Academic journal article Journal of Law and Education

Commentary - PRIMARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION

Academic journal article Journal of Law and Education

Commentary - PRIMARY & SECONDARY EDUCATION

Article excerpt

Articles

Rosemary Salomone, Caught in a Time Warp: The Education Rights of English Language Learners, 25 J. Civ. Rts. & Econ. Dev. 141 (2010). Two competing views concerning bilingual education are compared. The author examines evidence of the advantages of dual language instruction, Supreme Court decisions addressing the educational rights of linguistic minority students and existing legislative challenges. The author advocates for an procedural model that would permit the child to proceed from grade to grade based on individualized decisions that consider clear linguistic and academic goals.

Josh Davis & Josh Rosenberg, Government as Patron or Regulator in the Student Speech Cases, 83 St. John's L. Rev. 1047 (2009). The article highlights the consistencies and inconsistencies in school speech cases by analyzing the two roles the government may play: (1) as regulator interfering with private speech or (2) as patron acting independently by speaking or sponsoring speech. By analyzing the school speech cases and emphasizing the Supreme Court's recent decision in Morse v. Frederick, the authors develop the argument that free speech laws generally apply when the government acts as regulator.

Mark C. Fleming, Government Speech, Free Speech, and Education: The Constitutional Challenge to the Massachusetts Genocide Education Guide, 4 U. St. Thomas J.L. & Pub. Policy 18 (2010). This article discusses the legal challenge to the content of Massachusetts' guide to teaching about genocide. The author believes that the state's curricular guidelines will be upheld for three reasons. First, the government has authority to recommend non-mandatory curricular materials. Second, there is no First Amendment cause of action stated by the claim pending before the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. Third, there is not a valid preemption argument relating to the state curricular guidelines.

Susan Stuart, In Loco Parentis in the Public Schools: Abused, Confused, and in Need of Change, 78 U. Cin. L. Rev. 969 (2010). This article discusses the revival of the in loco parentis doctrine and argues that its revival is misguided. The author finds fault with the courts and schools for not providing a more modern justification for school disciplinary policies. She also blames elected governments for tasking schools with non-educational functions. She argues for an alternative institutional model that recognizes and respects students' civil rights.

Joseph O. Oluwole, Strip-Searching Public School Students: Proposal of a New Legal Standard, 9 Whittier J. Child & Fam. Advoc. 247 (2010). This article proposes that the U.S. Supreme Court rule that strip searches are unconstitutional as a matter of law unless school officials have both probable cause and a search warrant. The article outlines the negative impact of strip searches on students and parents. Then the author discusses several U.S. Supreme Court cases that dealt with strip searches. Next he proposes a new legal standard governing strip searches. Finally he sets forth proposed language for use by school districts and states to ban or limit strip searches in public schools.

David Ferster, Broken Promises: When Does a School's Failure to Implement an Individualized Education Program Deny a Disabled Student a Free and Appropriate Public Education, 28 Buff. Pub. Int. LJ. 71 (2009-2010). This article traces the current landscape of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the guarantee of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under that Act. The author discusses litigation concerning when an Individual Education Plan (IEP) is not enforced in a timely manner and the different standards that courts use. The article notes that most courts use a materiality standard, which finds a school has provided a FAPE even if it fails to execute portions of an IEP so long as the provisions are not substantial pieces of the IEP, and the student meets the goals of the IEP otherwise. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.