Professor William Kritsonis, Phd-sexual Harassment Ppt

8/20/2019 Professor William Kritsonis, Phd-sexual Harassment Ppt

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/professor-william-kritsonis-phd-sexual-harassment-ppt 1/17

Public School Law

Sexual Harassment

“Teacher verses Student”

Lecture Notes

William Allan Kritsonis, Ph



What is Sexual Harassment

• Sexual harassment is a serious

problem for students at all educational

levels. Students in elementary and

secondary schools, as well asvocational schools, apprenticeship

programs, colleges and universities can

be victims of sexual harassment. It is

different from flirting, playing around, orother types of behavior that you enjoy

or welcome.



• Sexual harassment can bereuests for sexual favors or

unwelcome sexual behaviorthat is bad enough orhappens often enough toma!e you feeluncomfortable, scared orconfused. It may interferewith your schoolwor! or yourability to participate inextracurricular activities or

attend classes. Sexualharassment can happen togirls and boys.



Sexual harassment can be

• verbal "comments about your body,spreading sexual rumors, sexual remar!sor accusations, dirty jo!es or stories#

• physical "grabbing, rubbing, flashing ormooning, touching, pinching in a sexualway, sexual assault#

• visual "display of na!ed pictures or

sex$related objects, obscene gestures#Sexual harassment can happen to girlsand boys.



%wo &inds of Sexual Harassment

%here are two !inds of sexual harassment'

uid pro uo

hostile environment



Quid Pro Quo

• Quid pro quo sexual harassment occurs when a

teacher offers you a better grade or treats you

better if you do something sexual. It could also bea threat to lower your grade or treat you worse

than other students if you refuse to go along with

a reuest for a sexual favor.



Hostile environment

• Hostile environment sexual harassmentoccurs when unwanted sexual touching,

comments, and(or gestures are so bad oroccur so often that it interferes with yourschoolwor!, ma!es you feel uncomfortable orunsafe at school, or prevents you from

participating in or benefiting from a schoolprogram or activity. %his type of harassmentdoes not have to involve a threat or promise ofbenefit in exchange for a sexual favor.



Sexual Harassment is Against the Law

• %he federal law prohibiting sexualharassment in schools is %itle I) ofthe *ducation +mendments of -/"%itle I)#, which prohibits any person,on the basis of sex, to be subjectedto discrimination in an educationalprogram or activity receiving federalfinancial assistance. +lso, it is illegal

to intimidate, threaten, or coerce aperson who has ta!en action under%itle I).



0andmar! 1ases

• Doe v. Taylor ISD, 1994

• Franklin v. Gwinnett County

Public Schools, 199

• Gonzalez v sleta !S"# $%%&

• 'abe v Lewisville !S"# $%%(

• )olina v Pasadena !S"# $%*%

• Gebser v Lago +ista !S"



Doe v. Taylor ISD, 1994

• %he case was based on a sexual relationship

between a teacher(coach and a minor student.

2ather than see!ing redress under state law for

assault or negligence of some sort, the studentalleged that her constitutional rights had been

violated. %he student alleged that the

1onstitution protects her from physical sexual

abuse at the hands of her teachers. %he 3ifth1ircuit agreed, thus opening the door to

potential liability.



Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools, 199

• In this case, petitioner 3ran!lin, a student in ahigh school alleged that she had been subjectedto continual sexual harassment and abused by a

teacher, +ndrew Hill. +fter the complaint wasfiled, 4r. Hill resigned on the condition that allmatters pending against him would be dropped,and the school would close it5s investigation.%he 6istrict 1ourt subseuently dismissed thecomplaint on the ground that %itle I) does notauthori7e an award damages, he the 1ourt of

+ppeals affirmed.



Gonzalez v Ysleta ISD, 1993

• In this case doing nothing could lead to an accusation ofdeliberate indifference, which could lead to liability. +n 8sletaIS6 teacher was accused of sexually molesting a first grader.School officials had conducted an investigation after twoprevious reports of the teacher5s improper contact withstudents, such as letting them sit on his lap and putting hisarm around their waists. 3ollowing the investigation, theschool board decided to transfer the teacher to a differentschool rather than terminating the teacher, as was customaryin the district when instances of child abuse arose. %hemolestation continued after the transfer. %he parents of thestudent sued the school district in federal court, alleging that

by not terminating the teacher, the district was deliberatelyindifferent to the student5s welfare.



Gebser v Lago Vista ISD• School districts cheered when the Supreme 1ourt

held in 9ebser v 0ago :ista IS6 that schoolofficials are not responsible for a teacher;s sexualharassment of a student unless they actually!new of the behavior and purposely loo!ed theother way. In Gebser , +lida 9ebser, a high

school student, sued her school district for sexualharassment based upon the illicit actions of herteacher, 3ran! Waldrup. Waldrup instigatedsexual relations with 9ebser, coupled withsuggestive comments in the classroom, whenshe was < years old and continued this behavior

until discovered by the police approximately =years later.



9ebser v 0ago :ista IS6 continued

• 9ebser had not reported the relationship to schoolofficials, testifying that she was unsure what to do anddidn;t want to lose Waldrop as a teacher> however, otherparents had complained to the principal about Waldrop;suse of inappropriate comments in class. 9ebser;s suitclaimed that under %itle I) the school district wasvicariously liable for Waldrup;s illicit behavior. In a ?$<decision, the Supreme 1ourt held that liability under %itleI) does not extend to a school district unless an official@who at a minimum has authority to institute corrective

measures on the district;s behalf has actual notice of,and is deliberately indifferent to, the teacher;smisconduct.@



'abe v Lewisville !S"# $%%(

, )olina v Pasadena !S"# $%*%

• + teacher with a continuing contract was writing a student notes,going over her house when her parents were not home, and!issing her on the lips constituted good cause for termination ongrounds of immorality in the case of Rabe v Lewisville ISD, 1994.

*ven if the student consents to the relationship, grounds fortermination may be established. +s noted in the Molina vPasaena ISD, 19!9 decision, A*ven if the student were an adult,the fact that a student was as student is the controlling point. It isthis status and this relationship that constitutes immoral conduct.B



1ommon sense rules to prevent false claims

• %ry not to be alone with studentsparticularly in isolated locations.

• +void physical contact with studentwhich could be misunderstood assexual in nature.

• +void any written communications

with students which could bemisconstrued as personal orromantic.

• +void off$the cuff comments onstudents5 physical appearance ordiscussing personal topics whichcould be construed as sexual.

• If a student confides in youregarding a personal topic ofsexual nature, either invite anotheradult to join the conversation orreport in writing immediately.



2esources

• 1ode of *thics and Standard Cractices for %exas *ducators website'

www.sbec.state.tx.us

• *ual 2ights +dvocates' Sexual Harassment at School' &now 8our

2ights website' http'((www.eualrights.org(ublications(!yr(shchool.asp

• 3ind0aw website' http'((caselaw.findlaw.com

• Sexual Harassment and Students website'

http'((cmswashingtonea.org(wea(CDE0I1+%(0*9+0(S*)H+2?.H%4

• Walsh, F., &emerer, 3., and 4aniotis, 0. "/GG?#. %he *ducator5s 9uide to

%exas School 0aw. Dniversity of %exas Cress, th *dition.

Date post:	07-Aug-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	anonymous-sewu7e6
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

Professor William Kritsonis, Phd-sexual Harassment Ppt

Documents