Craig Kotsmith EDAD 5914 Spring 2012 FINAL EXAMINATION 1. Landmark Court Case Decision(s) a.

I created the following Landmark Course Case matrix last year for a course to help me gain a deeper understanding for legal precedent in education law. Title
Ingraham v Wright

Date
Argued: November 2, 1976 --Decided: April 19, 1977

Situation
Corporal Punishment Petitioners: James Ingraham and Roosevelt Andrews Respondents: Willie J. Wright, et al. Petitioners' Claim: Officials at Drew Junior High School in Florida violated the Eighth (cruel and unusual punishment) and Fourteenth Amendments (due process) by paddling students in school.

Identification of the Issue

Corporal punishment in violation of their constitutional rights

Decision of the Court

54 decision - in favor of Wright - Drew Junior High

Implication/Significance
The Court said corporal punishment, or spanking, is not cruel and unusual punishment. (Eighth Amendment) Schools can use corporal punishment without giving students a chance to explain their conduct or otherwise defend themselves. (Due Process - Fourteenth Amendment)

South Gibson School Board v Sollman

Decided: May 26, 2000

Zero Tolerance Drug Policy Sollman was found in possession of a small amount of marijuana in the unlocked glove box of his truck There were three days left in the semester and he was suspended and later expelled from the school for the balance of the year In Rhode Island, the principal invited a Jewish rabbi to deliver a prayer at the graduation ceremony against the wishes of the Weismans 9 students were suspended for destroying school property and disrupting the learning environment

Expulsion was expelled for the remainder of the semester and second semester Claim that the excessive

The courts ruled in favor of Sollman

School rules may be insignificant if they are found excessive and/or capricious

Lee v. Weisman

1992

Separation of church and State

5-4 ruling that a clergy led prayer is a violation of first amendment Supreme Court ruled 54 in favor of the students

Separation of church and state especially applies when students are not given choice to refrain event. Suspension denied their due process All students are entitled to an education

Goss v Lopez

1975

The principal did not hold hearings for the suspended students before ordering the suspension

Doe v Little Rock School District

August 18, 2004

Ms. Doe was found to have Marijuana in her purse

Santa Fe Independent School District V. Doe

2000

A prayer was delivered over the loudspeaker

First court ruled that it was in violation of due process rights Students should not be subjected to personal search as it is a violation of fourth amendment rights Privacy rights Establishing religion - School argued that speech was private -Doe argued that Families should be able to establish a religion of choice Freedom of Speech is this a violation

Doe was convicted of a misdemeanor as a result of the search The district search was found unreasonable 6-3 that it was a violation of the establishment clause it was made public by having it over the loudspeaker

Search policies and student rights are affected by this ruling. Unreasonable searches.

Students must be given the option from refraining from religious activity. Religious activity cannot be school initiated.

Tinker v. Des Moines

1969

Students wore black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War. Administrators created a policy banning the armbands and made students aware of this rule 2003 Deborah Mayer, 4th-6th grade social teacher, Indiana Used TFK as part of her current events discussion, which followed the curriculum Issue about the War in Iraq Shared with class that she would honk when she drove past a march and saw a sign that read, Honk for Peace Tied this is with the lesson that we should all try to reach peaceful resolutions, including the playground Mayer was a probationary teacher and was let go at the end of the year Filed suit saying the school had violated her First Amendment Rights

7-2 in favor of students/Tinker

Freedom of speech must be acknowledged by school districts

Mayer v. Monroe County Community School Corporation

December 1, 2006

Filed suit saying the school had violated her First Amendment Rights

Seventh Circuit ruled unanimously that her first amendment rights were not violated when she was told not to express her opinions on the war in Iraq. Students are required to be in class and therefore are a captive audience and shouldnt be subjected to personal views and opinions

Teachers are not safe under the First Amendment Speech has to be in the best interest of the employee Taught within curriculum, (both TFK and Peace) still let go by the board because parents complained

East Hartford Education Association v. Board of Education

1977

Richard Brimley English teacher in Connecticut High School Refused to wear a necktie after being reprimanded for not following teacher dress code. Originally was told by his administration to wear a necktie while teaching English, but that he could choose not to wear a tie during his filmmaking classes, as filmmaking is a less formal course.

Argued that First & Fourteenth Amendment shall prevent forcing him to wear a necktie

Vote in favor of the school board

It is not federal courts obligation to make routine decisions for public school systems.

Drugger vs. Sprouse

February 4, 1988

Appellee Anthony Plavich is an employee of the Murray County school system. A suit was filed by a student, appellant Darin Dugger, for injuries he received when he was thrown from the back of a pickup truck while delivering wrestling mats from one county school to another.

The accident that happened was not covered under the schools insurance policy. The issue was whether or not the school waives the right of sovereign immunity because they have such a policy.

