Date post: | 04-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | wadzna-jamud |
View: | 221 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 131
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
1/131
Schools and the Law
EDLD 611
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
2/131
No Child Left Behind
Signed into law in January 2002 Thislaw provides the most extensive federal
involvement in public schools in the
history of the United States
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
3/131
Four Guiding Principles Schools must be held accountable for student achievement
Parents must be given a greater degree of choice
Selection of academic, intervention, and professional
development programming must be based on scientificallyresearched evidence demonstrating effectiveness
States and LEAs must be afforded added flexibility andlocal control to both facilitate funding acquisition andallocation and to use funds in a manner that best
addresses locally specific educational needs
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
4/131
Accountability Yearly academic assessments of students
between grades three and eight in reading,mathematics, and science
Adequate yearly progress targets
Rewards and sanctions for performance
States and LEAs must establish a system ofmonitoring and tracking data to ensure that all
groups are meeting minimum levels ofperformance
The State and the LEA must deliver assessmentdate to the public
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
5/131
Adequate Yearly Progress
Starting point or base year was 2001/2002
States established which indicator they use
lowest achieving percentage for subgroups the school at the 20th percentile in the
percentage of students meeting the proficient
level
States had the opportunity to establish howrigorous the standards are going to be
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
6/131
Highly Qualified Teachers andParaprofessionals
Must be in affect by the 05/06 school year
Paraprofessionals were also required to meetminimum qualifications
Associates Degree
Completion of a paraprofessional certificate (Praxis)
Paraprofessionals hired before 1/8/02 had four years tomeet these qualifications
May not engage in direct instructional service withoutthe supervision of the teacher
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
7/131
Disclosure
Assessments must be presented to the public inan understandable and practical manner
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
8/131
Sanctions 2 consecutive years of not making AYP and
parents will be afforded school choice within thedistrict. Transportation provided
2 additional years of non-performance andcorrective action is taken
Replacement of school staff
Selection of new curriculum and Prof. Development.
Establishment of decentralized management model
Extension of the school day or school year
Appointment of an external expert
Restructuring the school organization
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
9/131
Programming Accountability
Reports must be submitted describing programimpact and progress in meeting goals
Parental Choice Gives parents more rights to school choice,
especially in regards to non-performing schools
Establishes the parents right to know
Schools must notify parents yearly about studentprogress, assessment data, and lists of highly
qualified teacher and paraprofessionals
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
10/131
Focus on What Works Greater emphasis onprograms that have researched bases success
Targeting Assistance Provides funds to helpstudents with the greatest academic needs
Addressing Needs of Underperforming andUnderrepresented Populations Provides funds fortraditionally underrepresented populations
Building Instructional Capacity Added emphasison professional development
Creating a Solid Learning Foundation Stressesthe importance of good foundation programs, i.e.Reading First, Early Reading First
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
11/131
Creating a Safe Learning EnvironmentProvides additional money for Title IV andalso established limit financial liability levelsfor teachers and other school personnelwhen enforcing state, federal and localdisciplinary rules/laws
Flexibility and Local Control GreaterFlexibility = Increased Accountability
Eligibility Lowered the % required to beeligible for School Wide Title I programs
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
12/131
Enhanced Data Monitoring andCommunication Systems Focus on usingdata to assist in decision concerning studentacademic and social needs
Greater Authority and Discretion overProgramming Relaxes the rules on federalprograms to allow individualization for theLEA
Consolidation Eliminated some paperworkbut allowing consolidation of reports onFederal Programs
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
13/131
New Regulations
Limited English Proficiency/English
Language Learner Rules
Under the regulations, newly arriving limited English
proficient students to the United States enrolled in school
for fewer than twelve months are exempt from one
administration of the reading/language arts
assessment.
These LEP students still need to take the English
language proficiency assessment, in order to be
counted toward meeting the 95 percent assessment
participation requirement for AYP determinations forreading/language arts
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
14/131
While newly arriving LEP students still must take
the mathematics assessment, their scores are
not required to be included for AYP purposes.!"
Beginning in the 2007-08 school year, newlyarriving LEP students must also take state
science assessments.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
15/131
Conclusion One of the most extensivepieces of education legislation in recent
history Only time will tell how will it will
work and what types of lasting affects itwill have on improving student
achievement
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
16/131
Religious Influences and
Accommodations in Public Schools
Three landmark cases have been the main-stay indetermining how schools deal with Religious activities
at school
Abington School Dist. v. Schempp, No.
142, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITEDSTATES, 374 U.S. 203; 83 S. Ct. 1560; 10 L. Ed. 2d844; 1963 U.S. LEXIS 2611, February 27-28, 1963,
Argued, June 17, 1963, Decided ** Together with No.119, Murray et al. v. Curlett et al., Constituting the
Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City, oncertiorari to the Court of Appeals of Maryland, arguedFebruary 27, 1963.
School Sponsorship of prayer violated the First Amendment
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Abington%20v.%20Schempp%20374%20U.S.%20302.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Abington%20v.%20Schempp%20374%20U.S.%20302.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
17/131
Engel v. Vitale, No. 468, SUPREME COURTOF THE UNITED STATES, 370 U.S. 421;82 S. Ct. 1261; 8 L. Ed. 2d 601; 1962 U.S.LEXIS 847; 20 Ohio Op. 2d 328; 86
A.L.R.2d 1285, April 3, 1962, Argued, June25, 1962, Decided The court ended by quoting James Madison, It
is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on
our liberties. The court has consistently held thatstate-sponsored religious expression violates theU.S. Constitution.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Engel%20v.%20Vitale%20370%20U.S.%20421.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Engel%20v.%20Vitale%20370%20U.S.%20421.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
18/131
Lemon v. Kurtzman, No. 71-1470, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITEDSTATES , 411 U.S. 192; 93 S. Ct. 1463; 36L. Ed. 2d 151; 1973 U.S. LEXIS85, November 8, 1972, Argued, April 2,1973, Decided The statute must have a secular purpose;
The primary effect of the statute must neither
advance nor inhibit religion; and The statute must not foster excessive
entanglement with religion.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lemon%20v.%20Kurtzman%20403%20U.S.%20602.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lemon%20v.%20Kurtzman%20403%20U.S.%20602.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
19/131
Silent Prayer
This takes place everyday, and of course thereis no way to prevent this from happening
In some cases even moments of silence arequestionable, depending on how the schoolrepresents this time
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
20/131
Voluntary Spoken Devotionals
Lee v. Weisman, No. 90-1014 , SUPREMECOURT OF THE UNITED STATES , 505 U.S.
577; 112 S. Ct. 2649; 120 L. Ed. 2d 467; 1992
U.S. LEXIS 4364; 60 U.S.L.W. 4723; 92 Cal.
