Lesson 4: Student/Youth Due ProcessTopic: Should a student have the right to a hearing before being suspended? Background: Students do not "shed their constitutional rights" at the schoolhouse door. So said the Supreme Court in Tinker v. Des Moines School District 393 U.S. 503 (1969). This statement has probably had the single greatest impact on student's rights in the post Tinker era. In the nearly thirty years that have passed since the decision, the Supreme Court has, in various ways, tried to make the Constitution a meaningful document for students and educators. Liberals and conservatives alike have been able to carve out a role for constitutional protections in every aspect of education. It is not surprising then, that the Court would bring due process of law into the classroom. In Goss v. Lopez 419 U.S. 565 (1975), the Supreme Court considered the application of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, to student suspensions. They invalidated an Ohio statute that permitted student suspensions for not more than ten days, without effective notice and a hearing. The Court determined that notice and a hearing were the minimum safeguards necessary in suspension proceedings to satisfy the requirements of due process. This lesson explores the salient issues of the Goss case, in an informal setting devoid of the technicalities of a legal proceeding. The class will convene a school board meeting and examine significant aspects of both the majority and dissenting opinions. Students will not be required to reconcile the issues as the Court did in Goss, however they will be asked to assume the role of a person who may have opinions other than their own. They will then examine the three basic questions of the case in that role. At the conclusion of the meeting, students will have an opportunity to compare their own views with the views they expressed during the simulation. In this manner, students learn the value of analyzing a variety of perspectives before making a decision that will impact many different people in many different ways. Objectives: After students have participated in a school board meeting to establish procedures for student suspensions, students will be able to:
Materials: Handout 4A "Goss v. Lopez"
Time Required: 1-2 class periods Procedures: Distribute Handout 4B "Notice of Emergency School Board Meeting." Have students read and study the memorandum paying particular attention to the issues that are before the Supreme Court of the United States. Assign each student the role of a school board member described on the Handout. If there are more students in the class than school board members, additional students will play invited guests at the meeting and may raise their hands and ask questions of the board. Each student will have one minute to summarize his position on suspensions and state whether he/she believes that notification and a hearing should be required. At the conclusion of the meeting all students in the class should vote on whether to include notification and a hearing in the suspension proceeding. Students should stay within their assigned roles when voting, except for the invited guests who may vote as they want. The majority position will form the basis of the rules and regulations included in the manual. After the votes have been tallied, the class should write three rules and regulations in the manual. Before the end of the meeting, President Frank/Frieda Fairness will announce that an urgent fax has just been received and that the Supreme Court has reached a decision in the case of Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 (1975). Mr./Ms. Fairness will inform the board that as a result of this decision, students will be entitled to a notice and a hearing either before or in some instances immediately after a suspension as a matter of due process of law guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution. In addition, the Court found that once the right to a public education has been granted by statute, it is a property right which cannot be taken away without due process of law. Further, the Court found that a school suspension, even for a very short period of time, without notice and an opportunity to be heard, is more than a "de minimus" (minimal) denial of a property right. At this time the meeting is adjourned, however we may need to meet again to modify the manual in accordance with the findings of the Supreme Court. After the meeting has been adjourned, have students explain their answers to the following questions:
Performance Assessment: Distribute Handout 4C "Lunchtime Rumble." Have students read the hypothetical and complete the exercise. As an alternative to presenting the hypothetical, the teacher may use a real incident that recently occurred in the school and resulted in a suspension. After completing the exercise, have students explain their answers to the following questions.
Based on multiple intelligence theory. Linguistic: Write a letter to a friend stating your views about the issues presented in Goss v. Lopez. Logical/Mathematical: Calculate the number and types of incidents that have led to suspensions in your school, along with the total number of suspensions and compare these results to the data collected from other schools in your district. Intrapersonal: Write a diary entry describing your feelings if you were suspended. Interpersonal: Divide the class in half. Further divide each half into pairs. Have each group reach an agreement on what they think is the strongest argument supporting and opposing a hearing requirement in suspension proceedings.