Where the plain terms of the policy provide that there is no coverage for the particular claim, the policy does not create a waiver of sovereign immunity as to that claim. Here the trial court found that the policy did not provide coverage for the appellant's claim. Where there is no insurance coverage, there is no waiver of sovereign immunity. The Court found that the expulsion of Trent by the Expulsion Examiner and the South Gibson School Board was in violation of Indiana law and must not be allowed to stand. The expulsion extended beyond the 1998-99 school year, Indiana Code did not include summer school. The Court also found that the Board acted in an arbitrary and

Where there are gaps in liability insurance, sovereign immunity may serve as a defense to fill those gaps. Recently, NCLB has provided immunity for teachers and administrators acting within the scope of their authority.

South Gibson School Board v. Sollman

May 26, 2000

Gibson Southern High School has a zero-tolerance drug policy. Any student found in possession of drugs is expelled from school. On December 17, 1998,Trent Sollman, a junior, was found in possession of a small amount of marijuana in the unlocked glove box of his truck. There were only three days left in the fall semester and he was suspended and later expelled from school for the balance of the year, and he

Expulsion examiner determined that Trent Sollman would be expelled from GSHS for the remainder of the first semester, second semester, and summer school. Trent would be allowed to reenter GSHS in the fall of the 1999-2000 school year. It was also decided

Trent was allowed credit for completed coursework if he passed the course once zeroes were put in place. He was also allowed to take summer school courses.

South Gibson School Board v. Sollman

May 26, 2000

Gibson Southern High School has a zero-tolerance drug policy. Any student found in possession of drugs is expelled from school. On December 17, 1998,Trent Sollman, a junior, was found in possession of a small amount of marijuana in the unlocked glove box of his truck. There were only three days left in the fall semester and he was suspended and later expelled from school for the balance of the year, and he was denied all course work previously completed that semester.

Expulsion examiner determined that Trent Sollman would be expelled from GSHS for the remainder of the first semester, second semester, and summer school. Trent would be allowed to reenter GSHS in the fall of the 1999-2000 school year. It was also decided that he would not receive credit for his coursework that was already completed. A mother of one of the students noticed bruising on buttocks and reported it to the school & also to the Baxter County Division of Children and Family Services. Division of Children and Family Services found evidence of abuse citing that the Service must act on the evidence of bruising. The caseworker testified that the she did not believe the situation to be abusive.

The Court found that the expulsion of Trent by the Expulsion Examiner and the South Gibson School Board was in violation of Indiana law and must not be allowed to stand. The expulsion extended beyond the 1998-99 school year, Indiana Code did not include summer school. The Court also found that the Board acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner and abused its discretion in denying Trent credit for first semester courses for which he may have earned a passing grade. We do not believe that one factor, standing alone and applied as a litmus test, without consideration of all the attendant circumstances, is an appropriate measure to be used in all cases for determining whether an allegation of abuse is to be substantiated. There must be some exercise of judgment, as this is an area which does not lend itself to facile determination. On this record, we uphold the circuit courts finding of no credible evidence to support the allegation of abuse, and it finding that the punishment was not excessive or abusive

Trent was allowed credit for completed coursework if he passed the course once zeroes were put in place. He was also allowed to take summer school courses.

Arkansas Department of Human Services v. Pat Caldwell

1992

Pat Caldwell Assistant Principal at Guy Berry Middle School in Mountain Home, AR. Three 5th grade girls were caught smoking cigarettes. The girls were instructed to write a report on smoking & were paddled. Two girls receiving three licks and the third girl received one lick (she was not actually smoking).

Corporal Punishment is allowable by federal law and must be addressed by state law.

References Assistant Principal Cornell University Law School - http://www.law.cornell.edu Caldwell stated that she followed 2005 Pearson Education, Inc.
school policy: 1. Brought in another teacher as a witness. 2. Had the students touch their knees

I would like to expand on the Goss v. Lopez ruling, which ruled in the favor of students denied their due process rights prior to being suspended. This ruling served to ensure students are given due process in determining the appropriateness of suspension. This helped lay the groundwork for student due process procedures for students. The severity associated with expulsion requires a formal hearing, which grants students full fourteenth amendment rights of due process and equal protection privileges. The school must provide conclusive evidence that the students actions fall within the school district policy guidelines for expulsion. 2. Free and Appropriate Public Education The Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School v. Rowley ruling ensures schools provide students an equitable opportunity to reach their fullest potential. Every student has the ability to learn, and schools have the responsibility to give every student that empowering opportunity. As a society, individual differences are to be valued and educational institutions help accomplish the aim to treat each person with dignity and equity. Appropriate education as it applies to IEP team decision-making procedures means providing available educational services/recourses to best the needs of the student. The value of the individual student is held with high regard as strengthened by school policy and law. The special education support team provides the needed educational support these students need. This team is protected by the maintenance of effort requirement set forth by IDEA. A key with IEP decisions is how the services best help meet the academic needs of the student. This is essential in order to encourage a positive outcome for the student.

