Technology Teacher 03/30/2016

• AASA | American Association of School Administrators

  • AASA's Statement of Ethics for Educational Leaders
  • An educational leader’s professional conduct must conform to an ethical code of behavior, and the code must set high standards for all educational leaders.
  • The educational leader acknowledges that he or she serves the schools and community by providing equal educational opportunities to each and every child.

  • The educational leader:

    1. Makes the education and well-being of students the fundamental value of all decision making.
       
    2. Fulfills all professional duties with honesty and integrity and always acts in a trustworthy and responsible manner.
       
    3. Supports the principle of due process and protects the civil and human rights of all individuals.
       
    4. Implements local, state and national laws.
       
    5. Advises the school board and implements the board's policies and administrative rules and regulations.
       
    6. Pursues appropriate measures to correct those laws, policies, and regulations that are not consistent with sound educational goals or that are not in the best interest of children.
       
    7. Avoids using his/her position for personal gain through political, social, religious, economic or other influences.
       
    8. Accepts academic degrees or professional certification only from accredited institutions.
       
    9. Maintains the standards and seeks to improve the effectiveness of the profession through research and continuing professional development.
       
    10. Honors all contracts until fulfillment, release or dissolution mutually agreed upon by all parties.
        
    11. Accepts responsibility and accountability for one’s own actions and behaviors.
        
    12. Commits to serving others above self.

• Code of Ethics for Educators

  • The professional educator strives to create a learning environment that nurtures to fulfillment the potential of all students.
  • PRINCIPLE I: Ethical Conduct toward Students
  • 1. The professional educator deals considerately and justly with each student, and seeks to resolve problems, including discipline, according to law and school policy.
    
    2. The professional educator does not intentionally expose the student to disparagement.
    
    3. The professional educator does not reveal confidential information concerning students, unless required by law.
    
    4. The professional educator makes a constructive effort to protect the student from conditions detrimental to learning, health, or safety.
    
    5. The professional educator endeavors to present facts without distortion, bias, or personal prejudice.
  • PRINCIPLE II: Ethical Conduct toward Practices and Performance
  • 1. The professional educator applies for, accepts, or assigns a position or a responsibility on the basis of professional qualifications, and adheres to the terms of a contract or appointment.
    
    2. The professional educator maintains sound mental health, physical stamina, and social prudence necessary to perform the duties of any professional assignment.
    
    3. The professional educator continues professional growth.
    
    4. The professional educator complies with written local school policies and applicable laws and regulations that are not in conflict with this code of ethics.
    
    5. The professional educator does not intentionally misrepresent official policies of the school or educational organizations, and clearly distinguishes those views from his or her own personal opinions.
    
    6. The professional educator honestly accounts for all funds committed to his or her charge.
    
    7. The professional educator does not use institutional or professional privileges for personal or partisan advantage.
  • PRINCIPLE III
  • Ethical Conduct toward Professional Colleagues
  • 1. The professional educator does not reveal confidential information concerning colleagues unless required by law.
    
    2. The professional educator does not willfully make false statements about a colleague or the school system.
    
    3. The professional educator does not interfere with a colleague's freedom of choice, and works to eliminate coercion that forces educators to support actions and ideologies that violate individual professional integrity.
  • PRINCIPLE IV: Ethical Conduct toward Parents and Community

  • 1. The professional educator makes concerted efforts to communicate to parents all information that should be revealed in the interest of the student.
    
    2. The professional educator endeavors to understand and respect the values and traditions of the diverse cultures represented in the community and in his or her classroom.
    
    3. The professional educator manifests a positive and active role in school/community relations.

     

     

• Module 4 over view

  Some of the common areas mentioned in these ethics codes are: • Treatment of and relationships with students, colleagues, parents, and superiors • Use of school time and property • Dealing with conflicts of interest • Representing one’s self, school, district, and profession properly • Behaviors that are specific to the profession -The purpose of an ethics code is to assist members of organizations with their behavior and decision making in accordance with accepted norms of the group - Case studies allow one to see how the norms represented in an ethics code can be applied in a real-world situation. -Regarding one’s own behavior: Will a person make the ethical choice? o Will a school employee use the school copy machine to make “a few copies” of a personal document? o Will a teacher assign “busy work” to students because he/she has an assignment due for a graduate course and needs the time to complete it? o Will a school principal exaggerate his/her experiences in order to improve their chances for the position of superintendent? - Regarding others’ behavior: What should a teacher do from an ethical standpoint? o A teacher knows that the principal is not following the rules in the administration of state-wide tests at their school. o A colleague asks a teacher to cover his/her class for 30 minutes at the end of the day so they can leave early to get to their other job. o A special educator withholds relevant information about the student’s performance in a teacher’s class at an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting. - several ways one can respond to an unethical situation: • Ignore the unethical behavior; one could rationalize this by thinking that it is not his/her job to address the situation since he/she is not in a supervisory role. • Join in the unethical behavior, as one might fear that he/she would be bringing attention to him/herself by not joining. • Encourage those engaged in the unethical behavior to stop and do the right/ethical thing. • Inform someone in a supervisory position of the unethical behavior. - A person’s response to a situation is sometimes influenced by a fear of retaliation. Sometimes the fear is real and a person suffers isolation, criticism, and/or retaliation as a result.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/25/2016

