assessment and crisis response teams.

Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources and Student Services Dr. Brad Ross answered Spraggs’ queries about both entities and how the teams were created to address behavioral threat assessment and crisis response.

“We had trainers come up from CPS,” Ross said. “Every building has a team. If there is a threat that is made, at least two members of the team have been allowed an assessment tool.”

Regarding JHDF – the crisis response team policy – Ross said the district is also in compliance.

“This is a suicide response and prevention team,” Ross said. “It’s the same team (as behavioral threat assessment).”

The body tabled the recommendation on policy JHG regarding the definition of prevention, reporting and investigating child abuse and neglect due to the language's ambiguity. While the written policy aligns with Missouri House Bill HB 737 – 210.110, some aspects of the item leave room for interpretation.

Specifically, the concern is whether an individual would consider a given reason reasonable grounds to report. The item led to an exchange between Spraggs and board member Stephanie Tibbetts.

“Does that (legislative wording) conflict with reporting to the (child abuse) hotline because we may deem something reasonable that they may not deem reasonable?” Spraggs said.

“I think they’re trying to define spanking as not being abuse,” Tibbetts said. “That’s the way I’m reading this.”

“There may be different levels (of abuse),” Spraggs said. “What you may deem (as) reasonable (punishment), I may not. I don’t like the ambiguity of that because … it’s not an area I want gray.”

Klinginsmith added that the overarching responsibility for student care and discipline is ultimately open to interpretation.

“If a kid gets into a fight on the way home, who is responsible for that?” Klinginsmith said. “That’s been a gray area for a long time. When does our supervision end, and when does the parents’ begin? At the bus stop? You can make an argument that it’s not our responsibility until the bus gets there. There are several different arguments in that case, and I don’t know that it’s been clearly defined.”