Daily Op. Service 5448; 92 Daily Journal DAR
8669, November 6, 1991, Argued, June 24,
1992, Decided
This was very controversial decision especially forschools in the south (Bible Belt)
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=a1a453c74454ef9beec16998151aade2&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=77f0150e73eb06cb11bdb3ea200fa1b5http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lee%20v.%20Weisman%20505%20U.S.%20577.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lee%20v.%20Weisman%20505%20U.S.%20577.dochttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=a1a453c74454ef9beec16998151aade2&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=77f0150e73eb06cb11bdb3ea200fa1b57/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
21/131
Devotionals Initiated by Private Actors Courts will generally not allow students to deliver
proselytizing graduation speeches.
Questionhas the school established and open forum for
student expression in commencement exercises? Doe v. Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist., No. 97-
40150, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, 168 F.3d 806; 1999 U.S. App.
LEXIS 3157, February 26, 1999, Decided, As Revised
March 17, 1999. Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
Denied April 7, 1999, Reported at: 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS6250. Certiorari Granted November 15, 1999, Reported
at: 1999 U.S. LEXIS 7492.
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=6da8fb3e09b059c7176c19114490a3ae&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=96d85c9c24287bc8e625dff8a3fb18dahttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=6da8fb3e09b059c7176c19114490a3ae&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=96d85c9c24287bc8e625dff8a3fb18da7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
22/131
Issue: Whether petitioners policypermitting student-led, student-initiatedprayer at football games violates the
Establishment Clause of the FirstAmendment.
Once again, the court interprets theEstablishment Clause to prohibit thecoercion of belief among schoolstudents.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
23/131
One Nation Under God Newdow v. United States Cong., No. 00-16423 , UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT , 292 F.3d 597;2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 12576; 2002 Cal. Daily Op. Service 5700;2002 Daily Journal DAR 7229, March 14, 2002, Argued andSubmitted, San Francisco, California, June 26, 2002,
Filed, Reprinted as amended at Newdow v. U.S. Cong., 328 F.3d466, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 28040 (9th Cir. Cal., 2002) Stay grantedby Newdow v. United States Cong., 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 12826(9th Cir., June 27, 2002) Amended by, Rehearing denied by,Rehearing, en banc, denied by Newdow v. United States Cong., 321F.3d 772, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 3665 (9th Cir., 2003) Amended by,Rehearing denied by, Rehearing, en banc, denied by Newdow v.United States Cong., 328 F.3d 466, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 26867,
2003 Cal. Daily Op. Service 1724 (9th Cir. Cal., 2003) 9th Court said that by including Under God in the pledge, it promoted a
believe in monotheism
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=6dbd5d08c20c8127dfcbc8716521364d&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=2bf3ec87463f8b72c64f220dfeb10e91http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=6dbd5d08c20c8127dfcbc8716521364d&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=2bf3ec87463f8b72c64f220dfeb10e917/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
24/131
Elk Grove Unified Sch. Dist. v. Newdow, No. 02-1624, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITEDSTATES , 542 U.S. 1; 124 S. Ct. 2301; 159 L. Ed.2d 98; 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4178; 72 U.S.L.W. 4457;
17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 359, March 24, 2004,Argued, June 14, 2004, Decided, he LEXISpagination of this document is subject to changepending release of the final published version., USSupreme Court rehearing denied by Elk Grove
Unified Sch. Dist. v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 961, 125 S.Ct. 21, 159 L. Ed. 2d 851, 2004 U.S. LEXIS 4886(U.S., Aug. 23, 2004)
Supreme Court reversed 9th Circuit
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
25/131
The law is clear that you cannot requirea student to recite the pledge. They
cannot be punished for refusing to
participate
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
26/131
Removal of Religiously Oriented
Materials from Classrooms
KENNETH ROBERTS, MARC NELSON, and ZAY NELSON,Parents and Next Friends of Kelly Nelson and Amy Nelson, and
DEBRA J. WHITE, Parent and Next Friend of Kelly White, Plaintiffs-
Appellants, v. KATHLEEN MADIGAN and ADAMS COUNTY
SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 50, Defendants-Appellees, ANTI-
DEFAMATION LEAGUE OF B'NAI B'RITH, AMERICAN CIVILLIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF COLORADO, INC., and
AMERICAN JEWISH CONGRESS, Amici Curiae
No. 89-1014 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
TENTH CIRCUIT 921 F.2d 1047; 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 21683; 19
Fed. R. Serv. 3d (Callaghan) 530
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
27/131
Displaying the Ten Commandments
Stone v. Graham, No. 80-321, SUPREMECOURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 449 U.S. 39;
101 S. Ct. 192; 66 L. Ed. 2d 199; 1980 U.S.
LEXIS 2; 49 U.S.L.W. 3369, November 17, 1980,
Decided, Petition for Rehearing Denied January
12, 1981.
There is still great concern in this area. If taking this
chance, be sure not to purchase with public funds
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=df25ac3208490b0000ae3ab697aa865a&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=379d69b61af263db17ff9cebe5a4fe53http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=df25ac3208490b0000ae3ab697aa865a&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=379d69b61af263db17ff9cebe5a4fe537/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
28/131
CAPITOL SQUARE REVIEW AND ADVISORY BOARD,
ET AL., PETITIONERS v. VINCENT J. PINETTE,
DONNIE A. CARR AND KNIGHTS OF THE KU KLUX
KLAN No. 94-780 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES 515 U.S. 753; 115 S. Ct. 2440; 132 L. Ed. 2d650; 1995 U.S. LEXIS 4465; 63 U.S.L.W. 4684; 95 Cal.
Daily Op. Service 4990; 95 Daily Journal DAR 8540; 9
Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 241
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
29/131
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY ET AL. v.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION,
GREATER PITTSBURGH CHAPTER, ET AL.
No. 87-2050 SUPREME COURT OF THEUNITED STATES 492 U.S. 573; 109 S. Ct.3086; 106 L. Ed. 2d 472; 1989 U.S. LEXIS 3468;
57 U.S.L.W. 5045
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
30/131
Student and Community Devotional MeetingsDuring Non-instructional Time
Equal Access Act
EAA1984 If a federally assisted public secondaryschool provides a limited open forum for noncurriculumstudent group to meet during non-instructional time, it
cannot deny access to specific student groups because of
religious, political, or philosophical content of their
meetings. If the meetings have a religious orientation,school employees can attend only in a non-participatorycapacity to maintain discipline.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
31/131
Bd. of Educ. of Westside Cmty. Sch. v.Mergens, No. 88-1597 , SUPREME
COURT OF THE UNITED STATES , 496
U.S. 226; 110 S. Ct. 2356; 110 L. Ed. 2d191; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 2880; 58 U.S.L.W.
