Code Of Conduct Amendment

This is my unit 2 Action project for my Arguments course. Unit 2 was titled 1857 and focused on investigating a nations flaws and contradictions. The class examined the famous Scott VS Sanford case as a way to better understand how a nation contradicts itself. A variety of guiding questions were present in the unit and included: What tests the strength of an argument, How can a nations logic be flawed, and Why should a nation's argument be challenged. For the unit's action project students were asked to demonstrate their understanding of an argument's strength and soundness by evaluating GCE's Code of Conduct and crafting an amendment to a section of it. This unit was extremely intriguing and insightful. I felt I gained a broader and more comprehensive understanding of such an important moment in our nations history. I am really proud of my continued ability to dive deeper and continue asking questions during the unit as it allowed me to gain a certain set of understandings that I know will remain with me and impact me throughout my life. 

The two, related articles from GCE’s Code of Conduct I’m amending are as follows:
Behavioral Contract, a written agreement between the student/parent/guardian and school listing requirements for improvement

Probation, a written agreement with the student for a defined period of good behavior in lieu of suspension

These two rules, located in the “How” section on page two of the GCE Code of Conduct, are pointless and unjust. A written contract and or agreement is void and holds no validity unless the signee is over the age of eighteen. Additionally, I believe this is an invalid rule because a written contract or agreement teaches the student nothing about their wrongdoing. It’s easy to craft an illegitimate argument and make statements and promises that one has an intention of keeping. A written argument and or contract has no place in the context of disciplinary action in a high school. An alternate way to establish an agreement is to have a common understanding of the school’s policies and overall mission which would then allow students to conduct themselves in a manner that aligns with the school’s ethos. The formal argument of this amendment can be found below:
P1: A student does something that goes against a rule or policy in the GCE Code of Conduct.
P2: A written contract or agreement is proposed as a way for the student to learn and change based on their wrongdoing.
C: The student learns from their mistake and pays for their wrongdoing, in addition to crafting an agreement to pursue a certain type of positive behavior.

I don’t believe there are any instances in which writing an agreement or contract should be used as a form of punishment or disciplinary conduct. An agreement makes students reflect, which is an important part of the learning and rehabilitation process but not the entire thing. In addition to reflecting on your actions it is vital to change them through positive reinforcement. In addition to my personal support of the amendment, fellow GCE Junior Maddie F gave her impression of the proposed amendment by stating “I think that using a written agreement is a stupid way to teach a student a lesson. it doesn't have any sort of effect on the student and they might just reciprocate the same behavior since they weren't given a proper punishment” I would like to completely remove these two points from the GCE Code of Conduct. The previous argument, newly amended by me is:
P1: A student does something that goes against a rule or policy in the GCE Code of Conduct.
P2: A written contract or agreement is proposed as a way for the student to learn and change based on their wrongdoing.
P3: A written contract or agreement with a signee under eighteen is invalid and a contract or agreement does nothing to ensure the student changes and improves their behavior.
C: A written contract should not be used as a form of punishment, agreement, or education for a student's wrongdoing.

To help individuals grasp the meaning of my argument and its significance, my critique of the rule as it is written relates to actual ability vs. perceived ability. Imagine You need enlightenment and knowledge and you set out searching for a source of both.

(2016) Blue Sphere

You locate a blue sphere that states it can provide you with both so you go ahead and acquire the blue sphere with the hope you’ll get what you've been searching for. The blue sphere turns out to be nothing more than its physical being. The blue sphere is deemed useless in the context in which it was originally presented. Life at school will change as the result of my amendment. In the unfortunate event when a student commits an act that goes against a rule or policy in the Code of Conduct there will be no written contracts or agreements in place because of their lack of validity and inability to effectively teach the student. An inefficient and ineffective policy will be removed allowing for the more fundamentally sound options to prevail and be correctly implemented. The US Constitutional amendment that relates the most to my amendment is the sixth amendment, which states the rights of an accused individual during the prosecution process. The amendment states an individual's right to a trial by jury as well as the right to confront opposing witnesses and to counsel. My amendment to the Code of Conduct is closely related to the constitutional sixth amendment because it focuses on the rights of an accused or guilty student. It lays a basic foundation of students rights by removing a pointless set of rules related to the creation of a written agreement or contract as a form of punishment and rehabilitation. The removal of the rules relating to written contracts reinforces the already existing rules and policies in relation to a student's punishment. The removal of the rules leave a set of policies in place that more effectively teaches the students of their wrongdoings and fosters positive change. The policies in place act to teach the student through action rather than writing, a much more effective way of learning from your mistakes.

My amendment demonstrates true citizenship by creating a certain set of rules and policies that effectively teach and restore students. My amendment's removal of the rules relating to written contracts and agreements refines and reinforces the already existing set of policies focusing on students punishment. The current policies in place regarding written contracts and agreements as a form of punishment are invalid and unjust because of their flawed logic and have a inability to properly teach and rehabilitate students. These weaknesses have caused me to call for their complete removal. Having certain policies in place that act to teach through experience and positive reinforcement are much more effective in achieving change than an argument that holds to validity or significance to the signee. It is vital to to have a set of policies that effectively deal with students in a way that truly teaches them about their wrongdoings in a way that will cause them to evolve and change for good.