• Login - Vive La Revolution 2016 - Kidblog

  •  

        Username or password incorrect. Lost your

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/23/2016

• Athletic directors face daily challenges - The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

  • but with more students playing more sports than ever, the days are longer and the demands endless.
  • There was a time when the high school athletic director was a coach (probably football or basketball), definitely a teacher.
  • Athletic Administrators Association, there were 30 changes among the association’s 148 high school and middle school members for the 2013-14 school year.
  • “It’s becoming a burnout position right now,” said Thor Nilsen, who retired in 2013 after a 43-year career in education that included 26 as an athletic administrator.
  • “People want the athletic administrator to solve all the problems – get rid of this coach, suspend that athlete. You solve the problems and 50 percent of the people are happy.”
  • Athletic directors often arrive before classes begin and are the last ones to leave, after the final game of the night.
  • hey meet with coaches and students, answer emails and phone calls, arrange travel, secure officials for home games, work with booster groups that supplement shrinking athletic budgets, set up for home games, oversee home games at any variety of venues, hire coaches, deal with parents concerned about any number of things and, of course, work on budgets – constantly.
  • In addition to overseeing the Lakers’ athletic program, True coaches the girls’ basketball team
  • “I think I have demonstrated that it is possible to do both if someone has the passion and energy to do both,” he said.
  • “I’m going to be at the school anyway,” he said – but is toughest during the summer, when he has to run a basketball program at the expense of time with his family.

  • “That’s when I feel it,” he said. “During the school year every day is exciting for me. I love what I do.”

     

    And, he added, “I will continue to do it until that’s gone.”

     

• Job of high school athletic director evolving into multiple duties, resulting in increased burnout and turnover | MLive.com

  • They are athletic directors, and the demands of the job are leading to an increasing level of burnout and turnover.
  • That turnover rate of more than one-third in one year closely reflects the situation throughout the state, according to Michigan High School Athletic Association executive director Jack Roberts.
  • “You spend 75 to 80 percent of your time handling the small problems nobody hears about,” Western High School athletic director Jason Porter said. “Putting out small fires before they become big.”
  • Primary responsibilities include making sure all athletes are academically and otherwise eligible; scheduling events; dealing with conflicts between coaches, athletes and parents; game management; and hiring and evaluating coaches.
  • The job requires far more than the average work week. For those with additional duties — and that’s most — it can mean 60-70 hours a week.
  • Athletic directors are willing to take varying amounts of credit for the success of their teams. The job of hiring coaches is their best chance to influence win-loss records
  • “The AD has the final say who the coach is,” Vandercook Lake athletic director Les Essex said, “and the coach’s relationship with the kids determines whether they have good numbers, whether they play hard, whether they have the knowledge to be successful.”
  • According to a survey by the National Interscholastic Athletic Administrators Association, 45 percent of athletic directors had additional duties in 2005.
  • The most common other job is assistant principal, with eight holding that title, along with three more who are principal or co-principal.
  • “The AD has always had a hard job going into evenings. Couple those, and you’re dealing with student discipline and long hours, and how much fun is that?

  • Essex estimates he spends roughly two-thirds of his 50- to 60-hour work week on athletics. He said he is on hand for most home events but has the option of delegating that duty for some games.

    “Because of the economic times, I’ve not done that a lot, because that $50 (for a game manager) comes out of my budget, and I’d rather spend that on kids,” Essex said.

  • “Running the events takes most of your time, especially in the winter,” Galloway said.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/22/2016

• Kinesiology & Sport Review: Athletic Directors as Head Coaches: Conflict of Interest?

• Leagues policing themselves could lead to conflicts of interest, some say | The Columbian

• Tutoring and Conflict of Interest

  • Members often ask whether they can engage in private tutoring on their own time.
  • ETFO has publicly opposed referring students in publicly funded schools to private education providers.
  • all students in the public system should have access to the resources, services, and supports they need to succeed. 
  • Ontario Teachers’ Federation (OTF) policy on tutoring:
  • • Members are legally able to engage in tutoring on their own time.
     
    • Teachers must not tutor their own students for remuneration.
  • The teacher should consult the student’s regular teacher.
  • Public servants, such as teachers, are held to higher standards than other employees in conflict of interest situations.
  • • They must not advance their own agendas, financial or otherwise, in ways that might prejudice their employer’s interests or reputation.
      
     
    • They must not use information that is unavailable to the general public, and to which they have access because of their official duties, for private gain.
      
     
    • They must not place themselves in situations where their judgement could, even unconsciously, be affected by their private business.
      
     
    • Their interest in their private financial affairs must not clash, or appear to clash, with the employer’s interests.   

• Code of Ethics for Educators

  • The professional educator strives to create a learning environment that nurtures to fulfillment the potential of all students.
  • PRINCIPLE I: Ethical Conduct toward Students
  • The professional educator accepts personal responsibility for teaching students character qualities that will help them evaluate the consequences of and accept the responsibility for their actions and choices
  • The professional educator, in accepting his or her position of public trust, measures success not only by the progress of each student toward realization of his or her personal potential, but also as a citizen of the greater community of the republic.
  • 1. The professional educator deals considerately and justly with each student, and seeks to resolve problems, including discipline, according to law and school policy.
    