4720, January 9, 1990, Argued, June 4,
1990, Decided
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20v.%20Mergens.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20v.%20Mergens.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
32/131
Meetings of Community Groups
Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union FreeSch. Dist., No. 91-2024, SUPREME COURT OF
THE UNITED STATES, 508 U.S. 384; 113 S. Ct.
2141; 124 L. Ed. 2d 352; 1993 U.S. LEXIS 4019;
61 U.S.L.W. 4549; 93 Cal. Daily Op. Service
4130; 93 Daily Journal DAR 7045; 7 Fla. L.
Weekly Fed. S 369, February 24, 1993,
Argued, June 7, 1993, Decided
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=531edca00a3b7cf8c8ce2a773ac4b185&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=a711e63b10becba760aa8031634e2ecehttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lambs%20Chapel%20v.%20Ctr.%20Moriches%20Union%20Free%20Sch.%20Dist.%20508%20U.S.%20385.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Lambs%20Chapel%20v.%20Ctr.%20Moriches%20Union%20Free%20Sch.%20Dist.%20508%20U.S.%20385.dochttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=531edca00a3b7cf8c8ce2a773ac4b185&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=a711e63b10becba760aa8031634e2ece7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
33/131
The Court makes itself clear. Speech maynot be proscribed. simply because it is
religious speech. Justice Scalia, in his own
inimitable way, wrote a concurring opinionthat took exception to the reliance on the
Lemontest:
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
34/131
Like some ghoul in a late-night horror movie thatrepeatedly sits up in its grave and shuffles abroad afterbeing killed and buried, the Lemon test stalks ourEstablishment Clause jurisprudence once again,frightening little children and school attorneys of
Center Moriches Union Free School District. Its mostrecent burial, only last Term, was, to be sure, not fullysix feet under: Our decision in Lee v. Weisman, 505U.S. 577, 586-587 (1992), conspicuously avoidedusing the supposed test but also declined the invitationto repudiate it. Over the years, however, no fewer thanfive of the currently sitting Justices have, in their ownopinions, personally driven pencils through thecreatures heart
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
35/131
Good News Club v. Milford Cent.Sch., No. 99-2036 , SUPREME COURTOF THE UNITED STATES , 533 U.S.
98; 121 S. Ct. 2093; 150 L. Ed. 2d 151;2001 U.S. LEXIS 4312; 69 U.S.L.W.4451; 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4737;2001 Daily Journal DAR 5858; 2001
Colo. J. C.A.R. 2934; 14 Fla. L. WeeklyFed. S 337, February 28, 2001,
Argued, June 11, 2001, Decided
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Good%20News%20Club%20v.%20Milford%20Cent.%20Sch..dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Good%20News%20Club%20v.%20Milford%20Cent.%20Sch..doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
36/131
The case is related to Lambs Chapel. Notethat the use of facilities was outside the normalschool day. Most schools have created alimited public forum and cannot discriminate
against activities solely because they arereligious in nature. Viewpoint discrimination isunconstitutional. Schools and school systemsare well advised to fashion policies which
permit the use of facilities by outside groups,including religious groups, under carefullycrafted conditions.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
37/131
Distribution of Religious Literature
Gideons
Age makes a difference
Courts believe that the older children are more likely tobe able to determine what is school sponsored
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
38/131
Accommodations for
Religious Beliefs Release-Time Programs
Still may not use classrooms
Can be released from campus
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
39/131
Devotional Activities in Public Schools -
Recommendations for Practice
Lower courts continue to render decisions all along theseparation/ accommodation continuum. even though the
U.S. Department of Education is supporting greater
government accommodation of religion in public schools
than it was in the 1970s and 1980s. School personnel
would be wise to adhere to court rulings in their respectivejurisdictions when there is a direct conflict with the
Department's Guidance. The Executive Director ofAmericans United for Separation of Church and State has
asserted that school officials are placed "between a rock
and a hard place in either obeying the interpretation of lawfrom the administration, or following the dictates of their
local federal courts.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
40/131
Rather than providing clarification regardingpermissible religious activities in public schools,
the federal Guidancemay actually generate morelitigation as courts and legislative bodies attempt to
identify permissible religious influences and theappropriate church/state relationship in public
schools. The Supreme Court has espoused a
separationist position in a few cases," but it seems
to be redefining the notion of governmentalneutrality toward religion with an emphasis on
equal treatment of religious and secular expression
and groups.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
41/131
Public schools already are experiencing some effects ofthe doctrine shift toward religious accommodation, and
there may be significant future implications. Observable
religious activities in public schools will likely increase and
reflect preferences of the community's dominant religious
group. This, in turn, may stimulate additional EstablishmentClause challenges from members of minority sects,
asserting that they are unconstitutionally being subjected to
the will of the religious majority. Although the exact nature
of the controversies cannot be predicted, it seems assured
that church/state disputes involving schools will continue togenerate a steady stream of litigation in the foreseeable
future.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
42/131
Notwithstanding the evolving nature of the law inthis domain, legal developments to date provide
some guidance for school personnel as they make
daily decisions regarding permissible and
impermissible religious activities in public schools. School-sanctioned prayer during the public school day
violates the Establishment Clause, regardless of whether
student participation is voluntary.
Students can engage in silent prayer in public schools, but
school personnel cannot promote such silent devotionals.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
43/131
Public schools cannot sponsor religiousobservances in school events includinggraduation exercises and extracurricular activi-ties.
Graduation ceremonies can be (but do not haveto be) designated a forum for studentexpression, where content based restrictions arenot placed on students' speeches, includingreligious messages.
If school authorities maintain control ofgraduation speeches, proselytizing contentwould have to be eliminated.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
44/131
Public schools cannot allow students todetermine by election to have student led
prayers before athletic events.
Public schools cannot permanently display
sectarian documents, but they can recognizereligious holidays in an objective manner.
If a federally assisted high school has created alimited forum for non-curriculum student groups
to meet during non-instructional time, all studentgroups, including religious groups, must be
allowed equal access.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
45/131
Public schools cannot discriminate againstreligious viewpoints in creating a forum forcommunity groups to use school facilities whenclasses are not in session, even if a religiousgroup targets children attending the school.
School authorities would be wise to bar religiousorganizations from distributing sectarianliterature in public schools, whereas individualstudents have a free expression right to
distribute such literature during non-instructionaltime in conformance with reasonable schoolregulations.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
46/131
Teachers cannot proselytize students, butthey can teach aboutreligion,
Release-time programs in which studentsreceive religious instruction off public
school grounds during the school day do
not violate the Establishment Clause.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
47/131
Students can be excused from observances andinstructional assignments in public schools for
religious reasons if the exemption does not
interfere with their educational progress ormanagement of the school.
