Alignment of Staff and Student Handbooks with Current Law

Drake EDL 276 FBLA

Seth Rehn

Drake University

The famed scientist Albert Einstein believed, at one time, that we lived in a static, or
stationary, universe. Unchanging and motionless our universe was infinite, and space was neither
expanding nor contracting. We now know that this is false, our universe is a dynamic one with
planets and solar systems traveling away from each other creating even more space, and
requiring use to look at our incredible universe through a different lens. Like our universe our
schools are always changing. Our students are not like the children that were in schools 50, 20 or
even 10 years ago. In that time we have had very big social, technological, judicial, economic
and educational variations. Due to all of these adaptations the policies and practices we adhere to
in our school most also adapt to fit the current time. I have chosen to focus on three topics in
schools and examine my staff and student handbooks in order to compare them with current law.
I will be using the Cedar Rapids Community School District Policy Handbook found on the
district website, and the Franklin Middle School Student Handbook. By completing this I hope to
ensure that my school and district are practicing appropriate due process for students and staff.
Search and Seizure
When it comes to the searching of students, and possible seizure of illicit materials there
are several criteria that need to be met. The Students Rights chapter in our book is almost three
times as long as the chapter on Teacher Freedoms. If due process is not used correctly when
dealing with a student it may lead expensive litigation, as well as possible damages costing the
district and its personnel precious time and resources.
The most famous case surrounding search and seizure of a student is New Jersey v TLO
in 1985. During this case the court held that the searching of students is subject to the standards
of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. This means that a teacher or administrator is not
allowed to search any person or their effects without probable cause supported by oath or

affirmation. Often when cases pertaining to searches of students and their belongings arise it is
because there is a misunderstanding of probable cause on the side of the school. Suspicion and
past infractions cannot be used as reasons for probable cause, since in a court room they will ask
for specific pieces of evidence used by the school to deduce there may be elicit materials on the
student. In the Policy Handbook used by CRCSD it states:
A student's person and/or personal effects (e.g., purse, book bag, cell phone or other electronic
device, or other container used for carrying personal items) may be searched when there is
reasonable and articulable suspicion that a District policy, rule, regulation or law has been
violated.
Reasonable suspicion may be formed by considering such factors as:
a. eyewitness observations by school personnel;
b. information received from reliable sources;
c. suspicious behavior by the student; or
d. as a contracted condition of students attendance..

By using the term reasonable and articulable suspicion, the district states that random searches
of students may not be performed, and school officials must be able verbally state the specific
reasons why a student and/or their belongings were searched. This concept was highlighted in
the case of A.H. v. Florida (2003). In this case, a student was searched and found to be in
possession of a leafy green material and a razor blade. However, in court, when asked why he
was searched school officials said he had slurred speech, but had no concrete evidence. The court
ruled that the official was going off a gut-feeling which alone did not warrant reasonable
suspicion.
The section also gives a clear and useful guide to employees of what can be used for
probable cause. The section goes on to explain, personally intrusive searches will require more
compelling circumstances, and attempts to contact the parents/guardians should be made.
I feel very confident in our district policy pertaining to the search and seizure of students and
their belongings, CRCSD holds their staff and students to a high expectation and requires that all
rights be respected and ensures proper measures will be taken before removing those rights.

Field Trips
Nothing makes my hands sweat more than having a large class going on a field trip.
Though this is an excellent way to get out of the classroom and to immerse students into subject
matter and new ways of learning, there are also innumerous ways for things to go wrong. As a
teacher and an administrator it is important to know what exactly is expected of you and your
students to ensure everyone fulfills their roles. The large variable when it comes to the duties of
school personnel of field trips is the Standard of Care. This can be determined based on the age
and maturity of the students being taken on the trip, as well as the level of danger, and fulfilled
with proper amounts of supervision. There have been several court cases regarding students and
staff on field trips that deal with the issue Standard of Care and set forth some guidelines, but
it is in a small sense a gray area, and open to a slight interpretation. For example, when
considering the age of the students and their maturity level, some students will need to be
treated/handled differently, in certain situations. In one such case King v Kartenson, a teacher
allowed for a 13 year old student to leave a lunch area on a field trip and cross the street back to
an art studio. While crossing the street the student was struck by a car. It was up to the court to
decide whether or not the student was mature enough as a 13 year old to cross the street un
accompanied, leaving the fate of the teachers and school up to a jury of peers. In order to remain
completely safe, staff should attempt to supervise students whenever possible, since peer
decisions can change.
Unfortunately in the Policy Handbook for CRCSD there is nothing regarding the policies
or procedures of staff members while on a field trip. The most that I can find is the planning and
application for a field trip, depending on distance and number of students planning to attend.
This makes me worried the district leaves itself vulnerable to an unfortunate event to damage its

