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,

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Participation in all athletics and activities is a privilege offered to students, and may be withdrawn on the basis of failure to adhere to the high standards of personal conduct and ethical behavior.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