Teaching creationism or intelligent design inpublic school science classes advances
religious beliefs.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
48/131
Although the Establishment Clauserestricts the promotion of theistic and anti-
theistic religious beliefs, most claims that
secular public school instruction advancesanti-theistic doctrine have not been
successful.
R li i i th P bli S h l
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
49/131
Religion in the Public School
Curriculum
For much of the 20th century, religion hasbeen a key part of the public school
curriculum. In the 1960s the Supreme Court
triggered a shift in the place of religion inpublic education. To date, this topic is in and
out of the courts on a regular basis. Lemon v.
Kurtzman and Abington v. Schempp are used
continually to try and decide school districtsinvolvement with religion and the public school
curriculum.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
50/131
Speech that appears to be sponsored orendorsed by the school can be restricted
by school officials in order to maintain
consistency with educational goals,whereas private speech is likely to be
protected under the First Amendment
unless it is disruptive to the educationalenvironment.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
51/131
Teaching about Religion in the FormalCurriculum
Most Bible course taught in school will not
withstand the tests of the First Amendment Courses that have a great deal of material about
the New Testament will have a harder time being
approved by the courts that those courses that
deal primarily with the Old Testament Courts question the resurrection, virgin birth, and other
miracles that take place
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
52/131
When schools allow community andreligious groups to control the curriculum,
it is almost certain to be in conflict with
the First Amendment
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
53/131
If the school offers a Bible Course it should: Course content and materials should be controlled by the
school
Teachers should be selected in the same manner as other
teachers Teachers should be certified
The personal religious beliefs of the teacher should not bea selection criteria
Teachers should not attempt to indoctrinate the children
with a particular religious believe If money is taken from outside sources, this money should
be accepted with no conditions
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
54/131
Teachers Rights Regarding the Curriculum Courts are very concerned about teachers who
teach and appear to endorse religion Helland v. South Bend Community Sch. Corp., No. 96-
1079, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THESEVENTH CIRCUIT, 93 F.3d 327; 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS20560; 71 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1621; 68 Empl.Prac. Dec. (CCH) P44,201, June 6, 1996,
ARGUED, August 15, 1996, DECIDED, Certiorari DeniedJanuary 21, 1997, Reported at: 1997 U.S. LEXIS 555.
Downing v. W. Haven Bd. of Educ., Civ. Action No. 3:00CV 525 (SRU), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FORTHE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT, 162 F. Supp. 2d 19;2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14373, August 24, 2001, Decided
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=d05a7aa48b2a746b8a472666440d2c98&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=89ae8375c9d8fd32b089920b99522072http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=107316bf4a32e3c8d19cb783b9b58533&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=7010b7901604378af7d9fb0e21ff6f14http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=107316bf4a32e3c8d19cb783b9b58533&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=7010b7901604378af7d9fb0e21ff6f14http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=d05a7aa48b2a746b8a472666440d2c98&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkVb&_md5=89ae8375c9d8fd32b089920b995220727/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
55/131
Very important to remember that ateachers views are considered to be the
schools views. Again, this becomes
even more serious when working withelementary school students who have
difficulty separating the school views
from the teachers views
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
56/131
Students Rights Regarding the Curriculum
There is friction between the courts and what theDepartment of Education is saying about student
rights concerning religion and the school.
Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer inPublic Elementary and Secondary Schools.
http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandsch
ools/prayer_guidance.html
http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.htmlhttp://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.htmlhttp://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.htmlhttp://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.html7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
57/131
The heart of the issue is what if the student speech could beconsidered as school sponsored.
Denooyer v. Merinelli, No. 92-2080, UNITED STATES COURTOF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS30084, November 18, 1993, Filed, NOT RECOMMENDED FORFULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. SIXTH CIRCUIT RULE 24 LIMITSCITATION TO SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. PLEASE SEE RULE 24BEFORE CITING IN A PROCEEDING IN A COURT IN THESIXTH CIRCUIT. IF CITED, A COPY MUST BE SERVED ONOTHER PARTIES AND THE COURT. THIS NOTICE IS TO BEPROMINENTLY DISPLAYED IF THIS DECISION ISREPRODUCED., Rehearing Denied November 18, 1993,Reported at: 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36723. Reported in TableCase Format at: 12 F.3d 211, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 36506.
Hansen v. Ann Arbor Pub. Schs, No. 02-CV-72802-DT , UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OFMICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION , 293 F. Supp. 2d 780; 2003U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21920, December 5, 2003, Filed
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=aa02dd0478e19747ec7c19741c456760&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=06f0ebafb2190a55288eafc13a22d2a3http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=00010eed74bd8422fd2b8302252552a1&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=3333c9db3890571ba73d43c465949a37http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=00010eed74bd8422fd2b8302252552a1&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=3333c9db3890571ba73d43c465949a37http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=aa02dd0478e19747ec7c19741c456760&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=06f0ebafb2190a55288eafc13a22d2a37/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
58/131
In all cases the courts are concerned thatthe school district makes reasonable
efforts to accommodate a students
religious beliefs before imposingrestrictions
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
59/131
Challenges to the Secular Curriculum Since the 60s public schools have been viewed as
public bodies that are hostile to religion
Many groups continue to sue schools because
there is a perceived push toward secularhumanism (An outlook or philosophy thatadvocates human rather than religious values)
Brown v. Woodland Joint Unified Sch. Dist., No. 92-15772, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 27 F.3d 1373; 1994 U.S. App.LEXIS 14673; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4455; 94 DailyJournal DAR 8251, October 6, 1993, Argued, Submitted,San Francisco, California, June 15, 1994, Filed
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=23d4f36d6c473478836e37f650030c86&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=d154200072b011b2bfb62fe711a563bahttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=23d4f36d6c473478836e37f650030c86&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=d154200072b011b2bfb62fe711a563ba7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
60/131
Student Support Services, CharacterDevelopment, and Diversity Programs
Involved volunteer clergy to conduct groupcounseling on secular issues such as race,
divorce, peer pressure, discipline, and drugs
Court did not allow this because it did not providethe same opportunities to non-clergy volunteers
Schools should be careful when dealing withCharacter and Diversity issues that they do not
add a religious angle to the presentations
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
61/131
Secular Holiday Programs and Challengersto the Music Curriculum You cannot force students to participate in
religious holidays or perform music that is in
violation of their religious beliefs. As long as holiday activities are educational, the
courts have left them alone.
Most vocal music contains or has some religiousorigin and the courts will not require them to bedropped from the curriculum
Performing music in church settings has alsobeen found to be legal. (Better acoustics, etc.)
