Rockshire High School: A Case Study

I, _____________, will be participating in the Lindhurst Blazers Baseball Program in the 2018 season. I am representing Lindhurst High School, and, as such, my behavior reflects on the coaches, my teammates, the faculty and students of Lindhurst H.S., my family, and community. I will be held to a higher standard than other students and will be expected to treat everyone with the respect that I expect to be treated in return. By signing this agreement, I agree to the following conditions.

There is an increase in cyberbullying due to technology, the school has the right to protect their students, and it affects how teachers work. Numerous individuals trust that punishing students for what they say outside of school goes against the First Amendment, yet in the event that it disturbs the wellbeing of the student body, something should be done. At the point when students are included with cyberbullying, it unquestionably goes past the school's doors and influences not only the student, but the general population around

The purposes of schools include protecting and educating its students. Therefore, naturally, when a student is cyberbullying someone else, the school seeks to intervene. However, many argue that a school’s intervention of its students’ online speech is in violation of their First Amendment rights. Should schools be allowed to limit students’ online speech? That is, should schools be allowed to punish the things its students post online, even if they are done outside of school, and from their personal devices? The answer is clearly yes. From the concept, to the precedence, to the data, to a letter from the US Department of Education, evidences everywhere supports limiting students’

When posed with the question whether schools have grounds to punish students for their off-campus online speech, J expressed that the implications of the question are quite broad and require some nuance in approach. Public schools do have grounds to punish students for their off-campus online speech, but only in limited and specific circumstances. Threats of violence and harassment (such as cyberbullying) directed at members of the school community should certainly be dealt with by school administration. However, online speech that is merely controversial or vulgar, without threatening the safety of a specific person or groups of people, should not be addressed by school administrators. S agreed that public schools cannot control what a student says online off-campus except when it involves the safety of the school and/or students. If a student threatens to bring harm to others, be it staff or their peers, the principal

High School is an incredibly important period of life. It influences your social, academic, and personal life for four years, and prepares you for college and a career. This is the reason County Prep High School is my school of choice. County Prep's thriving social environment, challenging academic curriculum, and wide variety of electives will help me successfully carry out my plans for the future.

Students do not always realize that their free speech can go against certain limits that the Supreme Court has issued on this freedom. The US Department of Education Office for Civil Rights suggests that harassment creates a hostile environment when the conduct is sufficiently severe or persistent so as to interfere with or limit a students' ability to participate in or benefit from the services, activities, or opportunities offered by the school. (Doc. G) In consonance with this, it is the school's responsibility to address harassment incidents to protect students' privacy rights. Allowing full access to the first amendment in schools can often result in the violation of the fourth amendment by infringing privacy rights. There are many forms of harassment that can violate students' civil rights. According to the same department, harassment based on race, color, national origin, sex, or disability violates the civil rights laws that the OCR enforces. (Doc. G) Cyberbullying often falls into these categories which are all violations of civil rights, and many schools may not have proper standards for this violation. It is the school's responsibility to protect the civil rights of students, teachers, and administrators, so they must take a stand against discrimination, including online speech. Not only does cyberbullying contravene with civil rights, it also causes emotional

If I was the principle of Metro High School I would use the four types of reinforcements to motivate the students to improve performance and attendance.* This change of policies would realisticly take place over long period of time with a good system of data collection and other types of control functions. It is also very important to have the parents of the children involve as much as possible.

In a public school, it was determined that a person can always refuse a search, there is need for reasonable suspicion for a search, as opposed to probable cause and the exclusionary rule does not apply. In TLO, the initial suspicion to search TLO’s purse was justified due to the suspicion that she had been smoking in the bathroom. The majority opinion, written by Byron R. White, stated, “Under ordinary circumstances, a search of a student by a teacher or other school official will be ‘justified at its inception’ when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either law or the rules of the school.” The Court ruled in favor of the school because there was a reason to believe that the defendant had broken a school rule prohibiting smoking in the restrooms. This clarification by the Court holds that even students in a public school are protected by