credibility and reputation. I suggest that our district implement a policy, or guideline to help
determine and ensure supervision on field trips is adequate and as objective as possible.
Furthermore I strongly urge the district to implement a policy outline the expectations of all staff
members and chaperones on any school sponsored field trip. This clear communication of
expectations, I believe, will allow each person to know and understand their role in ensuring
student safety, and will also foster a more conducive climate for learning for students. My last
suggestion for the CRCSD is to make not of the fact: field trip waivers have very little to no legal
value in a court room. It is my personal belief, as well as others around me, that waivers are
viewed as a reprieve of duties on the behalf of staff. Staff, students, and parents should be
reminded that just because you signed a waiver does not mean that any and all precautions
should not be taken when supervising a field trip.
Political Activity
The general rule, on a first date, is to not discuss religion or politics. This is because these
are the two subjects that people are most passionate about, most of the time. Both hold immense
implications and thus are taken very seriously with those that participate in/with them. Thus
schools and their district must take every precaution to remain non-partisan and always focus on
the education of its students. Though students and staff to do not leave their beliefs and rights at
the door their views and beliefs must be expressed appropriately. Furthermore it is the duty of
the school and district to ensure partisan politics does not enter any school during a regular
school day.
Most of what I was able to find involving politics in the CRCD Policy Handbook was in
regard to what students and staff were not allowed to do, in order to maintain the school
neutrality. Such things as not being able to use school technology on behalf of a political activity,

may not harass any individual based upon their political beliefs, and lastly nothing will be posted
to the virtual backpack on the district website if it is seen to endorse a political candidate of
political issue. Regulation 1005.1 states:
Political candidates, party representatives, and other candidates for elective office shall not be allowed to campaign in
District buildings during the school day. They may be permitted to meet in District buildings before or after the student
day, provided they meet District guidelines for use of District facilities and provided the meeting is held in a designated
location and attendance is voluntary.
Political campaign material, including material supporting or opposing candidates or ballot issues, shall not be distributed
in school buildings during the school day and shall not be placed in District staff members mailboxes.
Political officeholders or candidates may be engaged as resource persons for instructional purposes with the approval of the
building administrator. Every effort shall be made, however, to structure the presentation or discussion so that it is either
nonpartisan in nature or allows opportunity for the representation of differing points of view.
The District shall not expend any District funds for partisan political activities.

CRCSD does a very good job outlining how they plan to remain a neutral learning environment
which I believe to be the most important concept when it comes to politics in schools. I do not
believe they need to take any more steps to ensure non-partisanship, I do suggest they take
greater steps to educate employees of their political rights.
I suggest CRCSD outline, for staff members, what their political rights are, and the
district expectations of staff members who wish to exercise those rights. A regulation may read
like: As employees of CRCSD you have the right to run for, and hold, public office (Minielly v.
State of Oregon). However in order to ensure the school remain a non-partisan entity you may
not sacrifice contractual time in order to complete political responsibilities. This would include
the dispersing of political material, handling of political matters (emails, phone calls,
engagements, etc).
Allen v. Board of Education Overturned a mandate for teacher to take leaves of absence
while holding public office, citing the fact other staff members were allowed to take part in extra
time consuming activities without having to leave. Though I do not believe a person should

attempt to be both a public official as well as a teacher, it is their right to attempt such a feat if
they so decide.
As stated before our schools just like our universe is a dynamic environment,
necessitating constant growth and adaptation. It requires we re-examine our practices, policies
and procedures routinely in order to ensure we are prepared for any foreseeable situation and can
react quickly when an unforeseeable circumstance arises. CRCSD has a very extensive Policy
Handbook, preparing us for almost everything we can think of, and by taking my suggestions
into consideration I believe we can be even more prepared for any situation that may arise in the
future.