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
62/131
Sex Education Programs
Sex education programs are legal in every state.It is a good idea to get parental permission that
gives the parents an opportunity to opt out of the
program
When teaching abstinence, it is important toleave the religious reference out of the
curriculum.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
63/131
Evolution, Creation Science, andAcademic Freedom
Epperson v. Arkansas, No. 7, SUPREME
COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 393U.S. 97; 89 S. Ct. 266; 21 L. Ed. 2d 228;1968 U.S. LEXIS 328, October 16, 1968,
Argued, November 12, 1968, Decided The issue in this case is a popular object of
contention. Most recently, some states haveattempted to pass laws which require the equaltreatment of creationism if evolution is taught
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=c70027d597b3c073e812e5cdab75a2cb&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=9dee8471031ee6fcdd239c56f8184b56http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Epperson%20v.%20Ark.%20393%20U.S.%2097.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Epperson%20v.%20Ark.%20393%20U.S.%2097.dochttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=c70027d597b3c073e812e5cdab75a2cb&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=9dee8471031ee6fcdd239c56f8184b567/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
64/131
Edwards v. Aguillard, No. 85-1513, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED
STATES, 482 U.S. 578; 107 S. Ct. 2573; 96
L. Ed. 2d 510; 1987 U.S. LEXIS 2729; 55U.S.L.W. 4860, December 10, 1986,
Argued, June 19, 1987, Decided
Even with the recent changes in First
Amendment analysis, it is still unlikely that thecourts will allow states to pass laws which further
particular religious beliefs in the public schools.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Edwards%20v.%20Aguillard%20482%20U.S.%20578.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Edwards%20v.%20Aguillard%20482%20U.S.%20578.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
65/131
Exemptions from the Secular Curriculum When parents find specific school-sponsored
activities to be offensive to their religious beliefs,they argue that the Free Exercise Clause entitlesthem to an exemption from the activity.
West Virginia State Bd. of Educ. v. Barnette, No.591, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 319U.S. 624; 63 S. Ct. 1178; 87 L. Ed. 1628; 1943 U.S. LEXIS490; 147 A.L.R. 674, March 11, 1943, Argued, June 14,1943, Decided
The court clearly stated that educators cannot compel
expression of belief. This includes asking students to standfor the pledge. Students, who do not wish to participate, haveno right to interfere with the rights of participants; therefore,they can be disciplined for disruption.
R li i i th P bli S h l C i l
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=f299c6714d0b8bab51e97458ff9ea0d7&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=05a2ef4243cf450c845ca9e5e26d2b51http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/West%20Virginia%20Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20v.%20Barnette%20319%20U.S.%20624.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/West%20Virginia%20Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20v.%20Barnette%20319%20U.S.%20624.dochttp://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=f299c6714d0b8bab51e97458ff9ea0d7&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVtb-zSkVb&_md5=05a2ef4243cf450c845ca9e5e26d2b517/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
66/131
Religion in the Public School Curriculum
- Recommendations for Practice
Decisions regarding what to include or exclude fromthe public school curriculum have always required
value judgments, but today school officials are wise to
make special efforts to consider the implications of
these decisions from an even wider variety ofperspectives. While some rules may be extrapolated
from these cases, school personnel are advised to
consult the various legal standards for analyzing
Establishment Clause and free exercise challenges,
and Guidancefrom the Department of Education, aswell as rulings from local jurisdictions when analyzing
a specific issue.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
67/131
Ideally, the various sources will offercongruent interpretations, but when
discrepancies arise, it is advisable to defer
to the case law of the local jurisdiction.Nonetheless, some practical
recommendations may be helpful in making
daily decisions regarding the role of religion
in the public school curriculum.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
68/131
Public school personnel may not teach religion,but may teach about religion when material is
presented objectively as part of a secular
program of study (e.g., comparative religion,
culture studies). In fact, involvement of religion inthe secular curriculum has been recommended.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
69/131
Courses that focus on the Bible are vulnerable toEstablishment Clause challenges when the
material includes religious doctrine; accounts of
miracles are taught as literal truth; or community
groups control hiring decisions, curriculumchoices, or implementation of the programs of
study. Even if public school officials control
selection of teachers for such courses, staffing
decisions should not be based on teachers'
religious beliefs.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
70/131
Courses in religious practices (e.g.,Transcendental Meditation) or instructional
methods that are driven by religious beliefs (e.g.,
Anthroposophy) are likely to be unconstitutional.
Instruction and activities about religious rituals orpractices must be academic. Role plays and
other experiential activities should be presented
in an historical context and should not resemble
religious practice.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
71/131
Classroom speech is considered schoolsponsored expression, which can be regulated
for legitimate educational reasons that do not
discriminate on the basis of viewpoint.
Consequently, teacher proselytizing isprohibited. Similarly, teachers must not disregard
portions of the prescribed curriculum that conflict
with their own philosophical or religious beliefs.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
72/131
When student speech may reasonably beperceived as school-sponsored speech, school
officials may regulate it when there are
educational reasons for doing so and the
regulation is viewpoint neutral. Where possible,school personnel are advised to make efforts to
accommodate student religious speech in an
alternate forum. Student speech may be
regulated when it causes, or will foreseeable
cause, a substantial disruption to the educational
environment.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
73/131
Choral repertoires that incidentally includereligious music or perform at religious venues foreducational reasons are likely to be upheld.
Activities related to the study of holidays thathave both religious and secular meanings arelikely to withstand Establishment Clausescrutiny.
School policies regarding the science curriculumshould neither discredit evolution nor promote
creation science. Teachers may address avariety of theories of the origin of humankind aslong as the theories are presented objectivelywith supporting scientific evidence.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
74/131
When school policies are neutral and generallyapplied, the policy is likely to be upheld even if
there is an incidental burden to a student's
religious beliefs.
Students may be released from the public schoolcurriculum to receive religious instruction off
school grounds. However, public school officials
are cautioned to avoid excessive entanglement
with religious groups in coordinating theseopportunities for instruction.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
75/131
Copyright Law
The Exclusive Rights and Limitations ofCopyright
Exclusive Rights
Fair Use Recent Copyright Legislation
T.E.A.C.H.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
Copyright Term Extension Act (The CTEA, TheSonny Bono Act)
Copyright Laws Recommendations for
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
76/131
Copyright Laws - Recommendations for
Practice
Online access to copyrighted materials opensschools to limited liability; these institutions needto be proactive and unambiguous in their policiesabout institutional responsibilities;
Students and staff must observe and adhere tothe fact that there are restrictions on the use ofcopyrighted materials whether in hard copy oronline;
Additional copyright protections may be available
to creators of materials used in distanceeducation and this information must also belisted in any school policy;
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
77/131
Copyrighted materials may now have additionalyears of protection and school personnel may
need to apply for continued permission to employ
such creations or ensure that fair use is
applicable; Assume that Web-based material is copyrighted
and investigate to make sure it is not;
Prepare acceptable use policies for online and
hard copy materials that offer proper guidancefor copyright restrictions and provide sanctions
for inappropriate activity.
