APS Board Begins Role Modeling of Student Standards of conduct

APS School Board Member Armijo Role Models New Student Standards of Conduct re; Caring and Fairness

The APS School Board was discussing student misbehavior and how they might avoid having to punish students for misbehaving by keeping students from making bad choices in the first place.

The discussion immediately followed their unanimous vote to lower student standards of conduct; abandoning at once and for all, any premise of a district wide effort to build good character in students.

The irony hits like a club, doesn’t it?

Board Member Armijo feels she has stepped up as a role model of accountability to the same standards of conduct that she establishes and has enforced upon students.

It’s a low bar; the new standard reads;

students are expected to model and promote caring and fairness.

The old higher standard of conduct, the one Armijo voted to removed, was a little more robust. 424 words more robust.

Please find among them;

“A fair person scrupulously employs open and impartial processes for gathering and evaluating information necessary to make decisions.”

The board ignored this ethic in the process they employed to lower student standards of conduct.

One cannot be a role model of honest accountability to standards of conduct they can and have ignored at will.


Before Armijo and the board lowered student standards, student were expected to

model and promote (honest accountability to) "the Pillars of Fairness and Caring."

4. FAIRNESS

What is fairness? Most would agree it involves issues of equality, impartiality, proportionality, openness and due process. Most would agree that it is unfair to handle similar matters inconsistently. Most would agree that it is unfair to impose punishment that is not commensurate with the offense. The basic concept seems simple, even intuitive, yet applying it in daily life can be surprisingly difficult. Fairness is another tricky concept, probably more subject to legitimate debate and interpretation than any other ethical value. Disagreeing parties tend to maintain that there is only one fair position (their own, naturally). But essentially fairness implies adherence to a balanced standard of justice without relevance to one’s own feelings or inclinations.

Process

Process is crucial in settling disputes, both to reach the fairest results and to minimize complaints. A fair person scrupulously employs open and impartial processes for gathering and evaluating information necessary to make decisions. Fair people do not wait for the truth to come to them; they seek out relevant information and conflicting perspectives before making important judgments.

Impartiality

Decisions should be made without favoritism or prejudice.

Equity

An individual, company or society should correct mistakes, promptly and voluntarily. It is improper to take advantage of the weakness or ignorance of others.

5. CARING

If you existed alone in the universe, there would be no need for ethics and your heart could be a cold, hard stone. Caring is the heart of ethics, and ethical decision-making. It is scarcely possible to be truly ethical and yet unconcerned with the welfare of others. That is because ethics is ultimately about good relations with other people.

It is easier to love “humanity” than to love people. People who consider themselves ethical and yet lack a caring attitude toward individuals tend to treat others as instruments of their will. They rarely feel an obligation to be honest, loyal, fair or respectful except insofar as it is prudent for them to do so, a disposition which itself hints at duplicity and a lack of integrity. A person who really cares feels an emotional response to both the pain and pleasure of others.

Of course, sometimes we must hurt those we truly care for, and some decisions while quite ethical, do cause pain. But one should consciously cause no more harm than is reasonably necessary to perform one’s duties.

The highest form of caring is the honest expression of benevolence, or altruism. This is not to be confused with strategic charity. Gifts to charities to advance personal interests are a fraud. That is, they aren’t gifts at all. They’re investments or tax write-offs.