    2. The professional educator does not intentionally expose the student to disparagement.
    
    3. The professional educator does not reveal confidential information concerning students, unless required by law.
    
    4. The professional educator makes a constructive effort to protect the student from conditions detrimental to learning, health, or safety.
    
    5. The professional educator endeavors to present facts without distortion, bias, or personal prejudice.
  • PRINCIPLE II: Ethical Conduct toward Practices and Performance
  • The professional educator endeavors to maintain the dignity of the profession by respecting and obeying the law, and by demonstrating personal integrity.
    
    1. The professional educator applies for, accepts, or assigns a position or a responsibility on the basis of professional qualifications, and adheres to the terms of a contract or appointment.
    
    2. The professional educator maintains sound mental health, physical stamina, and social prudence necessary to perform the duties of any professional assignment.
    
    3. The professional educator continues professional growth.
    
    4. The professional educator complies with written local school policies and applicable laws and regulations that are not in conflict with this code of ethics.
    
    5. The professional educator does not intentionally misrepresent official policies of the school or educational organizations, and clearly distinguishes those views from his or her own personal opinions.
    
    6. The professional educator honestly accounts for all funds committed to his or her charge.
    
    7. The professional educator does not use institutional or professional privileges for personal or partisan advantage.
  • PRINCIPLE III: Ethical Conduct toward Professional Colleagues
  • 1. The professional educator does not reveal confidential information concerning colleagues unless required by law.
    
    2. The professional educator does not willfully make false statements about a colleague or the school system.
    
    3. The professional educator does not interfere with a colleague's freedom of choice, and works to eliminate coercion that forces educators to support actions and ideologies that violate individual professional integrity.
  • PRINCIPLE IV: Ethical Conduct toward Parents and Community
  • 1. The professional educator makes concerted efforts to communicate to parents all information that should be revealed in the interest of the student.
    
    2. The professional educator endeavors to understand and respect the values and traditions of the diverse cultures represented in the community and in his or her classroom.
    
    3. The professional educator manifests a positive and active role in school/community relations.

• NEA - Code of Ethics

  • Code of Ethics
  • profession consists of one education workforce serving the needs of all students and that the term ‘educator’ includes education support professionals.
  • Essential to these goals is the protection of freedom to learn and to teach and the guarantee of equal educational opportunity for all.
  • educator accepts the responsibility to adhere to the highest ethical standards.
  • The Code of Ethics of the Education Profession indicates the aspiration of all educators and provides standards by which to judge conduct.
  • PRINCIPLE I
  • Commitment to the Student
  • The educator strives to help each student realize his or her potential as a worthy and effective member of society.

  • In fulfillment of the obligation to the student, the educator--

     

    1. Shall not unreasonably restrain the student from independent action in the pursuit of learning.

     

    2. Shall not unreasonably deny the student's access to varying points of view.

     

    3. Shall not deliberately suppress or distort subject matter relevant to the student's progress.

     

    4. Shall make reasonable effort to protect the student from conditions harmful to learning or to health and safety.

     

    5. Shall not intentionally expose the student to embarrassment or disparagement.

     

    6. Shall not on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, marital status, political or religious beliefs, family, social or cultural background, or sexual orientation, unfairly--

     
     
    1.  Exclude any student from participation in any program
     
    2.  Deny benefits to any student
     
    3.  Grant any advantage to any student
     

    7. Shall not use professional relationships with students for private advantage.

     

    8. Shall not disclose information about students obtained in the course of professional service unless disclosure serves a compelling professional purpose or is required by law.

  • PRINCIPLE II
  • Commitment to the Profession
  • The education profession is vested by the public with a trust and responsibility requiring the highest ideals of professional service.

  • In fulfillment of the obligation to the profession, the educator--

     

    1. Shall not in an application for a professional position deliberately make a false statement or fail to disclose a material fact related to competency and qualifications.

     

    2. Shall not misrepresent his/her professional qualifications.

     

    3. Shall not assist any entry into the profession of a person known to be unqualified in respect to character, education, or other relevant attribute.

     

    4.    Shall not knowingly make a false statement concerning the qualifications of a candidate for a professional position.

     

    5. Shall not assist a noneducator in the unauthorized practice of teaching.

     

    6. Shall not disclose information about colleagues obtained in the course of professional service unless disclosure serves a compelling professional purpose or is required by law.

     

    7. Shall not knowingly make false or malicious statements about a colleague.

     

    8. Shall not accept any gratuity, gift, or favor that might impair or appear to influence professional decisions or action.

• Professional Boundaries

  • Understanding Professional Boundaries
  • Failure to understand professional boundaries can lead almost any member to make serious mistakes - career threatening ones - in the management of teacher-student relationships.
  • Even an unfounded allegation of professional misconduct could be permanently damaging to a teacher, to their family, and to the profession.
  • Professional Boundaries Defined
  • The term "Professional Boundaries" is not easily defined.