C S
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
78/131
Charter Schools
Charter schools are public schools that areformed by a charter between a designatedchartering authority and those who wish tooperate a school. State legislatures grant
charter schools autonomy from many laws andregulations that apply to other public schools.In exchange for this autonomy, charter schoolsmust achieve the educational goals that are
established in the charter. Failure to meetthese goals may result in the closing of theschool
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
79/131
Are Charter Schools Public Schools Five States prohibit funding of private schools:
Alaska, Hawaii, Michigan, SOUTH CAROLINA,and New Mexico
Twelve States only permit the funding of publicschools: Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Indiana,Missouri, New Jersey, NORTH CAROLINA,Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Texas, Washingtonand Wyoming
Four States permit funding of private schools,only if they are under the exclusive control of thestate: California, Massachusetts, New Mexico
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
80/131
Charter Schools and School Finance Charter Schools have made numerous pleas
to the courts to allow them more funding,
claiming that there rights under the equalprotection clause have been violated
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
81/131
Charter Schools and Race Care has to be taken that Charter Schools
do not discrimination on the basis of race:
Beaufort County Bd. of Educ. v. LighthouseCharter Sch. Comm., Opinion No. 25583
, SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
, 353 S.C. 24; 576 S.E.2d 180; 2003 S.C. LEXIS
22, April 16, 2002, Heard; December 4, 2002,
Reheard, January 27, 2003, Filed
Charter Schools - Recommendations for
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=a64630e383327f79f95ace6210ebd294&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkVb&_md5=33618900d054c5ff18c62bc9bd5fd621http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=a64630e383327f79f95ace6210ebd294&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkVb&_md5=33618900d054c5ff18c62bc9bd5fd6217/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
82/131
Charter Schools - Recommendations for
Practice
Courts appear to agree that charter schools arepublic schools, despite their autonomy from state
regulations.
Legislators should monitor the economic impact
of charter schools on school districts. Legislators should analyze whether charter
schools have sufficient funding to provide for
their students' educational needs.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
83/131
Policy makers should explain differences in employmentlaw (such as collective bargaining) between charter
schools and traditional public schools.
Legislators should consider advising charter schools toadopt race-neutral approaches to ensure that their racial
compositions are reflective of the surrounding schooldistricts.
Charter schools that are located in segregated schooldistricts probably have to adhere to the requirements of
court ordered desegregation decrees even if they are
sponsored by entities that are not under federal courtsupervision.
Collective Bargaining In
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
84/131
Collective Bargaining In
Public Schools
Discussion!
Good or Bad..
For teachers
For students
For tax payers
S h l F di Liti ti
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
85/131
School Funding Litigation
Affi ti A ti
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
86/131
Affirmative Action
These policies were designed toincrease employment or educational
opportunities for both underrepresented
groups as well as those who facedhistoric discrimination
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
87/131
Employment Affirmative Action plans that have been approved
by the courts must be justified by a compellinggovernment interest tailored narrowly to overcomehistoric patters of discrimination and developed to
withstand careful scrutiny The courts used a four point test to describe
narrowly tailored: The test considered the necessity, flexibility and duration
of the proposed relief
The potential effectiveness of alternative remedies The goals and their relationship to the relevant market The impact of the relief on those impacted by the policy
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
88/131
Education The best policies utilized factors that were race
neutral, contained multiple criteria, and were
narrowly tailored
After desegregation has been obtained, racecannot be used as criteria for admission to
school
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
89/131
The legal battles today are framed interms of affirmative action, which is a
current campaign issue. Courts have
clearly stated that quotas, based solely,on race are not permissible when making
decisions related to contracts,
employment, and admission toprograms.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
90/131
BARBARA GRUTTER, Petitioner v. LEEBOLLINGER et al. No. 02-241
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
539 U.S. 306; 123 S. Ct. 2325; 156 L. Ed. 2d304; 2003 U.S. LEXIS 4800; 71 U.S.L.W. 4498;
91 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1761; 84 Empl.
Prac. Dec. (CCH) P41,415; 2003 Cal. Daily Op.
Service 5378; 16 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 367
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
91/131
Parents Involved in Cmty. Sch. v. SeattleSch. Dist. No. 1, (No. 05-908), (No. 05-
915), SUPREME COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES, 551 U.S. 701; 127 S.Ct. 2738; 168 L. Ed. 2d 508; 2007 U.S.
LEXIS 8670; 75 U.S.L.W. 4577; 20 Fla. L.
Weekly Fed. S 490, December 4, 2006,Argued , June 28, 2007, * Decided*
http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172151115&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172151118&cisb=22_T7172151117&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6443&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172151115&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172151118&cisb=22_T7172151117&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6443&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172151115&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172151118&cisb=22_T7172151117&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6443&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172151115&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172151118&cisb=22_T7172151117&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6443&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172151115&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172151118&cisb=22_T7172151117&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6443&docNo=17/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
92/131
Boston's Children First v. City ofBoston, No.03-2470 , UNITED STATES
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST
CIRCUIT, 395 F.3d 10; 2005 U.S. App.LEXIS 1006, January 18, 2005, Decided
Affirmative Action - Recommendations
http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172190944&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172190947&cisb=22_T7172190946&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6320&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172190944&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172190947&cisb=22_T7172190946&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6320&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172190944&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172190947&cisb=22_T7172190946&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6320&docNo=1http://0-www.lexisnexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T7172190944&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T7172190947&cisb=22_T7172190946&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6320&docNo=17/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
93/131
for Practice
Close examination of the policy environment surrounding theconcept of affirmative action relating to education andemployment created circumstances unlikely to be settledwithout court intervention. Competing forces vied for eithermore expedient race based remedies or more conservative,status quo positions. These differences were difficult to
accommodate in the policy environment. Differences inemployment and admissions standards were affected by pastdiscrimination and racially biased practices. Remedies, to be
judicially successful, must be narrowly tailored in promotingcompelling state interests. The prevailing standard of strictscrutiny, compelling state interest, and narrowly tailored plans
continued to serve as a parameter for determining theconstitutionality of affirmative action plans. When consideringrace conscious programs, the following should be considered:
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
94/131
The plans must be temporary in nature andterminate upon successful integration of workers
or students.
A lay off plan favoring minority teachers with less
seniority than non-minority teachers was toointrusive and drastic to survive a challenge.
Hiring goals favorable to minority teachers could
be acceptable because the denial of future
employment opportunity was not as intrusive asthe loss of an existing job.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
95/131
Districts under court orders to desegregate werenot bound by the impermissible use of race in
designing and implementing admissions policies.
