Should Wisconsin Accept The New Bill Of Student Rights Of Students

"Accordingly, this case does not concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the rights of other students."

This document supports limiting online student speech because the court ruled that even though it happened out of school, the school’s reason was strong enough to justify their actions toward K.K.

As in the first case discussed, the issue before the court was also based on the first amendment of the Constitution. The question before the court was; “Do school officials have the right to restrict the free expression of students without first showing that such expression will disrupt the operation of the school?”. After deliberation, the court overturned the decisions of the lower courts and determined that the school board’s actions violated the first and fourteenth

Citizens in America are born with a various amount of rights. One of these rights include the freedom of speech and expression. However, school administrators have the ability to restrict a student’s expression. The Supreme Court Cases ‘Bethel School District v. Fraser’ and ‘Frederick V. Morse’ gave schools the right for the administrators to discipline children when they see fit. Students should be able to express themselves in any way without fearing that their school administrators will discipline

In the article “College Kids Have Too Much Privacy,” Michele Willins explains how FERPA, a program that means parents have no right to know how their children are doing in school, is not only hurting college students’ future but also how frightening it can be to oblivious parents who have no idea about this privacy policy. Even the best students can be academically challenged when they go to college. Parents would have no idea that their child is struggling because he or she has succeeded in school thus far. Even if college students are not the best in a school setting, the parents would have no idea if he or she is failing out of classes because officials are not allowed to let the parents know. This marks a major flaw in the FERPA organization.

In high school, a parent has to be aware of everything that goes on with their child's life. Then their child grows up and blossoms into an adult that continues their education into college. There in college the parents of these blossoms are no longer as aware of what goes on with their school life. These parents have little control over what goes on academically and socially while their adult children are in college. In the article, “College Kids Have Too Much Privacy” Michele Willins shows us that parents have a right to know what is going on with their children’s college life.

Constitutional issues in this case are the student is not given his First Amendment rights and also the Due Process a Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The right to freedom of speech and due process are both laws that anyone should be following and anyone making a decision toward a case needs to consider these because they are apart of the amendments and rights to the people. However, in this case they ruled that Bethel High School was not wrong and didn't take away his

Ether Parent in the scenario has a right to request an informal conference with the principal. Depending upon the situation, the principal may take a more formal approach. In any case, the student must be contacted or at least make reasonable attempted contact. I have seen a situation where a student has committed serious offenses and the parent was not able to be bothered with the situation. Education code dictates the right to an appeal to suspensions or expulsions. LACOE does not have an appeal policy. There have been situations where students have appealed to the LACOE board. These situations are atypical of a LACOE program. However, LACOE manages programs for the High School and the Arts which has a higher level of participation.

This amendment pushed Ohio into the wrong direction especially in regards to protecting a student’s privacy.

The Court ruled that it did not violate students' federal or state constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable searches. The Court reasoned that the state, as schoolmaster of children, must exercise a degree of supervision and control greater than it could exercise over adults. They also said that public school children have lesser privacy expectations with regard to medical examinations and procedures than the general population, and student athletes have even less legitimate privacy expectation. The school district had immediate and legitimate concern in preventing student athletes from using drugs.

The topic of this paper is privacy. It will talk about the ethical and legal reasons for maintain privacy. The audience for this paper is high school level teachers in a school with one-to-one devices for every student.

The subject of student rights has caused a lot of confusion and anger for decades now. There are two different sides that everyone seems to fall into. Some people want the constitutional rights of students to be fully protected within the school. The other side believes that, as a public institution, schools should regulate what is said or done by students to protect everyone involved. This is where it gets confusing, because it is hard to draw the line between what is allowed or not. The three most interesting topics that I chose to cover are a student’s right to free speech, religion within the school and student privacy.

Prior to the landmark ruling by the United States Supreme Court, New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 105 S. Ct. 733, 83 L. Ed. 2d 720 (1985), the clarity on how search and seizures applied to students in public schools were unclear. A particular case from 1969 can shed some light regarding on how the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution defines student rights in public schools. In Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733; 21 L. Ed. 2d 731 (1969), the court found that:

There is a concern about many users privacy worldwide. Technology is constantly upgrading and internet is being used daily worldwide. Laws are constantly changing and there are many concerns about this. In this essay, I will be talking about why

In the two videos provided by FIRE, certain situations where students’ basic rights were violated were shown. In the first video presented by FIRE, I was very surprised to learn that some colleges opt to control what you wear, what you post on Facebook or what you say. Instead of educating young adults, it appears that colleges nowadays are trying to babysit them in every dimension of life, including their personal online social