  • Some common responses were

     
     
    • violation of the position of trust;
     
    • abuse of power in a teacher's relationship with a child; and
     
    • teachers using their relationship to meet their own needs instead of the needs of their students.
  • most extreme form of boundary violation is that of sexual abuse against a student
  • The Onus is On the Teacher
  • Teachers are responsible for recognizing in themselves whether they are "at risk" of crossing boundaries and, if they are, of addressing the issue.
  • Teachers have a responsibility to address this issue when they witness a colleague who may be crossing boundaries.
  • What Places Teachers at the Highest Risk?
  • Insufficient training: Teachers insufficiently trained in their roles can become too personally involved with students.
  • Ignorance of the law: There is no excuse for being ignorant of the law
  • Unacceptable Behaviours
  • • becoming too personally involved with students - friend, confident, surrogate parent;
     
    • seeing students in private or non-school settings;
     
    • writing or exchanging notes, letters or emails;
     
    • serving as a confidant with regard to a student's decision about his/her personal issues;
     
    • giving gifts or money to students;
     
    • inviting students to one's home or cottage;
     
    • having students stay overnight in one's home/cottage;
     
    • driving individual students to or from school;
     
    • giving one student undue attention;
     
    • being alone with a student with the exception of an emergency situation;
     
    • sharing your personal problems with students;
     
    • sharing personal information about a student with a third party; and
     
    • initiating physical contact.
  • Protective Strategies
  • old adage "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure."

  • As a teacher, do you protect yourself by:

     
     
    • learning about the law and your liability as a teacher?
     
    • teaching with your classroom door open?
     
    • having another adult present when attending to the personal needs of special needs students?
     
    • complimenting or commending students without "hugging or touching" them?
     
    • reporting any reasonable suspicion of child abuse to proper authorities?
     
    • clarifying procedures with your principal regarding potentially threatening situations?
     
    • getting parents' and principals' approval regarding all activities off school property?
     
    • letting students know when they are overstepping your personal boundaries?
     
    • seeking input from colleagues or other professionals if unsure of the appropriateness of your actions or plans?
  • a caring professional relationship always helps a student to learn. But this relationship has boundaries of time, place, purpose and activity.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/20/2016

• How the Case Moved through the Court System | www.streetlaw.org

  

• Summary of the Decision | www.streetlaw.org

  • Justice Black believed that the majority’s ruling was too restrictive on school officials, overly limiting their control over their schools, and subjecting public schools to “the whims and caprices of their loudest-mouthed … students.”

• Background summary & questions (•••) | www.streetlaw.org

  • Do the First Amendment rights of free speech extend to symbolic speech by students in public schools? And, if so, in what circumstances is that symbolic speech protected?

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/18/2016

• Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist. | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

  • Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist.
  • Syllabus
  • Petitioners, three public school pupils in Des Moines, Iowa, were suspended from school for wearing black armbands to protest the Government's policy in Vietnam.
  • The District Court dismissed the complaint on the ground that the regulation was within the Board's power, despite the absence of any finding of substantial interference with the conduct of school activities.

  • Held: 

     

    1. In wearing armbands, the petitioners were quiet and passive. They were not disruptive, and did not impinge upon the rights of others. In these circumstances, their conduct was within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth. Pp. 505-506.

     

    2. First Amendment rights are available to teachers and students, subject to application in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. Pp. 506-507.

     

    3. A prohibition against expression of opinion, without any evidence that the rule is necessary to avoid substantial interference with school discipline or the rights of others, is not permissible under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Pp. 507-514.

  • Opinion
  • MR. JUSTICE FORTAS delivered the opinion of the Court.
  • Petitioner John F. Tinker, 15 years old, and petitioner Christopher Eckhardt, 16 years old, attended high schools in Des Moines, Iowa. Petitioner Mary Beth Tinker, John's sister, was a 13-year-old student in junior high school.
  • The principals of the Des Moines schools became aware of the plan to wear armbands. On December 14, 1965, they met and adopted a policy that any student wearing an armband to school would be asked to remove it, and, if he refused, he would be suspended until he returned without the armband.
  • On December 16, Mary Beth and Christopher wore black armbands to their schools. John Tinker wore his armband the next day. They were all sent home and suspended from school until they would come back without their armbands. They did not return to school until after the planned period for wearing armbands had expired -- that is, until after New Year's Day.
  • It upheld   [p505]  the constitutionality of the school authorities' action on the ground that it was reasonable in order to prevent disturbance of school discipline.
  • The District Court recognized that the wearing of an armband for the purpose of expressing certain views is the type of symbolic act that is within the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment
  • First Amendment rights, applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and students.
  • It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.
  • Mr. Justice McReynolds, held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prevents States from forbidding the teaching of a foreign language to young students
  • In West Virginia v. Barnette, supra, this Court held that, under the First Amendment, the student in public school may not be compelled to salute the flag
  • The Fourteenth Amendment, as now applied to the States, protects the citizen against the State itself and all of its creatures -- Boards of Education not excepted.
  • On the other hand, the Court has repeatedly emphasized the need for affirming the comprehensive authority of the States and of school officials, consistent with fundamental constitutional safeguards, to prescribe and control conduct in the schools
  • Our problem lies in the area where students in the exercise of First Amendment rights collide with the rules of the school authorities.
  • Only a few of the 18,000 students in the school system wore the black armbands. Only five students were suspended for wearing them
  • There is no indication that the work of the schools or any class was disrupted. Outside the classrooms, a few students made hostile remarks to the children wearing armbands, but there were no threats or acts of violence on school premises.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/17/2016

