32
School Law Char Crusta Kristyn Kirschenman Justin Lien

School law powerpoint[1](1)

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

School Law PowerPoint created by pre-service education students. Great refresher for teacher in-service days!

Citation preview

Page 1: School law powerpoint[1](1)

School Law

Char CrustaKristyn KirschenmanJustin Lien

Page 2: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Liability

Teachers are liable for a lot

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUSb8_ox9cY&feature=related

Mostly responsible for students

Page 3: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Student Injury

Teachers are liable for student injury if the student can prove four things

1: If the teacher had a duty to prevent injury

2: The teacher failed to use due care 3: The teacher’s carelessness lead to

the injury 4: The student sustained provable

damages

Page 4: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The Sheehan Case

A teacher brings her class of 20 girls near boys playing baseball

She tells them to sit nearby and leaves

Boy students begin throwing rocks at the girls

Margaret Sheehan is hit in the eye and injured

Page 5: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Ruling

The parents sued the school, claiming that it was the teacher’s duty to watch the children.

The court ruled in favor of the parents, saying the teacher should have been out there to protect the children and if she had been there the incident would not have happened.

Page 6: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Supervision

Do you think that teachers should be required to monitor their children at all times?

Page 7: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The Mancha Case

Roberto Mancha and his class go on a field trip to a museum

Teachers loosely supervise students in the museum

Several children not associated with the school assaulted Roberto

Page 8: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Ruling

Roberto’s parents sued the school, claiming that the teachers were negligent in supervising the children.

Court ruled in favor of the school, stating that there was no way the teachers could predict an assault at a museum.

Page 9: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Contributory Negligence

If a student’s negligent acts result in them injuring themselves.

Children under the age of 7 cannot have contributory negligence, they are considered not intelligent or mature enough.

Children between the ages of 7 and 14 are “iffy”.

Page 10: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Contributory Negligence

Children older than 14 can have contributory negligence.

17-year-old Jodeen Miles being unsafe around machinery.

Teacher was covered for giving a safety test and demonstrating safe behaviors.

Page 11: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Comparative Negligence

“…compare[s] the relative negligence of the plaintiff and the defendant in causing the injury and to make an appropriate damage award.”

Who’s fault was it?

9-year-old who jumped from merry-go-round

Page 12: School law powerpoint[1](1)

What is Academic Freedom?

The right of teachers to speak freely about their subjects, to experiment with new ideas, and to select appropriate teaching materials.

Page 13: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Pickering v. Board of Education

Marvin Pickering is a teacher in Illinois.

He writes an article in a newspaper denouncing the use of tax funds by the school board

The school board fights back Pickering claims that he has the right

to free speech, when he loses in the local court

He appeals to the Supreme Court

Page 14: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Pickering v Board of Education

The US Supreme Court sided with Pickering.

Justice Thurgood Marshal said the problem of the case is “to arrive at a balance between the interests of the teacher, as citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern…”

Page 15: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The Tinker Case

Discussions in a high school social studies class become heated over students’ opinions of the Vietnam War

Students outside the classroom begin to wear black armbands to symbolize their opinions of the war

The school banned armbands in the school

Page 16: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The Tinker Case

The students complained that their First Amendment rights were broken and that they should have the right to wear these armbands.

Local courts sided with the school The students appealed to the

Supreme Court where it was decided that the armbands were a form of expression and could not be banned.

Page 17: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Boring V. Buncombe County

Boring V. Buncombe County: Award winning English teacher Margaret Boring had good reviews before her staging of the play Independence.

Parents dislike the content of the play, even though the principal allowed play with deleted scenes.

Boring gets bad reviews, then transferred, goes to court.

Majority finds that this is an employee/employer dispute. Minority writes that it is inappropriate to use Kirkland v. as Boring obeyed superiors.

Page 18: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Garcetti v. Ceballos

Decided 2006

Judge Jeffrey Sutton writes: “When a teacher teaches, the school system does not regulate that speech so much as hires that speech. Expression is a teacher’s stock in trade, the commodity she sells to her employer in exchange for a salary. And if it is the school board that hires that speech, it can surely regulate the content of what is or is not expressed, what is expressed in other words on its behalf.”

Page 19: School law powerpoint[1](1)

What it means for us

Recent court decisions mean that we must choose curriculum that is within the ‘good taste’ of the community we teach. Think Oklahoma!

Always run stuff past your principal, submit your lesson plans on time and completely!

Page 20: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Yoder v. Wisconsin

Amish desire to cease the education requirement after 8th grade.

Court decides for Amish in that: “the Amish way of life is a (viable) ‘alternative to formal secondary education’ and has enabled them to exist successfully and independently for 200 years.

The writing of the Yoder judgment has been used to dismiss cases brought by fly-by-night religions.

Page 21: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The Lemon Test

This 1971 case, Lemon v. Kurtzman, is where the Supreme Court came up with this test to clarify First Amendment cases involving the “establishment clause”.

What is that?! “Congress shall make no law respecting

an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The Lemon movie explains the three parts of the test….

Page 22: School law powerpoint[1](1)
Page 23: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Lemon Test:

Does the policy or practice have a secular purpose?

Is the primary effect of the policy or practice one that neither advances nor inhibits religion?

Does the policy or practice avoid an excessive entanglement with religion?

Page 24: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Gems

In 1943 the Supreme Court decides West Virginia v. Barnette which allows exemptions for those who wish not to be forced to say, or punished for not saying, The Pledge of Allegiance at the start of school day.

Page 25: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Gems

School prayer cannot be called such, semantics are key.

Massachusetts rewrote its law to read: “…a period of silence not to exceed one minute in duration shall be observed for personal thoughts, and during such period, silence shall be maintained and no other activity engaged in.”

Page 26: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Gems

To protect yourself, remember: CYAP

Cover Your A** with Paper

Page 27: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Watch for:

As teachers, we will not be having an official class on CYA. We will be acquiring a small amount of this wisdom during student teaching.

However, during new teacher orientation, in most districts, all the laws we come under as teachers are touched upon.

Blas Telleria of BSD-HR would like to see liability issues addressed more specifically during student teaching. He said that the biggest issues today at BSD are educators acting unprofessionally in social network arenas.

Page 28: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Proactive Ideas:

Document threats made to students, before you find yourself documenting disruptive behaviors that endanger students/staff.

If documenting threats is going above and beyond what your school requires it is beneficial in that it creates a comfortable atmosphere where students feel it is okay to come forward, even if they are no longer your students.

Triplicate forms at office supply stores: white--yours, yellow—principal, pink—parent.

Page 29: School law powerpoint[1](1)

What it costs:

Litigation takes years if you find yourself appealing a negative decision through all the court layers.

It takes ridiculous amounts of money.

Page 30: School law powerpoint[1](1)

The layers of School Law: The union, if you choose to join it, provides an

attorney if you find yourself before the school board at a “non-renewal hearing.”

(note: Idaho is a Right to Work State, so you will not be forced to join a union as a condition of hire-- yet non-members are covered under the same contract)

Then you end up at the county court house next, and the union may help with your attorney fees if it is a case they feel they can win.

Page 31: School law powerpoint[1](1)

If still unfavorable it goes up to the third floor (or some such) where the District Court is.

Then, if there is a issue of state constitutionality, State Supreme Court.

Then, if there is an issue of federal constitutionality, U.S. Supreme Court.

With a cost of $10,00o-50,000 a year, an average of 5-8 years just to approach the highest court-- and then they may decide not to hear it!

Page 32: School law powerpoint[1](1)

Remember:

Just remember what Dr. Kelly says: “Just don’t do stupid, and don’t be stupid.”