3. Good Policy Let me start by stating good policy can only be effective if it is appropriately communicated and followed. A well-formed and practiced school policy serves to protect and promote the educational process. Policy provides a protocol for operating within the educational institution. Clear expectations and consequences are communicated through education policy. School districts are complex organizations, which involve the most precious and impressionable human resource, students. Thoughtful and consistent policy helps ensure students are best served. Properly implementing school policy can greatly reduce subjectivity, inconsistency, and confusion. In the end, a policy, no matter how well written, will only be as effective as the degree to which it is implemented. 4. District Internet Policy School district internet policy sets forth guidelines for access to the school district computer system and acceptable and safe use of the internet, including electronic communications. The internet policy helps protect the district as well as the students from internet misuse. Both legal and ethical guidelines are outlined by the school district internet policy, which helps ensure educational aims are promoted through the districtwide internet use. The internet policy serves the various educational stakeholders including students, staff, and parents. The students are able to recognize the school systems internet use as an educational tool. The dos and dont are clearly defined by the policy. Most importantly, the district policy helps ensure student safety and protect them from negative consequences of internet misuse by clearly defining the expectations. Staff are also able

to recognize the clear expectations for school district internet use. The policy warns of legal ramifications of computer misuse. It often seems to be the case that people do not know what they do not know. The policy helps eliminate questionable computer use and promote professional integrity to the educational aims. Parents are also able to see the policy as it is written. This open communication of policy to all stakeholders helps promote organizational effectiveness. Maintaining a clearly communicated internet policy promotes the continuous improvement efforts of a school. It protects the school district legally and promotes positive public relations through open communication. As technology continues to rapidly change, these policies will also adapt to best protect students and promote educational aims. 5. Legal/Ethical Leadership I am a firm believer in leadership by example. Therefore, I would never expect a higher ethical standard for my teaching staff than what I practice. I once read, Whatever you decide to be, be a good one. To me, being a good leader means setting a good example. Although leadership by example is powerful, legal and ethical leadership must also be provided through methodical decision-making and effective communication. Similar to school improvement, effective policy development is an ongoing process. I will have to constantly update myself on current school law issues. It is essential for me as a school leader to diligently update school policies to ensure relevance and legal protection.

It is not enough to update policy. Policies must be effectively communicated and followed by everyone involved. This communication may be done through workshops, handbooks, and other meetings, but it is crucial that everyone knows and understands how the school policy relates to them. I would provide the clear communication necessary to ensure understanding, and the courage to follow through with those not following the policy. The policy must be enforced for it to be effective, and that responsibility would often fall on me as the school leader. Finally, providing legal and ethical leadership is impossible to do alone in education. As a leader, if I do not know the answer, I better find someone who does. This may be the districts lawyer or maybe another administrator, but gaining legal and ethical insight is extremely important to effective decision-making. I would also share this value of ethical behavior through encouraging collaboration when developing new school policies. This would help empower a school culture that recognizes and values positive decisions. Providing ethical and legal leadership for a school is not an easy role, but it is a critical responsibility of a school leader to ensure educational effectiveness. Final Thoughts (Mainly Related to #4) The rapid advancement of technology affects the landscape of education as much as any facet of society. The unintended dilemmas created by communication and information technologys growing role in society becomes evident when observing the educational process. An educator may feel reluctant to ask questions related to legal and ethical issues related to technology for fear of the answers. Should I contact the author before making copies out of a book for educational purposes? I have noticed many teachers copying textbooks. Is that appropriate? Should I report a teacher or another

administrator that has sent me a forward in poor taste for the educational environment, or should I simply delete it? Is it wrong to check my savings balance at work even if it only takes two minutes? Should I worry about students listening to headphones during their passing time and classroom work-time? What if they are listening to music deemed inappropriate for the school environment? Should I address the legal aspect of a student making a highlight video using more than the accepted 30-second music clip? Is it appropriate for students to upload a video to YouTube during school hours? I noticed a student with a photo of a male athlete training without wearing a shirt as his computer desktop image; should I ask him to change the background? What about a female beach volleyball player? Many questions may also rise out of the increasing use of social networking media? How concerned should I be about students on Facebook? I heard of a coach and music teacher adding students to their Facebook friends list for scheduling purposes. Is this okay? Can I safely add a student to my Facebook friends list after they graduate? How long should I wait? Should educators altogether delete their Facebook pages in order to be safe? The ethical and legal questions related to technology will continue to amass as the rate of change continues to exponentially increase. As an aspiring educational leader, I am subject to greater scrutiny than most other occupational areas. This is something that I accept and embrace. What a position of influence and responsibility an educator holds. Some shy away from this field due to the volume of legal and ethical guidelines. I say the education field has only enough room for those willing to live within the legal and ethical boundaries to make positive differences in students lives.