Running head: HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 1

Handbook Investigations
FBLAEDL 276
Dina Saunders
Drake University


















HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 2

In order to augment my high school clinical experiences this year, I decided to examine
the Mount Pleasant Community High School (MPCHS) Handbook. Many of the court cases that
have been analyzed during the course of this class seem to focus on the actions of students of
middle school to high school age, so examining the high school handbook seemed logical.
As I read through the handbook, it appears much care has been taken to anticipate differ-
ent scenarios that could have a negative impact on the learning environment. There were many
examples of language that stated the purpose of the policies was to ensure a safe learning envi-
ronment. For example, under the attendance policy, the handbook says the safety of the absent
student is more important than the inconvenience of contacting a parent at work to find out why
the student is not at school (MPCHS Handbook, 2014, p. 20). The sections on attendance, grad-
ing and behavior were quite lengthy and detailed. I suspect that any problems that may occur
with students following the rules come about in a real or perceived lack of consistency in enforc-
ing the rules, just as we have discussed in class.
Dress Code: On page 28 of the handbook, it states no dress or grooming of any kind
will be permitted that infringes on the rights of other students to benefit from a productive, safe
educational environment. The major responsibility for appropriate dress and grooming rests with
students and parents (MPCHS Handbook, 2014). This is followed by a list of what to wear and
what not to wear during school hours as well as a list of possible consequences for violating the
rules. After-school attire is to be determined by coaches and sponsors. I hope sponsors are made
aware of this policy. Coaches usually insist on players dressing up for games, but I am not sure
sponsors know they have an obligation to consider the dress code.
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 3
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District is the landmark case re-
garding student freedom of expression, under which dress code guidelines often fall (Essex,
2012, p. 52). The Supreme Court Justices determined that for attire to be banned it needs to be
shown to cause a material and substantial disruption to the educational process (Essex, 2012,
p. 53). The handbook policy shows that school leaders anticipate double-meaning slogans, sexu-
al, racial, or profane remarks could cause this type of disruption. In addition, the policy bans
dress that promotes activities illegal for students, like alcohol or drugs. Even advertisements for
local bars are not permitted.
I think it would be appropriate to be more specific in the introductory paragraph of the
dress code. In addition to stating dress or grooming shall not infringe on students rights to have
a safe learning environment, it should also mention the protected classes of people. The nondis-
crimination notice at the end of the handbook (MPCHS Handbook, 2014, p. 44) mentions race,
color, national origin, sexual orientation, etc., but it might be more powerful to remind students
under the dress code section that their dress cannot infringe on the rights of these groups to enjoy
a safe learning environment. The protected classes may feel reassured of their rights, especially
if the rights are consistently enforced. Hot-button issues may be avoided, such as in the Scott v.
School Board of Alachua County case (Essex, 2012, p.63), if students are reminded to think of
how their actions may offend or incite people different from them. Our community is mostly
white, so displaying things like a Confederate flag may not be on everyones radar as potentially
offensive.
School Searches: Essex (2012) mentions the landmark Supreme Court case of New Jersey
v. T.L.O. (p. 64). This case established the notion that school officials only need
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 4
reasonable . . .individualized suspicion (Essex, 2012, p. 65) to search a students belongings.
The Supreme Court recognized the need to balance students Fourth Amendment rights and the
need to keep the school environment safe for all students (Essex, 2012, p.65).
I could not find a section that specifically covered searches; however, I did find mention
of the possibility of a search under the heading Lockers on page 30 of the handbook. There is
one sentence that states board policy permits a students locker to be periodically searched
whenever an administrator or teacher has a reasonable suspicion that a criminal offense or a
school district policy, rule, or regulation has been violated (MPCHS Handbook, 2014, p. 30).
There is no mention of searching book bags or students cars. However, when I examined school
board policy, Policy 502Student Behavior and Discipline, there was very specific information
about searching lockers, desks, students and cars. This board policy even cites New Jersey v.
T.L.O. as a basis for making the policies. This detailed information should be included in the
handbook, or, at the very least, there should be a notation to refer to Board Policy 502 regarding
other types of permitted searches.
Open Campus: There is a paragraph on open campus policy on page 23 of the handbook.
The Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution gives states the right to determine compulsory
attendance requirements (Essex, 2012, p. 280). Policy 501 cites the following as legal support for
its attendance policies: Iowa Code Section 259A; 279.10-11; 299.1-1A(1995); 299.2; 299.6; 978
Op. Attorney Gen. 379 (MPCSD Board Policy, 2014). I could not find specific board policy
about open campus in any section, but there is a phrase under Policy 501.1A Student Atten-
dance that states It shall be the responsibility of the superintendent, in conjunction with the
principal, to develop administrative regulations regarding this policy (MPCSD Board Policy,
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 5
2014). I believe that this phrase gives the administration the power to create things like open
campus policies. The open campus policy mentioned in the handbook appears to be a reward for
seniors with good attendance, behavior and academic standing. Students are warned that the
privilege may be withdrawn at any time. The language in the handbook seems adequate.
Internet Use: Page 27 of the student handbook gives specific advice on how students
should use the computers and the information that is acquired from the Internet. Under Policy
603 Instructional Arrangements, Internet use is also discussed. Section 603.8 of the board pol-
icy talks about appropriate use of the Internet. Under section RP603.8 Internet Appropriate
Use Regulation, both employees and students are to abide by similar rules of online etiquette
(which are spelled out) but the emphasis is mostly on how students will be allowed to access and
use the Internet. Parents of students will annually be asked to grant permission for students to use
the Internet. The last part of this section also defines consequences for student violations. There
is a provision that states that this policy will be maintained for five years beyond the end of fund-
ing under the Childrens Internet Protection Act (CIPA) or E-rate. CIPA was enacted in 2000 to
protect children from obscene, pornographic, and other harmful things for minors that can be
found on the Internet (Federal Communications Commission, n.d.). It would be in the school
districts best interest to inform parents and students that there are filters on the Internet and that
precautions are taken to protect students using the Internet while they are in school. A statement
added to the handbook would be sufficient.
Electronic Devices: I decided to examine electronic device policy since there was a new
addition to the handbook regarding cell phones. As Essex (2012) states, schools can ban phones
and other electronics if they cause a material or substantial disruption to the educational
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 6
process (p.76). Cell phones and other electronic items are under the jurisdiction of school
boards. In Mount Pleasant, there is not a separate board policy about electronic devices, but Poli-
cy 502.6 discusses contraband items, in addition to search and seizure. There is a sentence under
that policy that authorizes the superintendent and the principals to develop administrative regula-
tions about illegal and unauthorized items. That is the only mention I could find that could de-
fine regulating the use of electronic items. The handbook now states that students can use cell-
phones before and after school, during lunch and during passing times between classes. In-class
use is up to the teacher. This seems to be a good compromise with parent desire to have relative-
ly easy access to their children (and vice versa) as well as potentially allow cellphone use during
class for educational purposes. However, it seems to be in conflict with another part of the hand-
book that does not allow MP3 players, video games, and televisions. Many smart phones can do
all three of those things. I wonder if the other devices had been simply banned or if there were
problems with their use. If there were issues with use, cellphones will likely cause the same
problems. This contradiction will likely be cleared up in the next year or two as the new lan-
guage is put into practice.
FERPAFamily Educational Rights and Privacy Act: I did not find anything about
FERPA in the handbook, but I did in school board policy under Policy 505Miscellaneous Re-
lated Matters. Policies 505.1A and B describe the use and release of student directory informa-
tion. This policy needs to be more widely known because on our school registration form, there
are a series of phrases that require a Y or N response and Student Directory is one of
them. Since I help Spanish-speaking parents with registration, I was always unclear what this
was about, and no other staff members could really tell me what it meant. It seems that in the in-
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 7
terest of saving paper on registration forms, parental rights are being overlooked. Furthermore,
Policy 505.7 states that for parents and students 18 or older, student records shall be reasonably
accessible and remain confidential in compliance with federal and state law(MPCSD Board
Policy, 2014). The administrative staff is responsible for developing and maintaining these
records. According to the Student Press Law Center, (n.d.), the purpose of FERPA was to give
parents access to the educational files of their children. Prior to 1974, health and law enforce-
ment personnel were given access to student records, but parents were often denied. This did not
seem fair as parents have the right to know about tests and other things that affect their childrens
education and decisions made about their lives. In addition, Senator Buckley, the main author of
this act, was concerned about the release of personally identifiable information to the public.
FERPA states that educational records that contain information directly related to a student and
that are maintained by an educational institution are to be kept confidential (Essex, 2012, p. 190).
