There are more tactful words, I would suppose, but not more honest.

The leadership of the APS steadfastly refuses to enable an
open and honest discussion of administrative and
executive role modeling of the student standards of conduct.

They refuse for some reason.

I can think of two. I can think of only two.
I have begged readers for years, to suggest a third.
I have offered those I have offended, ample opportunity
to point to the third, anonymously or otherwise.

I have never, not posted a comment.
(With two exceptions, which were simply mean spirited or obscene, and
I have no obligation what so ever, to indulge that kind of behavior.)

We are left with only two reasons on the table, that the
leadership of the APS will not be honest with stakeholders.


I reiterate my request;
somebody, anybody, please tell me what other reason there
could possibly be, that the leadership of the APS will not
open and honestly discuss role modeling, or standards, or
accountability, except that;

1 They lack the courage, and/or
2 They lack the character

Just in; a friend has suggested a third;

"because it is politically expedient."

Is it acceptable according to the Pillars of Character Counts!
to prevent an open an honest, public discussion of standards
and accountability, because it is "politically expedient"?

The APS Student Standards of Conduct;
the Pillars of Character Counts!, are online, link

Here quoted in significant part;

1. TRUSTWORTHINESS

When others trust us, they give us greater leeway because they feel we don’t need monitoring to assure that we’ll meet our obligations. They believe in us and hold us in higher esteem. That’s satisfying. At the same time, we must constantly live up to the expectations of others and refrain from even small lies or self-serving behavior that can quickly destroy our relationships.

Simply refraining from deception is not enough. Trustworthiness is the most complicated of the six core ethical values and concerns a variety of qualities like honesty, integrity, reliability and loyalty.

Honesty

There is no more fundamental ethical value than honesty. We associate honesty with people of honor, and we admire and rely on those who are honest. But honesty is a broader concept than many may realize. It involves both communications and conduct.

Honesty in communications is expressing the truth as best we know it and not conveying it in a way likely to mislead or deceive. There are three dimensions:

Truthfulness. Truthfulness is presenting the facts to the best of our knowledge. Intent is the crucial distinction between truthfulness and truth itself. Being wrong is not the same thing as lying, although honest mistakes can still damage trust insofar as they may show sloppy judgment.

Sincerity. Sincerity is genuineness, being without trickery or duplicity. It precludes all acts, including half-truths, out-of-context statements, and even silence, that are intended to create beliefs or leave impressions that are untrue or misleading.

Candor. In relationships involving legitimate expectations of trust, honesty may also require candor, forthrightness and frankness, imposing the obligation to volunteer information that another person needs to know.

It would appear that the 90,000 of our sons and daughters in
the APS, are being told that political expediency is not
an acceptable choice.

Not if, their character counts.

Political expediency is denied them, as both cowardly and corrupt.


And we are back to two;

1 They lack the courage, and/or
2 They lack the character

to enable an open and honest discussion of
the Pillars of Character Counts!