• Plyler v. Doe | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

  • Plyler v. Doe
  • Held: A Texas statute which withholds from local school districts any state funds for the education of children who were not "legally admitted" into the United States, and which authorizes local school districts to deny enrollment to such children, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
  • The illegal aliens who are plaintiffs in these cases challenging the statute may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection Clause, which provides that no State shall "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
  • This Court's prior cases recognizing that illegal aliens are "persons" protected by the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, which Clauses do not include the phrase "within its jurisdiction," cannot be distinguished on the asserted ground that persons who have entered the country illegally are not "within the jurisdiction" of a State even if they are present within its boundaries and subject to its laws.
  • The discrimination contained in the Texas statute cannot be considered rational unless it furthers some substantial goal of the State
  • Although undocumented resident aliens cannot be treated as a "suspect class," and although education is not a "fundamental right," so as to require the State to justify the statutory classification by showing that it serves a compelling governmental interest, nevertheless the Texas statute imposes a lifetime hardship on a discrete class of children not accountable for their disabling status.
  • children can neither affect their parents' conduct nor their own undocumented status
  • Public education has a pivotal role in maintaining the fabric of our society and in sustaining our political and cultural heritage; the deprivation of education takes an inestimable toll on the social, economic, intellectual, and psychological wellbeing of the individual, and poses an obstacle to individual achievement.
  • Nor is there any merit to the suggestion that undocumented children are appropriately singled out for exclusion because of the special burdens they impose on the State's ability to provide high-quality public education.
  • The record does not show that exclusion of undocumented children is likely to improve the overall quality of education in the State
  • The question presented by these cases is whether, consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Texas may deny to undocumented school-age children the free public education that it provides to children who are citizens of the United States or legally admitted aliens.
  • The 1975 revision also authorized local school districts to deny enrollment in their public schools to children not "legally admitted" to the country
  • The court found that neither § 21.031 nor the School District policy implementing it had "either the purpose or effect of keeping illegal aliens out of the State of Texas."

  • "the illegal alien of today may well be the legal alien of tomorrow,"    ^[n4]    and that, without an education, these undocumented   [p208]  children,

     

    [a]lready disadvantaged as a result of poverty, lack of English-speaking ability, and undeniable racial prejudices, . . . will become permanently locked into the lowest socio-economic class.

  • The District Court held that illegal aliens were entitled to the protection of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that § 21.031 violated that Clause.
  • that exclusion of these children had not been shown to be necessary to improve education within the State
  • deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

• Due Process Equal Protection and Disenfranchisement | Equality and the 14th Amendment | Constitution USA | PBS

  • The Fourteenth Amendment promises that all persons in the United States shall enjoy the “equal protection of the laws.”
  • they cannot be discriminated against without good reason. All laws discriminate, because governments must make choices about what is lawful. For example, a law that prohibits burglary discriminates against burglars
  • Equal Protection Clause requires that a state have a good reason or a “rational basis” for such choices
  • In certain areas where there has been a history of past wrongful action—such as discrimination based on race or gender—the state must meet a much higher burden to justify such classifications.
  • Consequently, the Court held in Ricci v. DeStefano (2009) that the city of New Haven, Connecticut, could not invalidate a promotion exam for firefighters merely because a disproportionate percentage of racial minorities did not pass.
  • The Equal Protection Clause also applies to illegal immigrants in certain cases. In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Supreme Court struck down a Texas law that prohibited children who were not legal residents to attend free public schools.
  • The Court held that “the Texas statute imposes a lifetime hardship on a discrete class of children not accountable for their disabling status.”

• Equal Protection

  • No State shall...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

• Fundamental Rights and Equal Protection Clause Analysis: The Right to Vote and the Right to Education

  • Equal Protection and Fundamental Rights
  • Two types of classifications cause the Court to depart from its usual rational basis scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause: when group burdened by the classification is "suspect"  (e.g., a racial or  ethnic minority,  women,  aliens)  or when  the classification burdens  what the Court  determines to  be  a  "fundamental  right."
  • Heightened scutiny has been limited to cases involving substantial burdens placed on the right to vote, the right to be a candidate (access to the ballot), the right to migrate to another state, the right to marry and procreate and live as a family unit, and to fees that prevent indigents from obtaining equal access to justice  (e.g, divorcing, maintaining parental rights, and obtaining transcripts and securing legal assistance for a criminal appeal).
    

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/15/2016

• Stanford Risk Management - Insurance and Risk Management Information for Schools and Departments

  • Risk management is the acceptance of responsibility for recognizing, identifying, and controlling the exposures to loss or injury which are created by the activities of the University.

