by Danielle Tobb ‘17

According to The Washington Post in June, the Montgomery County Board of Education was to carry out an extensive review of policies this past summer involving consequences for students caught drinking alcohol at prom or other school-sponsored events. However, MCPS spokesperson Harry Johnson said they have not yet made any official changes to regulations.

The reported policy evaluation by MCPS stems from B-CC’s prom last year where six students were found consuming alcohol. Prior to prom, B-CC’s principal stressed that any student who violated the school’s alcohol-free policy would not be able to participate in commencement. After announcing the punishment for those students, the superintendent at the time, Larry Bowers, reversed the ban.

In the absence of clear MCPS guidelines for punishing students for alcohol-related offenses following this incident, Principal Bill Gregory recently decided to specify in Sherwood’s new Code of Conduct that a police referral for a student found under the influence “could result in a citation or an arrest depending upon the severity.” MCPS’s Code of Conduct includes police referrals as well, but this specific language is unique to Sherwood. The issuing of citations by police is not a new consequence at Sherwood, but it was spelled out more explicitly that it is a possible punishment in this year’s Code of Conduct.

The school’s objective to ensure that students found drinking at school-sponsored activities will be properly disciplined was evident at the first home football game at which many students noted a police presence. According to student witnesses, at least one student was issued a citation after being found under the influence of alcohol.

According to MCPS’s Code of Conduct, students under the influence of alcohol or found in possession of alcohol face anywhere from a Level 2 to a Level 4 consequence. These consequences include and are not limited to peer mediation, In-School Interventions and Short-Term Suspensions.

Whether or not these consequences for students found drinking were a strong enough deterrent came into question at Sherwood’s latest prom when students were rounded up by school security after being suspected of drinking prior to arriving at prom. Students reportedly were vomiting in the bathrooms. School security subsequently made the intoxicated students call their parents to pick them up. Gregory said those students were given In-School Interventions, In-School Suspensions, or Out-Of-School Suspensions following prom, evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Following Sherwood’s dilemma with teen drinking at
prom, the PTSA made education on the consequences of underage drinking a priority this school year. “The PTSA has always been concerned with student safety and responsible behavior,” PTSA President Randall MacGill said. “The parents and teachers have been around long enough to have witnessed the consequences of underage drinking, either personally or through close friends.”

To contribute to this goal, the PTSA is setting up programs that all students and parents are encouraged to attend in order to learn about the impact that drugs and alcohol have on one’s body and future. The first program is scheduled for before homecoming on October 18 at 7:15 p.m. MCPD Officer Walburn has been invited to talk about teen alcohol and substance abuse. The PTSA will address the topic again in April prior to prom, according to MacGill.