If the purpose of a school's admissions process
was narrowly tailored to serve the purpose of astate's compelling interest in improving the
quality of education and remedying past
discrimination, the use of race or ethnicity could
be used as a factor.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
96/131
Admissions policies built on a race neutral basisand multiple criteria could be applied fairly and
equitably, thereby constituting a proven policy
development direction. In developing race
neutral criteria for public school and public stateuniversity admissions policies, the use of
multiple criteria such as class rank or social
economic status, instead of race, could prove
instructive.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
97/131
School administrators should immediatelyreview and update admissions and student
assignment plans that were designed to
remedy past discrimination in school
districts formerly under desegregation court
orders.
School Desegregation during an
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
98/131
g g g
Era of Judicial Disengagement
On May 17, 1954, the United StatesSupreme Court heard its most important
educational case and made perhaps its
most significant ruling in Brown v. Boardof Education of Topeka, Kansas.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Brown%20v.%20Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20of%20Topeka%20347%20U.S.%20483.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Brown%20v.%20Bd.%20of%20Educ.%20of%20Topeka%20347%20U.S.%20483.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
99/131
Facts: This decision consolidated casesfrom Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia,and Delaware. A companion case,Bolling v. Sharp, dealt with the sameissue in the District of Columbia, thoughunder the Fifth Amendment. Theplaintiffs contended that the education
being received underPlessy v. Fergusonwas not equal and could not be madeequal.
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Bolling%20v.%20Sharp%20347%20U.S.%20497.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Bolling%20v.%20Sharp%20347%20U.S.%20497.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
100/131
Issue: Whether separate but equalschools for African-Americans deprive
African-American students of equal
protection under the law, even when,under the Plessystandard, physicalfacilities and other tangible factors are
equal.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
101/131
Previous History: The district court in Kansas haddenied relief. In the South Carolina case, the districtcourt denied the requested relief; however, the courtdid order equalization of the facilities. On remand, thecourt found that substantial equality had beenachieved. In the Virginia case, the court denied therequested relief; however, the court orderedequalization in physical plants, curricula, andtransportation. In the Delaware case, the DelawareCourt of Chancery had granted admission to schoolspreviously attended only by Caucasian students on the
grounds that the African-American schools wereinferior with respect to teacher training, pupil-teacherratio, extracurricular activities, physical plant, and timeand distance involved.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
102/131
Holding: Separate but equal schools forAfrican-Americans are inherently
unequal.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
103/131
Significance: Brownand its progenyended segregation in public schools;
however, it took a long time for the
promise ofBrownto be realized.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
104/131
Plessy v. Ferguson, No. 210, SUPREMECOURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 163
U.S. 537; 16 S. Ct. 1138; 41 L. Ed. 256;
1896 U.S. LEXIS 3390, Argued April 13,
1896., May 18, 1896
Desegregation The Fourteenth
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Plessy%20v.%20Ferguson%201167%20U.S.%20537.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Plessy%20v.%20Ferguson%201167%20U.S.%20537.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
105/131
Amendment
After the Civil War, Congress enacted and thepeople ratified the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, andFifteenth Amendments in order to protect therights of former slaves. In 1871, Congress
enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1871. Manystudents and teachers have used section 1983to gain access to federal courts because theybelieve that their civil rights have been
violated. President Johnson signed the CivilRights Act of 1964. Title VI and Title VII protectemployees and students from discrimination.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
106/131
42 U.S.C. 1983Any person who, under the color of anystatute, ordinance, regulation, custom, orusage, of any State or territory or the District of
Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected,any citizen of the United States or other personresiding within the jurisdiction thereof to thedeprivation of any rights, privileges, orimmunities secured by the Constitution and
laws, and shall be liable to the party injured inan action at law, suit in equity, or other properproceeding for redress.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
107/131
Litigation Involving School Desegregation The 1990s: Half A Step Backward
Missouri v. Jenkins (Jenkins 1) This case was more about taxes being mandated by
the courts than it was about desegregation
The courts determined that since the state would notpay for desegregation, than the federal judges would
mandate tax increases to pay for them
http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Missouri%20v.%20Jenkins%20515%20U.S.%2070.dochttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/current/Legal%20Briefs%20-%20Administrators%20Guide/Missouri%20v.%20Jenkins%20515%20U.S.%2070.doc7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
108/131
Missouri v. Jenkins (Jenkins II) The court reversed the authority of
bestowed to the federal judges to impose
taxes This was the last case on desegregation heard
by the Supreme Court.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
109/131
Having taken a major stepforward in Brown 1, the Nation
cannot allow the progress tatwas achieved to slip by returning
to a time when many children
suffered due to inequitableeducational opportunities.
English Language Learners
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
110/131
English Language Learners
This is a topic of great controversythroughout the United States. American
is currently divided over the needs of
language minority students. There isgreat debate over English being
established as the official language of
this country.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
111/131
Methodological Definitions There aremany different types of programs toaddress the needs of ELL students.However, the improvement of theseprograms regardless of philosophy isbecoming hard to fund each year. Thecurrent administration continues to
decrease the amount of money allocatedto help educate non-English speakingstudents.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
112/131
Bilingual education Focus is on transition bilingual education with an emphasis on rapidtransition to English
English as a Second Language, or ESL Most often used when the population of non-English speaking
students is small. These are generally pull out programs that utilizeELS teachers or paraprofessionals that are not bilingual
Immersion or Structured Immersion Sheltered English the subject is taught in the target language
English. Materials are modified and only Basic English skills arelearned.
Dual Immersion Probably the best method for both ELL students and English
speaking students. Utilizes two teachers that sometimes team-teachsubjects in both languages. This allows an enriching activity for allstudents in the class.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
113/131
Foundational Legal Rights of EnglishLanguage Learners
Lau v. Nichols, No. 72-6520 , SUPREMECOURT OF THE UNITED STATES , 414U.S. 563; 94 S. Ct. 786; 39 L. Ed. 2d 1;1974 U.S. LEXIS 151, December 10, 1973,
Argued, January 21, 1974, Decided
Students have their a right to have theirlanguage skill needs met as soon aspossible
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=9dd9748e64dbf1f50f2a60d3489a1947&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkVb&_md5=a0f7874501fcbda336036567322d85c9http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=9dd9748e64dbf1f50f2a60d3489a1947&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkVb&_md5=a0f7874501fcbda336036567322d85c97/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
114/131
Referenda Outlawing Bilingual Education Is being used to allow schools the least
expensive manner to deal with ELL students
Given the wording of these laws, schools willsoon be litigated under the 14th amendment
and Civil Rights statues.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
115/131
The Equal Educational Opportunities Actand Castaneda:Defining Appropriate
Action
If students continue to fail in public schools,and consequently are not able to obtain
Adequate Yearly Progress, the question will
become if schools are in violation of the
equal protection laws.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
116/131
Equal Educational Opportunities Act Castaneda v. Pickard, No. 79-
2253, UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS, FIFTH CIRCUIT. UNIT A, 648F.2d 989; 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS
12063, June 23, 1981
http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=e43e3bf86a143bdb42b2dea8e2b35d4d&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkVb&_md5=651884ace1340124bf704dd115f7a8b1http://0-web.lexis-nexis.com.library.winthrop.edu/universe/document?_m=e43e3bf86a143bdb42b2dea8e2b35d4d&_docnum=1&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkVb&_md5=651884ace1340124bf704dd115f7a8b17/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
117/131
Castaneda established a series of three questionsused to determine whether appropriate action isbeing pursued to overcome language barriers:
Is the school system pursuing a program bases on aneducational theory recognized as sound or at least as
legitimate experimental strategy by some of the experts in
the field?