  • Some definitions are in order: 

     

      Risk is uncertainty of loss. 

      Peril is a source of loss (fire, windstorm, embezzlement, etc.). 

      Hazard is a condition which increases the likelihood of loss (e.g.,  a known embezzler hired as an accountant).

  • A function of risk management is to organize and carry out a plan to control or reduce the risks to which the University is exposed
  • These steps are: 
     
    • Recognize and appraise the risk  
    • Estimate the probability of loss due to the risk.  
    • Select the optimum method of treating the risk.  
    • Implement a plan to carry out the selected method

• Liability of School Districts and School Personnel for Negligence - Duty, Breach of Duty, Injury, Causation, Defenses, Malpractice - StateUniversity.com

  • Liability of School Districts and School Personnel for Negligence - Duty, Breach of Duty, Injury, Causation, Defenses, Malpractice
  • an individual who is injured by a breach of duty can sue the other person to collect compensation for that injury
  • A tort is a civil wrong–a violation of a duty–that causes harm
  • three types of civil wrongs.
  • • Intentional torts include trespass, assault, battery and defamation.
     
    •  Unintentional torts include negligence and strict liability. Strict liability is when someone is held liable, even though they are not at fault. It is often used when an individual is engaged in an ultrahazardous activity.
     
    •  Constitutional torts occur when a government agent has violated an individual's constitutional rights.
  • intentional torts also can be crimes, and a tort-feasor can be required by a civil court to pay money damages to compensate the injured person and also be required by a criminal court to pay a fine or suffer imprisonment.
  • Negligence differs from these in that it is an unintentional tort.
  • It occurs when one person unintentionally causes an injury to another through a breach of a duty or violation of a general standard of care
  • A negligent tort is a tort that, although not intended, was committed in disregard of the rights or reasonable expectations of another person. This is the area of tort law that has given rise to the most litigation.
  • The money a tort-feasor must pay to compensate the accuser for the harm the accuser has sustained is called damages.
  • The damages constitute a civil, or private, fine against the tort-feasor and are analogous to the fines imposed by a criminal court.
  • negligence as "the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those ordinary considerations which ordinarily regulate human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a reasonable or prudent man would not do."

  • Schools and their employees are not automatically responsible for every injury that may occur within the school. In order to be held liable for negligence, the following four questions must be answered in the affirmative:

     
     
    1. Did the defendant owe a duty to the plaintiff?
     
    2. Did the defendant breach that duty?
     
    3. Was the plaintiff injured?
     
    4. Was the breach the proximate cause of the injuries?
  • to recover damages, it must be shown that the defendant owes a duty to the injured person, that the behavior fell short of that required, that this caused a real injury to the person, and that the injured person was not responsible for causing the injury.
  • duty of due care that the law recognizes one person owes to another.
  • the courts have found that schools and their employees have the duty to supervise students, provide adequate and appropriate instruction prior to commencing an activity that may pose a risk of harm, and provide a safe environment.
  • Schools may have a duty to supervise students off school grounds when they have caused them to be there such as while on field trips or extracurricular events.
  • Schools may acquire a duty to supervise when they have, by their previous actions, assumed the duty to supervise at this time such as when some staff has supervised intermittently or consistently before official time to arrive.
  • School administrators are not automatically responsible for the negligent acts of teachers. In school situations, usually a plaintiff must find a separate duty on the part of each defendant.
  • In carrying out duties, one is expected to act as an ordinary, prudent, and reasonable person considering all of the circumstances involved
  • court or jury makes a determination of how the reasonable person would have acted
  • Defendants who are professionals will be held to a standard based on the skills or training they should have acquired for that position.

  • Some of the factors which may be considered in determining the standard of care include the following:

     
     
    • Age and maturity
     
    • Nature of the risk
     
    • Precautions taken to avoid injury
     
    • Environment and context (including characteristics of students, location, physical characteristics, and so forth)
     
    • Type of activity
     
    • Previous practice and experience
  • determining negligence, children are not held to the same standard of care as adults; instead their actions must be reasonable for a child of similar age, maturity, intelligence, and experience.
  • is that a child may be held to an adult standard of care when engaged in an adult activity, for example, driving a car or handling a weapon.
  • Compensation may include direct monetary damages for medical expenses, replacement of property, lost wages, and so forth.
  • o recover for an injury, the plaintiff must show that the defendant's negligence was the cause of the injury
  • When there is a series of events leading up to an injury, the person starting that chain of events may be liable for the resultant injury if it was a foreseeable result of his negligence
  • Intervening acts will not cut off liability when those intervening acts were foreseeable.
  • the court looks to the possibility of defenses before a damage award is granted.
  • Governmental immunity has greatly eroded in recent years, generally allowing an individual to recover for injuries, but not allowing an action that would undermine the state's decision-making power when carrying out its state or official functions.
  • an individual is not allowed to sue the school for an injury caused by a policy decision such as making a curriculum choice or setting the date and time for school to start.
  • Assumption of the risk is also an affirmative defense that, if successful, presents a complete bar to plaintiff's recovery
  • plaintiff understood how the specific activity was dangerous and nonetheless voluntarily engaged in it
  • Students in athletic activities are asked to assume the risk of playing that sport.
  • mistakenly believe that parents assume all risks for their children when they sign permission slips
  • some permission slips are worthless in terms of waiving liability
  • contributory negligence, if the plaintiff is responsible for the injuries sustained in any way, no matter how slight, he or she cannot be awarded any damages
  • omparative negligence, the damage award is apportioned depending on the degree of fault or contribution to the injuries.
  • In states that have adopted a modified comparative negligence, damages are awarded only if the defendant's negligence is greater than that of the plaintiff.
  • the term educational malpractice refers to negligence on the part of a professional
  • have not recognized educational malpractice as a cause of action for damages
  • Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District
  • graduated from high school while still being illiterate
  • no legal duty on which to base an action against the school district
  • no workable standard of care for teaching against which the defendant's actions could be judged
  • court noted that the degree of certainty that the plaintiff had suffered any injury, the extent of the injury, and the establishment of a causal link between defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's injuries were uncertain
  • The concern typically expressed is that recognition of this cause of action would require the courts to make judgments on the validity of educational policies.