The part of FERPA referring to records maintained by an educational institution was tested in the
Owasso ISD v Falvo case (Essex, 2012, p. 195). It was determined by the Supreme Court that
peer grading in class was not a FERPA violation because no records that were publicly disclosed
were maintained by the school. Essex asserts that school districts should notify parents or
guardians of their FERPA rights each year (2012, p. 190). I will be looking for documents at reg-
istration this year to see if the district actually does notify parents. I would recommend adding a
statement in the handbook that lets students and parents know the release of student information
is governed by FERPA and give a short explanation of what FERPA means.
Use of Facilities: Facilities use is not addressed in the handbook. From what I could tell
from board policy, Mount Pleasant CSD has a limited open forum. Policy 904 Use of School
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 8
Facilities states that the facilities and equipment is available to local non-profits, and the board
can decide whether to allow for-profit groups to have the same opportunity. A fee schedule has
been developed for each building, but the fee can be waived by the superintendent. There is lan-
guage allowing the use of the facilities only when the use does not interfere with or disrupt the
education program or school-related activity, the use is consistent with state law, and will end no
later than midnight (MPCSD Board Policy 904.1, 2014). Policy 904.7 Equal Access to
School Facilities states that student groups can use the facilities for meetings which have a reli-
gious, political, or philosophical emphasis provided the meeting is voluntary, student initiated,
and does not materially or substantially interfere with the orderly conduct of educational activi-
ties within the school (MPCSD Board Policy, 2014). A brief statement notifying students of
their right to have meetings and a referral to board policy would be sufficient.
Overall, the student handbook seems to address at length the issues that are paramount to
most students grading, attendance, scheduling, harassment, bullying and dress code. Other
things like student searches, consequences for violating regulations addressing violence, illegal
items, and possession of weapons are not discussed at great length in the handbook, but are de-
tailed in school board policy. As mentioned previously, some things like facilities use are not
covered at all in the handbook. Even if the school doesnt want to discuss these issues thoroughly
because they feel there is little need or do not want to give attention to supposedly rare problems,
there should at least be some language that directs students and parents to pertinent board poli-
cies for more information.
The next investigation was the Master Contract with the Mount Pleasant Education Asso-
ciation. Unfortunately, this document was not very helpful at all regarding the rights of certified
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 9
staff. The contract focuses on specific work requirements such as leave, salary schedules,
teacher assistance plans, and grievance procedures. This is ironic, since dress code and profes-
sional behavior have been hot topics for the staff under our new superintendent. I had to comb
through board policy for guidance on those and other issues. In addition, I recently completed an
Ethics for Educators course in which I learned that Chapter 25 of Iowa Code 282 covers profes-
sional conduct of licensed educators. Most of the topics assigned for this FBLA investigation are
covered under Chapter 25.
Teacher Appearance: Our new superintendent notified all staff prior to the start of school
last year that jeans and tennis shoes would not be permitted, even on field trips. Unless a teacher
can cite religious reasons for his/her attire, the courts have supported the notion that the school
board and superintendent have the power to dictate teacher dress. In East Hartford Education
Association v. Board of Education of Town of East Hartford (Essex, 2012, p. 214), a teacher did
not want to wear a tie as an expression of First Amendment rights. The courts held for the dis-
trict because wearing the tie was less about the First Amendment and more about looking profes-
sional at work. In the case of McGlothin v. Jackson Municipal Separate School District, (Essex,
2012, p. 215) Ms. McGlothin might have won the right to wear hats and head wraps if she had
claimed religious freedom from the beginning. Since looking professional has become a topic of
discussion in our district, guidelines for the dress code should appear in a handbook, not just the
emails that were sent out last year. If it is in the handbook, new staff members will be aware of
the policy. Important items should be listed in a handbook for easy reference for all.
Public Conduct: I could not find anything in the Master Contract about public conduct.
However, there is a sentence under Policy 401.8 Staff Technology Use/Social Networking.
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 10
This policy states that employees must conduct themselves in a manner that does not disrupt
from or disrupt the educational process and failure to do so will result in discipline, up to and
including, discharge (MPCSD Board Policy 401.8, 2014). Because educators are viewed as role
models and law-abiding protectors of students, they are held to a higher standard of conduct.
