Dress Code

Dress Code

State law does not give students the right to choose their mode of dress. Thus, the matter of student dress and grooming is at the discretion of local school districts. A common question remains: Can school districts have a dress code that discriminates on the basis of gender?

Pay close attention to Chapter 4, especially the Tinker case which highlights that “conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason—whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior—materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech” (p. 65).

In your discussion post,

• Present an argument to the question, “Can school districts have a dress code that discriminates on the basis of gender?” using the text and one outside source to support your explanation.
• Refer to at least two statements from the Linking to Practice Do and Do Not suggestions in Chapter 4 (p. 70) to further explain your rationale for your dress code argument.

Please answer all the questions in a full paragraphs that make sense….

Chapter 5 Due Process, Student Discipline, Athletics, and Title IX

Introduction

Administrators are empowered by a wide variety of federal, state, and local laws and policies to maintain orderly and safe schools. However, students do not forfeit all of their constitutional rights. This is especially true when students are off-campus. For many secondary school leaders, extracurricular activities, especially athletics, are also an important responsibility. Title IX is designed to protect students from being denied the benefits of any educational program or activity, including athletics, because of sex. Basic fairness and a healthy respect for these rights is part of being an ethical and humane school leader. This chapter considers the balance between the obligation to maintain order and safety while respecting the rights of students. The Justice as Fairness principles of the American political philosopher John Rawls, the due process rights of students, corporal punishment, excessive force, and extracurricular activities are presented here.

Focus Questions

1. What is a “well-ordered” school, and how is this concept related to due process and student discipline?

2. Can, and should, students be disciplined for off-campus behavior?

3. Is consistency in student discipline always rational?

4. Should schools use corporal punishment to control student behavior? What standards should courts use when reviewing charges of excessive force during corporal punishment?

Key Terms

1. Corporal punishment

2. Due process

3. Liberty interest

4. Procedural due process

5. Property interest

6. Shocks the conscience

7. Substantive due process

8. Title IX

9. Well-ordered school

Case Study The Case of the Powdered Aspirin

As principal of Medford Elementary School, Charlene Daniels was quite concerned about the rumors that several students had been bringing powdered aspirin to school and “huffing” the powder in the restroom after lunch and after recess. At the last faculty meeting, Charlene had discussed her concerns with the faculty and asked them to be more vigilant than usual as students left the cafeteria and returned from recess. It was this vigilance that led sixth-grade teacher Ralph Smith to her office. “Ms. Daniels, I just saw sixth-grader Lasiandra Davis go into the girls’ restroom next to the cafeteria. I just caught a glimpse, but I am sure I saw a brown paper bag in her hand. I could not follow her into the restroom, but I sent Mrs. Hale to go check.”

Mrs. Hale came out of the restroom just as Charlene and Ralph arrived holding a brown paper bag covered with a white powdery substance. “I found this in the trash can under some papers. When I arrived Lasiandra Davis was the only one in the restroom. She saw me searching the trash can and left the restroom before I could stop her.”

Charlene immediately placed the brown bag with the white substance in a plastic container, called the police, and started her own investigation. The investigation lasted all afternoon, interrupted several classes, and caused several students to miss significant time in the classroom. All five of the sixth-grade teachers spent considerable time talking to their students trying to get more information. By the end of the day, Charlene was fairly convinced that Lasiandra had indeed been in possession of the paper bag. She based her conclusions on a couple of students’ testimony that they had seen Lasiandra with a paper bag right before lunch, Lasiandra’s teacher’s observation that Lasiandra had seem “agitated” after lunch the past several days, and Mr. Smith’s belief that he had seen Lasiandra take a brown paper bag into the restroom.

Charlene called Lasiandra to the office and confronted her with the allegations. Lasiandra denied that she had brought powdered aspirin to school. She said that she was not in possession of a paper bag after lunch as Mr. Smith had said, and that she knew nothing about the bag found in the trash. Charlene informed Lasiandra that she was suspending her for 5 days for “disturbing instruction.” She based this finding on the fact that all sixth-grade classes had been disrupted, that all five of the sixth-grade teachers had participated in the investigation rather than teach their classes, and that she as principal spent all afternoon investigating the incident.

