Collaborative Project #1

Board Policy Selected: Wireless Communication

Group Members: Eric Tande, Mike Johnson, Jeremy Hanson

Applicable Federal Laws:
1. Childrens Internet Protection Act (2000)
a. Schools subject to CIPA have two additional certification requirements: 1) their
Internet safety policies must include monitoring the online activities of minors;
and 2) as required by the Protecting Children in the 21st Century Act, they must
provide for educating minors about appropriate online behavior, including
interacting with other individuals on social networking websites and in chat
rooms, and cyberbullying awareness and response. (www.fcc.gov)
2. United States Constitution 4th Amendment
a. The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the
part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and
requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause
b. Like their adult counterparts, students are protected from unreasonable searches,
and thus, assuming that the school officials conduct is a search, any Fourth
Amendment inquiry turns on whether a search is reasonable or unreasonable.
Unlike adults however, students in school enjoy less protection of their privacy
because a students right to privacy in his or her belongings has been deemed
secondary to concerns for students overall safety and well-being. Schools act in
place of a parentor, in loco parentis. Thus, reasonableness has a distinct
definition for students in a school setting. Before a school official can search a
student, the justification for the search must be reasonable at its inception and
reasonable in scope. Most courts will give school officials wide latitude in what
is reasonable, given the realities of keeping schools safe. School administrators
can search lockers, backpacks, pocketbooks, and other items of personal property
with only a moderate degree of suspicionsomething more than a hunch, but less
than what would be required to meet a preponderance of evidence standard.
3. New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985)
a. T.L.O., 469 U.S. at 342 ([A] search will be permissible in its scope when the
measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search and not
excessively intrusive in light of the age and sex of the student and the nature of
the infraction.).
Applicable State Statutes:

1. Wisconsin State Statute 118.258 (Electronic Communication Devices Prohibited)

a. (1)Each school board may adopt rules prohibiting a pupil from using or
possessing an electronic communication device while on premises owned or
rented by or under the control of a public school.
(2)Annually, if the school board adopts rules under sub. (1), it shall provide each
pupil enrolled in the school district with a copy of the rules.

Similarities Between School District Policy:
Most of our district policies were very similar to each other. Most schools allowed for use before
and after school, and during lunch time. Schools also banned use of devices in locker rooms and
bathrooms or any place with an expectation of privacy. Common language was used regarding
devices that students carry with them, mandating that they either be powered off, on mute with
no vibration, or on do not disturb. Another common similarity was the vagueness of most
policies, rather than defining specific violations, schools opted to use words such as acceptable
use and responsible use.

Differences Between School District Policy:
Blair-Taylor does not mention any restrictions on places of use, but does mention that students
need to have permission to use their devices. Tomah was very different from other school
districts, in that they are very specific in their language regarding when personal communication
devices can be used, where they can be used, in what ways they can be used, and by whom they
can be used. Most difference revolved around when and where students could use personal
communication devices.

Two Court Cases Which Impact This Policy (How/Why):

Riley vs. California
573 U.S. (20140
-A persons cell phone cannot be searched at will.
-A warrant is needed to search a cell phone
-Too much is revealed about a persons life when a cell phones are searched. (Apps)


United States vs Wurie
11-1792
-Drug dealer arrested with drug paraphernalia, cell phone confiscated
-Cell phone rings and visible is a My Home label
-Police go to address associated with My Home and find more drugs and firearms
-Wurie argues to the supreme court that his reasonable right to privacy was violated.





Draft of New Policy:
Source: http://www.manawa.k12.wi.us/policies.cfm

STUDENT USE AND/OR POSSESSION OF TWO-WAY ELECTRONIC

DEVICES

Students are permitted to possess cellular phones and other electronic

communication devices during the school day. These include, but are not
limited to, cellular phones, personal digital assistants, personal
music/video/gaming devices, cameras, or other personal electronic devices.
Students who possess such a device do so at their own risk to possible loss,
damage, or liability.

Cameras or electronic communication devices shall not be used:

In areas where one would reasonably expect privacy, i.e. locker rooms,
bathrooms, etc
To communicate test answers, photographic tests, or engage in any
other conduct that enables students to cheat
To share or post personal information about, or images of, any other
student or staff member without permission from that student or staff
member
To engage in cyber-bullying placing cell phone calls or sending text
messages that ridicule, threaten or harass another student
To take, disseminate, transfer or share obscene, pornographic, lewd or
otherwise illegal images or photographs

Possession of an electronic device by a student is a privilege, which may be

forfeited by any student who fails to abide by the terms of this policy, or
otherwise engages in misuse of this privilege.

Nothing within this policy shall be construed to limit a students ability to use
an electronic device in a manner that functions as assistive technology
necessary for a students education and that is required under an
individualized education plan or a Section 504 plan.

The inappropriate use of electronic devices by students while on campus or
engaging in school activities is subject to disciplinary action.

The inappropriate use of such devices by students while off campus and not
engaging in school activities may also be subject to disciplinary action if such
conduct endangers the health, safety or property of others at school or under
the supervision of school authorities and/or causes a material and substantial
disruption to the school environment or school activities.

Also, students involved in activities that interfere with the rights of other
students to participate fully in school or extracurricular activities will be in
violation of this policy.