Is the program reasonably calculated to implement thattheory?
After being used for enough time to be a legitimate trial, hasthe program produced satisfactory results?
English Language Learners -
R d ti f P ti
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
118/131
Recommendations for Practice
Based on research in early literacydevelopment and second language
acquisition, the following features of
effective early literacy programs arerecommended for young ESOL students.
Oral language and literacy development issupported by the student's native language.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
119/131
Development and learning begin at an early age, and thelanguage young children have heard since birth is the
language they have used to begin to construct their
knowledge and form meaningful communicative
relationships. All young children come to school with
knowledge and learning from home. Successful earlychildhood programs acknowledge and build upon this prior
knowledge. Wherever possible, young ESOL learners
should receive their initial reading instruction in their native
language. The body of research in second language
acquisition shows that literacy learning is easiest when the
initial instruction is in the student's native language
because literacy skills are easily transferred from the first to
the second language.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
120/131
Moreover, use of the native language builds a connectionbetween the home and school. ESOL students' families
should be encouraged to read and talk to their children in the
family's native language if this is their strongest language.
ESOL students' interaction with their families in their native
language will give them the richest possible languagefoundation, advancing the learning of their first language as
well as English, in both academic and social situations.
These experiences will allow young children to associate
reading with meaning from the very beginning so that they do
not word call, that is, pronounce words from print when they
do not understand them.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
121/131
Adequate time is provided for students to acquireliteracy skills in English.
It is well documented that all children learn at differentrates. This principle is especially true for young ESOLlearners, who follow developmental patterns that are
distinctly different from those of native English speakers.Young ESOL learners should not be hurried prematurelyinto formal literacy instruction in any language or intomoving from reading in their native language to reading inEnglish. Oral or social language proficiency, which can be
achieved within 23 years, should not be equated withacademic proficiency or literacy in a language.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
122/131
Literacy, cognitive, and conceptual development of ESOLstudents should be interlaced. Research shows that for
young children in particular, the stronger the native
language foundation, especially when learned in formal
schooling environments, the greater the academic success
in English literacy development. Of course, not all newEnglish language learners or their families have had formal
schooling opportunities. Therefore, accountability systems
that hold teachers and schools responsible for English
literacy development for ESOL learners in an unrealistic
time frame may, in the long run, hinder the students'
chances for academic success.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
123/131
Instruction and materials are developmentallyappropriate.
ESOL students who are at early stages of schooling (pre-K-Grade 2) need to experience developmentallyappropriate instruction that will help them develop oral and
written language proficiency in one or more languages.This kind of instruction engages children in meaningfulinter-actions with adults, other children, concrete materials,and print materials. Moreover, the materials that are usedneed to be comprehensible to the learner and meet their
developmental, cognitive, social, and cultural needs, whichfor young ESOL learners include language proficiency.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
124/131
In developmentally appropriate classrooms, studentsspend most of their time in rich language environments in
which they observe, touch, listen, talk, and interact. Early
reading and writing instruction is largely informal, playful,
and based on oral language activities and personal
experiences. Activities that typically challenge the attentionspan of young learners, such as sitting quietly and listening
for long periods, and printing neatly on fine-lined paper,
should be limited. Standards-based instruction, as
described in ESL Standards for Pre-K-12 Students
(TESOL, 1997) and Integrating the ESL Standards Into
Classroom Practice: Grades Pre-K-2 (TESOL, 2001),should be incorporated into developmentally appropriate
practices.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
125/131
Literacy programs are meaning-based andbalanced. ESOL learners need to understand why people read and
write in order to be motivated to excel in their own literacydevelopment. A preponderance of isolated skills, such as
intensive phonics program that is not firmly grounded inbooks and stories, does not foster overall readingcomprehension. A balanced literacy program will teachskills within the context of meaningful interactions withtexts that elicit students' emotional and intellectualresponses to ideas, characters, and events. Using
children's literature, preferably from a wide variety ofcultural backgrounds, will be a key part of any suchprogram.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
126/131
Effective literacy programs seek both literacy andcontent development, assert that students within
the program are learning the same content as
native-English-speaking children, and look
beyond the classroom for literacy experiences.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
127/131
Assessment is reliable, valid, and ongoing. Many young children cannot demonstrate the
knowledge and skills they possess if they areassessed with methods more appropriate toolder learners or those designed for nativeEnglish speakers. In order to more accuratelyassess the literacy development of young ESOLlearners, a variety of formal and informal toolsshould be used. Assessments that only focus onphonics, spelling skills, and writing content andstyle may be vulnerable to linguistic interferencefrom the native language.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
128/131
Teachers should be aware that errors onassessments of English literacy skills can bedevelopmental in nature and will disappear overtime as students acquire English languageproficiency. By continually using reliable, valid,
and fair assessments, teachers are able tomodify their instruction and tailor it to theindividual needs of ESOL learners. Gatheringclassroom data on an ongoing basis, asdescribed in Scenarios for ESL Standards-based
Assessment (TESOL, 2001) keeps teachersappraised of student progress toward theattainment of ESL standards.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
129/131
Professional preparation and developmentis continually provided for educatorsregarding linguistic and cultural diversity.
The presence of English language learners and
culturally diverse classroomslong acharacteristic only of major citiesis more andmore becoming the norm throughout the country.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
130/131
In order to face the challenges that come with adiverse classroom, all educators and
administrators need to have both pre- and in-
service training opportunities in linguistic and
cultural diversity, and in principles of first andsecond language development. It is also critical
for the early childhood educator to understand
the linguistic and cultural backgrounds of their
children in order to facilitate learning and build
cross-cultural understandings with their families.
7/31/2019 Schools and the Law 4th ED
131/131
The End