Lasiandra’s mother and father were not happy with Charlene’s decision. Both parents had called Superintendent Johanson. Charlene’s parents and the superintendent had agreed to meet the next day to appeal the suspension.

Leadership Perspectives

A reasonably orderly school promotes and protects the welfare and safety of students and staff and provides the foundation for a safe and effective school environment (ISLLC Standards 3 & 3C). A reasonably orderly building environment also promotes social justice, equity, and accountability as called for in ISLLC Standard 5E. However, not all orderly schools are good schools. Not all orderly classrooms promote efficient and effective learning (ISLLC Standard 3). As in a maximum-security prison, order in schools and classrooms can be obtained by rigid rules and punishment. As discussed in the previous chapter, schools and classrooms that achieve order in these ways often create a hostile, alienating, and toxic environment that is not conducive to the types of teaching and learning for which “good” schools are noted (Skiba & Peterson, 2000). There is little question, however, that effective schools and classrooms must have a system of enforced rules in place to provide the foundations for orderly and safe school cultures that promote learning. Unfortunately, a very fine line sometimes exists between maintaining order and creating overly punitive school cultures.

ISLLC Standards 3 & 3C

ISLLC Standard 5E

ISLLC Standard 3

The opening case study “The Case of the Powdered Aspirin” illustrates this. ISLLC Standard 2A calls for school leaders to develop and sustain a culture of collaboration and trust. Principal Daniels has exemplified this standard by enlisting faculty in support of her efforts to maintain a substance-free environment. There is no question that students bringing powdered aspirin to school and “huffing” it is a significant school safety and student health concern. Principal Daniels is correct in being concerned about the welfare and safety of students in her school (ISLLC Standard 3C). She is also correct in accepting Mr. Smith’s assertion that he had seen Lasiandra Davis take a brown paper bag into the girl’s restroom after lunch. Principal Daniels may be correct in her belief that Lasiandra Davis is at least one of the students bringing powdered aspirin to school. As principal she is empowered by a wide variety of state laws and school board policies to enforce reasonable rules designed to maintain a safe and substance-free environment. As principal, she also has a responsibility to treat students, teachers, and others fairly and in an ethical manner regardless of the circumstances (ISLLC Standard 5).

ISLLC Standard 2A

ISLLC Standard 3C

ISLLC Standard 5

Lasiandra Davis also has certain rights and responsibilities. She has the responsibility to follow reasonable rules. She also has the right to be treated fairly. School leaders’ responsibility to promote good order and discipline must be balanced with student rights to be treated fairly and in an ethical manner. This balance, reflected in ISLLC Standards 3 and 5, is addressed in this chapter by considering the “justice as fairness” concepts of the American political philosopher John Rawls, and the legal concepts of due process, student discipline, and Title IX.

ISLLC Standards 3 and 5

Student Rights and the Well-Ordered School

John Rawls’s concept of justice as fairness (2001)  provides guidance when considering the balance of the sometimes conflicting principles of maintaining a reasonably orderly school that promotes learning, safety and a substance-free environment with the equally compelling requirement that all students be treated fairly. Rawls’s theory of justice as fairness is a political theory, but it is applicable to schools as a concept of local justice. Rawls presents his concept in two principles of justice. The first, presented here, is particularly germane to a discussion of the relationship between student rights and the obligation to maintain order in a positive school culture.