• Module 2 Overview

  -Due Process is a legal principle that has its foundation in the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Both of these amendments provide protection from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law” - two forms of due process:  Procedural due process: Guarantees that the procedures and processes used by the government will be fair.  Substantive due process: Guarantees that the substance of laws and actions of the government will be fair. - Basic due process calls for students to be informed of the infraction for which they are being accused, told the existing evidence that supports the accusation, and given the opportunity to tell their side of the story - Equal Protection is the legal principle that calls for all people to be treated in a similar manner given similar circumstances. - Student discipline o Does the school treat all students who have violated a school rule, under similar circumstances, the same way?  Student access to school’s classes, programs, and services o Do all students have access to all classes, programs, and services? o Or are certain classes, programs, and services only available to certain students? - A tort is defined as “a civil wrong that results in personal injury or property damage” - Negligence is defined as “failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances” - Liability is the assignment of responsibility for the injury and/or damage caused in a tort. In the example provided above, the person responsible for the collision would be held liable for the damages. The person who is liable assumes the responsibility for the cost to return the person and/or property to the condition before the damage occurred. - Risk management is the effort to reduce the chances of being held responsible for a tort. Insurance: Having insurance reduces or limits the financial exposure a person has in certain tort cases.  Education: Educational programs that are designed to help people avoid actions that could lead to tort cases can reduce the chances of a tort case.  Maintenance: Care and upkeep of facilities and equipment can also reduce the chances of a tort case. -

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Technology Teacher 03/13/2016

• Civil Rights: Brown v. Board of Education I (1954)

  • Brown v. Board of Education,  347 U.S. 483 (1954)
  • Segregation of white and Negro children  in the public schools of a State solely on the basis of race,  pursuant to state laws permitting or requiring such segregation,  denies to Negro children the equal protection of the laws guaranteed  by the Fourteenth Amendment -- even though the physical facilities  and other "tangible" factors of white and Negro schools  may be equal.
  • Segregation of children in public  schools solely on the basis of race deprives children of the  minority group of equal educational opportunities, even though  the physical facilities and other "tangible" factors  may be equal.
  • The "separate but equal"  doctrine adopted in Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537,  has no place in the field of public education.
  • The plaintiffs contend that segregated  public schools are not "equal" and cannot be made "equal,"  and that hence they are deprived of the equal protection of the  laws.
  • Today, education is perhaps the most  important function of state and local governments. Compulsory  school attendance laws and the great expenditures for education  both demonstrate our recognition of the importance of education  to our democratic society.
  • it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected  to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education.  Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide  it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms.
  • Segregation of white and colored children  in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children.  The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for  the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as  denoting the inferiority of the negro group
  • A sense of inferiority  affects the motivation of a child to learn.

• Separate and Unequal - The New York Times

  • More than a half-century after the landmark Brown v. Board of Education school desegregation ruling, we are still trying as a country to validate and justify the discredited concept of separate but equal schools — the very idea supposedly overturned by Brown v. Board when it declared, “Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.”
  • “Ninety-five percent of education reform is about trying to make separate schools for rich and poor work, but there is very little evidence that you can have success when you pack all the low-income students into one particular school,
  • If you really want to improve the education of poor children, you have to get them away from learning environments that are smothered by poverty. This is being done in some places, with impressive results.
  • showed that low-income students who happened to be enrolled in affluent elementary schools did much better than similarly low-income students in higher-poverty schools in the county.
  • found that “over a period of five to seven years, children in public housing who attended the school district’s most advantaged schools (as measured by either subsidized lunch status or the district’s own criteria) far outperformed in math and reading those children in public housing who attended the district’s least-advantaged public schools.”
  • Studies have shown that it is not the race of the students that is significant, but rather the improved all-around environment of schools with better teachers, fewer classroom disruptions, pupils who are more engaged academically, parents who are more involved, and so on.
  • But there is no getting away from the fact that if you try to bring about economic integration, you’re also talking about racial and ethnic integration, and that provokes bitter resistance.
  • Everybody’s in favor of helping poor black kids do better in school, but the consensus is that those efforts are best confined to the kids’ own poor black neighborhoods.
  • Separate but equal. The Supreme Court understood in 1954 that it would never work.