Handout 4A: STUDENT/YOUTH DUE PROCESS
Handout 4B: STUDENT/YOUTH DUE PROCESS The following memorandum has been distributed to all interested parties: NOTICE OF EMERGENCY SCHOOL BOARD MEETING TO: Members of the school board, faculty and staff, students, parents and residents of the community FROM: Frank/Frieda Fairness, President of the Local School Board RE: Procedures for the suspension of students
In light of recent incidents of student unrest leading to a number of suspensions, an emergency meeting of the school board is being scheduled for tomorrow. The purpose of this meeting will be to establish rules and regulations for student suspension proceedings and to prepare a manual of such, for the use of school administrators. All participants should be aware that a case is now before the Supreme Court of the United States, which examines the relationship between student due process rights and suspensions. We must therefore be concerned about a number of issues in preparing our manual. These issues include:
The meeting will be conducted in an open forum. All school board members, residents and members of the educational community are urged to attend this important event. The next day the meeting is called to order with the following members of the school board present: Principal Artie/Amy Autonomy: Believes that suspensions are purely an educational matter and school officials should have complete authority to order them. Resents any attempt by the Court or the state to impose due process requirements. Assistant Principal Eva/Evan Brawny: Concerned about a lack of discipline in school. Does not feel students should have any rights in the matter of suspensions. Law School Professor Dr. Dudley/Diedre Dueprocess: Constitutional scholar. Considers public education a property right, and feels that students should have the full protection of the Due Process Clause. Believes that students should be given timely notice, a hearing, representation and a chance to cross-examine witnesses during a suspension proceeding. English Teacher and Part-time Law Student Carl/Cora Compromise: Supports the views of Dr. Dueprocess, but feels that timely notice and a hearing is all that is required by the Due Process Clause in student suspension proceedings. Dean of Students Oliver/Olivia Overburdened: Supervises all suspensions. Concerned that a hearing requirement will result in too much work for school officials leaving them little time for anything else. Wealthy Land Owner Ed/Edie Cheapo: Worried that the high cost of enforcing too many rules and regulations for suspensions will force property taxes to go up. Guidance Counselor Chas/Constance Concerned: Cares about the future and the effect of a suspension on a student's record when applying to college or looking for a job. Physical Education Teacher and Coach Ernie/Esther Easygoing: Hopes to avoid the suspension of students who participate in school sports. Believes that suspensions should never be used as a form of punishment. In any event, wants to keep everything as informal as possible. Parent Ivan/Ivana Involvement: Believes that parents should be involved in every aspect of a child's education and discipline. Parent Rudy/Ruth Ruler: Believes that rules and regulations are to be strictly followed and students should not have any right to question them. Parent Lance/Lana Liberal: Does not believe in suspensions. Parent Arthur/Ann Authority: Believes that schools should have the authority to do what they think is best. Security Guard Fred/Francis Fearless: Wants students suspended more frequently to maintain discipline. Mayor Al/Alma Sharpy: First African-American mayor, feels that suspensions are too often used against minority students. State Education Commissioner Dan/Dawn Dogood: Supports the right of school officials to have complete discretion in suspensions and believes that this is necessary for the smooth operation of the school. Feels that most school officials act in the best interests of the students anyway and better understand the needs of the school. Judge Jesse/Jessica Justice: Feels that the best way to make a decision about a suspension is in a hearing conducted in a forum similar to a court of law. School Board President Frank/ Frieda Fairness: Concerned about the tendency of some school officials to make mistakes and suspend students for the wrong reason. MANUAL OF RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR STUDENT SUSPENSIONS ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Handout 4C: STUDENT/YOUTH DUE PROCESS "Lunchtime Rumble" Bob Buffbody, head trainer in the local health club, visited the high school to speak about the benefits of proper nutrition and exercise. Buffbody is very charismatic, as well as handsome, and had no trouble convincing students to establish a chapter of his organization, "Pumped, Fit and Trim," which he refers to as PFAT. Wendy Burger and Mac Donalds, two overweight students, have decided to give up fast food and join PFAT. Together they have organized a boycott of the school cafeteria to protest the amount of junk food sold there. At one point during the boycott, they blocked the entrance to the cafeteria. When several students wanted to enter the facility to purchase food, a fight broke out. Nobody was injured but the cafeteria was trashed. On her way back to class, Wendy noticed a Domino's pizza delivery boy bringing a pizza to the office of the principal, Hart Bloch. Wendy physically assaulted the pizza delivery boy leaving him with cuts and bruises. Mr. Bloch immediately suspended Wendy indefinitely and Mac for one week. They were sent home with a brief letter informing their parents that they had been suspended. The suspensions were noted on their permanent records.
Activity Based on the three rules and regulations in the manual produced at the school board meeting, write a letter to Wendy and Mac informing them of their rights and whether or not they are entitled to notice and a hearing. Be sure to fully explain the reasons for the rules and regulations in the manual. |
