School Discipline: Pennridge Board Approves Restorative Practices
A 7-2 vote adds conflict resolution tools to the policy, while community debate continues over the potential closure of South Middle School.
By James Mitchell ·
The central question at the Pennridge School Board meeting on Monday, October 26, was whether a new disciplinary approach could coexist with traditional punishments without confusing staff. The board answered that question with a 7-2 vote to approve revisions to the student-discipline policy. The change authorizes restorative practices as an alternative to detention, suspension, and expulsion.
Restorative practices shift the focus from punishment to relationship building. Administrators may now use tools such as restorative conferences, peer mediation, and problem-solving circles. Board member Carly Taylor clarified that these new options do not remove existing consequences. She stated that the option to use restorative justice sessions where appropriate does not replace traditional forms of discipline. Application remains at the discretion of the administration team.
The approval process highlighted a divide over timing. Two board members, Thomas Trauger and Brian McMullen, voted against the measure. Trauger supported the concept but argued that staff needed training before the policy was finalized. He noted that Director of Student Services Ernest Johnson had outlined a plan for training through the Bucks County Intermediate Unit this winter. Trauger said the board must ensure affected staff have the necessary tools prior to policy approval.
McMullen also voiced support for the practice but called for a basic implementation plan. He wanted to see how the new methods align with existing procedures. McMullen said he would rather get the process right the first time than fix it after something goes wrong. The board’s majority accepted the policy as written, planning implementation for the 2027-28 school year.
The vote came alongside a contentious discussion regarding the future of South Middle School. The district proposes closing the school and consolidating three middle schools into two starting in the 2028-29 school year. Administrators point to declining enrollment and rising expenses. A 2017 study projects the closure will save an estimated $3.3 million annually. This savings would come primarily from reduced personnel costs. Enrollment at the remaining schools would jump to roughly 700 students each, still below 70% utilization.
Public comment turned to the logistics of the proposed consolidation. Several speakers demanded broader community involvement in the decision. Resident John Seager urged the board to create a citizens committee after the current planning committee finishes its work. He noted that 40 of the 52 members on the current committee are district employees and that their meetings are closed to the public. Seager argued that creating a new committee would not impede progress if the consolidation takes place.
Other residents sought more transparency. Barbara Russell encouraged officials to seek input from residents without children in the district. Kim Purcell requested summaries of the planning committee’s work and easier access to Student Services Committee minutes. The board will review findings from the planning committee in January and aims for a final decision in April. The next board meeting is scheduled for December 1 at 6:30 p.m.