• Lee v. Weisman :: 505 U.S. 577 (1992) :: Justia U.S. Supreme Court Center

  • Petitioner Lee, a middle school principal, invited a rabbi to offer such prayers at the graduation ceremony for Deborah Weisman's class, gave the rabbi a pamphlet containing guidelines for the composition of public prayers at civic ceremonies, and advised him that the prayers should be nonsectarian. Shortly before the ceremony, the District Court denied the motion of respondent Weisman, Deborah's father, for a temporary restraining order to prohibit school officials from including the prayers in the ceremony
  • Subsequently, Weisman sought a permanent injunction barring Lee and other petitioners, various Providence public school officials, from inviting clergy to deliver invocations and benedictions at future graduations.
  • Including clergy who offer prayers as part of an official public school graduation ceremony is forbidden by the Establishment Clause. Pp.586-599
  • The principle that government may accommodate the free exercise of religion does not supersede the fundamental limitations imposed by the Establishment Clause, which guarantees at a minimum that a government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way which "establishes a
  • [state] religion or religious faith, or tends to do so."
  • Lee's decision that prayers should be given and his selection of the religious participant are choices attributable to the State. Moreover, through the pamphlet and his advice that the prayers be nonsectarian, he directed and controlled the prayers' content. That the directions may have been given in a good-faith attempt to make the prayers acceptable to most persons does not resolve the dilemma caused by the school's involvement, since the government may not establish an official or civic religion as a means of avoiding the establishment of a religion with more specific creeds
  • Prayer exercises in elementary and secondary schools carry a particular risk of indirect coercion. Engel v. Vitale, 370 U. S. 421; School Dist. of Abington v. Schempp, 374 U. S. 203. The school district's supervision and control of a high school graduation ceremony places subtle and indirect public and peer pressure on attending students to stand as a group or maintain respectful silence during the invocation and benediction.
  • A reasonable dissenter of high school age could believe that standing or remaining silent signified her own participation in, or approval of, the group exercise, rather than her respect for it.
  • And the State may not place the student dissenter in the dilemma of participating or protesting
  • The embarrassment and intrusion of the religious exercise cannot be refuted by arguing that the prayers are of a de minimis character, since that is an affront to the rabbi and those for whom the prayers have meaning, and since any intrusion was both real and a violation of the objectors' rights
  • Petitioners' argument that the option of not attending the ceremony excuses any inducement or coercion in the ceremony itself is rejected. In this society, high school graduation is one of life's most significant occasions, and a student is not free to absent herself from the exercise in any real sense of the term "voluntary."
  • Inherent differences between the public school system and a session of a state legislature distinguish this case from Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U. S. 783, which condoned a prayer exercise. The atmosphere at a state legislature's opening, where adults are free to enter and leave with little comment and for any number of reasons, cannot compare with the constraining potential of the one school event most important for the student to attend
  • School principals in the public school system of the city of Providence, Rhode Island, are permitted to invite members of the clergy to offer invocation and benediction prayers as part of the formal graduation ceremonies for middle schools and for high schools. The question before us is whether including clerical members who offer prayers as part of the official school graduation ceremony is consistent with the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment, provisions the Fourteenth Amendment makes applicable with full force to the States and their school districts.
  • The District Court held that petitioners' actions violated the second part of the test, and so did not address either the first or the third. The court decided, based on its reading of our precedents, that the effects test of Lemon is violated whenever government action "creates an identification of the state with a religion, or with religion in general," 728 F. Supp., at 71, or when "the effect of the governmental action is to endorse one religion over another, or to endorse religion in generaL" Id., at 72.
  • The court determined that the practice of including invocations and benedictions, even so-called nonsectarian ones, in public school graduations creates an identification of governmental power with religious practice, endorses religion, and violates the Establishment Clause. In so holding the court expressed the determination not to follow Stein v. Plainwell Community Schools, 822 F.2d 1406 (1987), in which the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, relying on our decision in Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U. S. 783 (1983), held that benedictions and invocations at public school graduations are not always unconstitutiona
  • He concluded by suggesting that under Establishment Clause rules no prayer, even one excluding any mention of the Deity, could be offered at a public school graduation ceremony

• untitled

  - The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Under Lemon, a government-sponsored activity will not violate the Establishment Clause if (1) it has a secular purpose, (2) its principal or primary effect neither advances nor inhibits religion, and (3) it does not create an excessive entanglement of the government with religion -These practices, often termed ceremonial deism, have historically been protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny primarily because “they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content.”1 -What constitutes a de minimis violation is in the eye of the beholder. In Marsh, the Court found legislative prayer to be a de minimis violation. In Lee v. Weisman, however, the Court rejected the de minimis argument; the prayer in that case was recited at a public high school commencement. - Thus observing Christmas as a national holiday, printing the words “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency, and reciting “one nation under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance are merely de minimis violations, if they are violations at all, of the Establishment Clause.5

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.