Chapter 25 of Iowa Code 282 details many ways in which educators can lose their teaching li-
censes by breaking the law and acting unethically (Halliburton, 2010, pp. 36-42). The courts go
back and forth on this matter, seemingly changing with societal attitudes. For example, the 1975
case of Gaylord v. Tacoma School District held for the district because the court believed that if
students knew Gaylord was a homosexual, that would impair the optimum learning atmosphere
in the classroom (Leagle.Com, n.d.). With the legalization of gay marriage and growing accep-
tance of homosexuality, there will come a day in which having a gay teacher will not cause dis-
ruption in the classroom. I think each teacher should be given a copy of Chapter 25 of Iowa
Code 282 as a reminder of how to comport themselves and the consequences of not behaving
within societal norms.
Privacy and Workplace Searches: There is nothing about privacy in the Master Contract
or board policy. Educators should know that the schools email is subject to public scrutiny; there
is no expectation of privacy. Teacher use of the schools email is discussed under Policy
RP401.28. I think teachers can do pretty much anything in private, but if the actions are not so-
cially acceptable, or illegal or immoral, they need to know they can lose their teaching license
under Iowa Code 282.25 if their secret activities become public. In addition, many cases have
shown that educators should not have a reasonable expectation of privacy at work. For example,
in Brannen v. Board of Education, the court did not agree that a secretly installed video camera
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 11
in the break room was a violation of privacy rights (Hickman, 2013). Again, teachers need to be
aware of the implications of Chapter 25 of Iowa Code 282.
Political Activity: There was no specific information in either board policy or the Master
Contract on this topic. In Mayer v. Monroe County Community School Corporation (Walsh,
2007), teachers do not have their free speech rights carry over to the classroom. Because students
are very impressionable, teachers opinions carry more weight and might unduly influence the
opinions of students. Teachers can exercise their right to free speech outside the job as long as it
is clear their opinions are theirs, not the school districts. In the Master Contract or future teacher
handbook, teachers should be cautioned to use language that distances their opinions and actions
from the school district. For example, teachers should preface an opinion about a candidate or
political issue by saying, In my opinion. . . in order to make clear the opinion is of a private
citizen, not a representative of the school district. In addition, there should be language that re-
minds teachers not to use school facilities and equipment to advance their private activities and
opinions. Delineating the separation of public employee/private citizen is also valid for teachers
wishing to run for political office (Essex, 2012, p. 213).
There are many things that our school district takes for granted under the word profes-
sionalism. Many misunderstandings between administration and staff could be avoided if
things like the dress code were explicitly addressed. There should be a teacher handbook that in-
cludes the items mentioned above, plus other topics not included in the Master Contract.
This project was worthwhile because it forced me to delve into the school board policies
in my district. I was aware of some things, mostly because I attend school board meetings regu-
larly and there are frequent, systematic reviews of board policies. It often seems that most stu-
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 12
dents, parents and staff members are not aware of different policies until they are found in viola-
tion of them. All stakeholders need to make a good faith effort to be informed participants in the
educational community. The school district can help by including important information in their
student and staff handbooks, or at the very least, direct stakeholders to a website or other re-
source that can explain a list of covered topics in more depth.




HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 13
References


Essex, N.L. (2012). School law and the public schools: A practical guide for educational leaders.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved July 5, 2014 from http://www.fcc.gov/
guides/childrens-internet-protection-act
Halliburton, C. (2010). Small book of ethics: For Iowa educators in schools and agencies. Des
Moines, IA: Iowa State Education Association
Hickman, C. (2013). Video surveillance in public schools. Retrieved from www.isea.org/home/
550.htm. ISEA-video surveillance
Leagle.Com. (n.d). Retrieved July 5, 2014 from http://www.leagletax.com/decision?
q=197543385Wn2d348_1387.xml/GAYLORD%20v.%20TACOMA%20SCHOOL
%20DIST
Mount Pleasant Community High School Student Handbook. (2014). Retrieved from http://
www.mt-pleasant.k12.ia.us/files/7213/8245/3223/2013_2014_HS_Handbook.pdf
Mount Pleasant Community School District Board Policy. (2014). Retrieved from http://
www.mt-pleasant.k12.ia.us/index.php/board-policies/
MPEA Master Contract. (2013-2014). Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/a/mtpcsd.org/mt-
pleasant-csd-business-forms/contracts/mpea-contract
Student Press Law Center. (n.d.). Retrieved July 5, 2014 from http://www.splc.org/pdf/ferpa_w-
p.pdf
HANDBOOK INVESTIGATIONS 14
Walsh, M. (2007). Teachers free speech case denied. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/tm/
news/profession/2007/10/05/ew_freespeech_web.h19.html