Friday, July 27, 2012

July 23rd, 2012



I read the article yesterday.  What bothers me is that they think they had rule interpretation that allowed the practice.  CCS never used a withdraw type that indicated "Withdrawn Due to Truancy", but I wonder if Toledo did.  I don't know how the ODE classifies that type of withdraw, but I bet it would count as a DROP OUT.

The big difference between CCS and Toledo is intent.  Did TPS have a policy in place, and a properly setup withdraw type, to utilize the "Withdrawn Due to Truancy"?  Did they then follow the policy consistently?

Was there ever any discussion at CCS that would have added a withdraw type of "Withdrawn Due to Truancy"?  I know that there was no withdraw type for "Withdrawn Due to Truancy" prior to my retirement in January 2012.

No comments:

Post a Comment