In the case of New Jersey v T.L.O a high school student was suspected of trying to hide cigarettes in her bag. An official searched the bag and found cigarettes,marijuana, and a list of names of students who owed T.L.O. money, she argued that her Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable searches was violated. She was then charged with possession of marijuana and sentenced to one year of probation. Before trial, T.L.O. wanted to suppress the evidence discovered in the search, but the Court denied her motion. The supreme court said school administrators don't need to have a search warrant or probable cause before conducting a search because students already have a reduced expectation of privacy when in

Last year, at Kingsland High School’s Graduation Ceremony, Josie Hinze not only receiveed her High School Diploma, but also her Associates of Arts Degree before even attending any college or university. Fast-forward to one year later, and seven Kingsland students will be graduating high school with both their High School Diploma and AA Degree thanks to the collaboration of Riverland Community College and Kingsland High School for allowing high school students to take college-level courses in high school and receive college credit for them. Not only that, but there are several others who will be graduating Kingsland High School with transferrable college credit so their first few semesters might

A more recent case, J. S v. Bethlehem Area School (2000), is more relevant to the issues today. This court case involves a student who was expelled from the school for creating a website that included derogatory and threatening comments about members of the school’s administration. The Supreme Court ruled that the school’s actions were deemed justified due to evidence proving an obvious disruption of the school environment. In the courts closing arguments the following is stated, “Regrettably, in this day and age where school violence is becoming more commonplace, school officials are justified in taking very seriously threats against faculty and other students.”(Herbeck, 2010)

Masconomet Regional School District is an amazing learning institution filled with passionate educators, supportive parents and engaged students. As a result, I have loved every day of being the Principal of Masconomet Regional High School.

Leaguetown Independent School District is currently facing a conflict of whether having later start times would perhaps help the improvement of academic performance of Leaguetown Middle School and high school students. Superintendent Judith Owens has proposed a new schedule that would set later start times. A group of Leaguetown Middle School parents has organized to oppose the proposal.

Students can send cruel comments through texts and emails instead of doing it in person. A whole group of students can send anonymous messages and slander through Facebook or YouTube. The home address or cell phone number of the victim can be posted online. Videos and pictures of an individual during a vulnerable or intimate time in their life can be used on the internet to continue their humiliation for years to come. Victims are no longer safe in their own home because their bullies can follow them online. In addition, teachers cannot witness these online altercations like they could with altercations in a classroom. Being unable to track student behavior online, instructors could no longer report activity unless it occurred in their presence or they are notified by a student. School boards cannot respond to these internet attacks with their sweeping policies because they did not apply to off campus situations. Federal laws provided little relief. “In January 2006, the United States made it a federal crime to harass people on the internet.—but the law applied only to people over the age of eighteen.”(Klein 119-120) Cyber-bullies in secondary school could commit acts of aggression without worries of repercussion. If caught, online abuser could evoke their first amendment rights, which defendsfreedom of speech. No one willing to stop these attackers would know what was happening until it was too late for the

The Center presented the officials with a made-up scenario in which a student, using the web, threatened to inflict bodily harm on another student. On a scale of one to ten, one meaning no law enforcement role was required and ten requiring a “significant” role, the respondents rated the situation a 9.1. This was the scenario that drew the strongest approval of police intervention (Patchin). Interestingly, one of Rebecca Sedwick’s tormentors told her to die via a Facebook post (Slifer, Fla. Girls). In such a case, the Cyberbullying Research Center instructed law enforcement officials to discuss publicly the consequences of cyberbullying for education and deterrence purposes (Patchin). Obviously, talking things over cannot prevent everything, but it increases awareness in school administrators and parents. The Center also asserted officers should “discipline students for conduct outside of school if it infringes on the rights of other students or causes material disruptions to the school’s learning environment” (Patchin). Ultimately, the Center left interpretations of cyberbullying incidents and the required responses to the officers themselves. In fact, the Center more clearly defines law enforcement’s role in cyberbullying cases in its general statement found on its homepage. The document says officials should