A proposal to require volunteers in Roanoke’s schools to undergo background checks is on hold.
Superintendent Rita Bishop told the school board in a work session Wednesday morning that she will seek input from principals next week regarding how to proceed. In the meantime, she said principals will be directed to maintain a list of volunteers and check it against the state’s sex offender registry.
“Volunteers are not to be alone with students, not to assist with things like toileting,” Bishop added.
Many volunteers do not work with students directly but perform administrative tasks such as making copies, she said.
The proposal to more strictly screen volunteers came to light this summer after parents contacted The Roanoke Times about it. Bishop said in hindsight the concept had not been discussed with principals or any of the community organizations that supply volunteers. She estimates some 600 volunteers give their time to the city’s schools.
“If we want volunteers, we have to make sure it’s not hard to be one,” school board member Todd Putney said.
Bishop is preparing to launch a separate initiative that would place mentors in one-on-one relationships with students. Those individuals will be subject to intense criminal background checks, she said. School officials may learn from that process how – or whether – to move forward with volunteer screens.
http://liarcatchers.com/background_checks.html
In other board news, the board informally opted not to institute random drug testing for student athletes. No vote was taken. Salem school officials adopted a policy last year, and the Botetourt County School Board approved a similar plan earlier this month. But some Roanoke School Board members noted the testing is costly and not always an effective deterrent.
“I think before I’d say let’s do this, I’d like to know if there is success,” school board member Annette Lewis said.
Board members on Wednesday also turned down a proposal by Putney that would have required school employees to report outside employment if they work as high school athletics coaches for other school divisions.
“I think it makes sense for us to be aware of the occasions where our staff are working for other districts,” Putney said.
His concerns — centered around loyalties — stemmed from a city school employee who coached at an area private school and openly admitted recruiting city students for the private school team, he said.
“I am totally, totally against a policy like this because to me it’s like punishing the whole class for one student’s misbehavior,” school board member Suzanne Moore said.
School board Chairman David Carson said he would like to have such a policy to understand why city school employees are not coaching the city’s teams.
“I would not restrict the other coaching,” he said. “I’d want to know about it. I’d want to have the ability to potentially restrict it. I would make it high school only, head and assistant coaching only.”
Lewis and Mae Huff each said they could not support a proposal that discouraged employees from working part-time jobs.