· Principle One: Each person has the same indefeasible claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of liberties for all. (p. 42)

 

Principle One assumes that all students, regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnicity, or disciplinary history, are deserving of the same liberties. The fundamental idea is the development of a school culture that exists simultaneously as a fair system of social cooperation that is established by public justification. Social cooperation requires that reasonable persons understand and honor certain basic principles, even at the expense of their own interests, provided that others are also expected to honor these principles. In other words, students can be expected to understand and honor reasonable restrictions on their freedoms. School officials can be expected to reciprocate by promoting fairness and honoring appropriate student rights. In Rawls’s view, it is unreasonable not to honor fair terms of cooperation that others are expected to accept. It is worse than unreasonable to pretend to honor basic principles of social cooperation and then readily violate these principles simply because one has the power to do so. In other words, Rawls views it as unreasonable for school leaders to “talk the fairness talk” but not “walk the walk.” As pointed out in  Chapter 1 , fairness is a difficult concept. Fairness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. There is no question that walking the walk can be fraught with difficulty. But, as Rawls points out, although it may seem rational at times to violate the principle of fairness and ignore student rights, it is never reasonable.

 

A school culture based on social cooperation must be publicly justified and acceptable, not only to those who make the rules, but also to others (students, parents, teachers, etc.) who are affected by the school culture. To be effective, public justification should proceed to some form of consensus that assumes that all parties have fundamental rights and responsibilities. Rawls acknowledges that it is unlikely that all members of a diverse school with conflicting needs, values, and priorities will come to the same conclusions and the same definition of a well-ordered school. However, it is important that a reasonable consensus result from the process to serve as a basis for the justification of the need for certain rules and policies to promote order and efficiency.

The Idea of a Well-Ordered School

A school that exists as a fair system of cooperation under a public conception of justice meets ISLLC Standards 2A, 3A, 3C, 4B, 4C, 4D, 5B, 5C, 5D, and 5E. A school existing in this manner—a  well-ordered school —has three defining characteristics:

ISLLC Standards 2A, 3A, 3C, 4B, 4C, 4D, 5B, 5C, 5D, and 5E

1. Everyone in the school accepts, and knows that everyone else accepts, the same concepts of justice. Moreover, this knowledge is mutually recognized as though these principles were a matter of public record. In other words, school leaders, teachers, and students acknowledge and accept that certain basic principles will be honored by everyone.

2. All personal interactions, policies, and applications of policy are designed to facilitate a system of cooperation.

3. Students, teachers, and school leaders have a rational sense of justice that allows them to understand and for the most part act accordingly as their positions in the school dictate.

 

These three concepts provide a mutually recognizable point of view for the development of a school culture that promotes order, safety, and security. A mutual understanding of the roles and responsibilities of administrators, teachers, and students is important. The concept of a well-ordered school characterized by a fair system of social cooperation established by public justification may seem overly theoretical. However, it is embedded in a real problem—the development of a safe, secure, and substance-free school environment that promotes student learning. For example, in a national study of crime and violence in middle schools,  Cantor et al. (2001)  found that in low-disorder schools, a shared sense of responsibility is present among teachers and administrators. In these schools, principals and teachers for the most part support one another and function well as a team. In contrast, this sense of shared responsibility among teachers and administrators was weak in high-disorder schools. Teachers tended to point fingers at one another, at administrators, and at school security officers for the lack of good order in the school. A school culture based on a public conception of justice provides the framework for a shared sense of responsibility by all concerned in promoting good order and discipline. Well-ordered schools characterized by a fair system of social cooperation established by public justification are most likely to have a school environment that promotes collaboration, trust, and learning (ISLLC Standard 2A); the welfare and safety of students and staff (ISLLC Standard 3C); and social justice and student achievement (ISLLC Standard 5E).

ISLLC Standard 2A

ISLLC Standard 3C

ISLLC Standard 5E

 

Linking to Practice

Do:

· Develop a system of mutually acceptable and publicly justified policies designed to maintain order and promote safety.

· Involve a wide range of interested stakeholders in the formulation of school rules.

· Model and insist that teachers and other adults in the school honor basic fairness and student rights. Conversely, insist that parents and students honor basic teacher rights.

· Use the concept of a well-ordered school to reinforce feelings of emotional safety for students, teachers, and parents.

· Use data to publicly justify certain restrictions on student freedom. These data can be used to support school safety interventions or conversely demonstrate that certain interventions may not be needed at this point in time.

Do Not: