I'll make this brief. A school's duty is to teach students and keep them safe while they're teaching. Both of these rules can be broken if a student is brutally attacked online or even out on the street. If the bullying gets worse, the student would eventually not feel safe in school around the people who are hurting them. If the student doesn't go to school, that will affect their education. The school should intervene if they know about a bully situation simply to keep their students' self esteem high and their education possible. When possible, a student could use as much help as he can get when dealing with a bully.
School isn't solely about education. It is about enabling children to become capable, participating members of society with the basic skills necessary to navigate everyday life. Part of this means they have to protect the children they teach, or they will never reach that point--and what a school would punish a student for is the sort of thing that would harm both other students and themselves, or otherwise endanger their future. Arguing that parents should take this role is invalid, as the many children of abusive or neglectful families should have made clear.
It corrects the behavior and prevents others from doing similar. It part of our culture. It is biblical for example David was punished. Punishment is constitutional. However students must know why they are punished. A committee must be responsible for school punishment. Punishment of students must be documented. Parents may also be involved
If students were punished by their school, it means that the school can monitor their behavior and parents will feel as though their students are being 'nurtured' to do the right things. School is a good place to learn your lessons when it comes to behavior, mainly because teachers are qualified to make sure students behave correctly. It also means that if something is serious enough to include the police some cases may fall under the radar if schools aren't allowed to intervene.
As their behaviour reflects back onto the school, this may cause disruption and bad reputation to rise around the school. As it involves the school, undoubtly, the school would provide consequences for those whom are involved in bad behaviour outside of school supervision. Schools are allowed to punish students if it poses a substantial threat of a disruption. If they didn't take charge, other students may follow this "example", and future students may have the wrong attitude.
Goodkldlkjsdklfjk dsfkl jkldfkdflsfj kdlsj klfsdklfjs sdfjfj j j j j jj j j j j j j jj j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j
I'm eating corn as i type. The ears of corn, nibbled by by teeth. The yellow, buttery goodness against my lips. "YES!" i scream as a intensely eat the corn, "YES! MORE... MORE!!!" the shredded cob, now cornless. I am sad. There is no more corn. This world is a dark, lifeless place...... I abuse people
I like cheese n;dfj;ioo jgrijgeroijg[reij jfs[girjgs[egipj rpisjg k kfk k k k ed k o o d o e kkf f g r g d g f g f f f f r g g f f f f f f ff g f f f f f f f
Everyone is saying about how much jurisdiction the school has or that the parents need to deal with their children, but what if they have family issues and have no one to talk to if there is a law saying the school cant get involved then where is the victim supposed to go?
I think this because of reasons. A b c d e f g h I j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z now I no my abc's next time won't you sing with me. I like chicken nuggets and bananas.
Schools punishing students for outside of school behavior is a direct violation of the 2nd amendment. Freedom of speech is provided because the American people wanted to ensure that the government wasn't too oppressive. And while a school board isn't a form of government, they have no right to punish acts that don't take place within their jurisdiction.
Teachers have rights to discipline students in school but not outside. Students can't get discipline outside unless of illegal action then they have the right to notify the guardian. Like if a student doesn't go to school and yet goes to a sport practice, and a teacher sees them they can't get disciplined. Students get there rights outside of school and can go about doing what they please.
The schools do not have jurisdiction off of the school grounds. When a student leaves school grounds, he or she has regained his or her freedoms that were already taken away once entering the grounds. The school cannot interfere with personal lives unless the school is directly or indirectly affected. For example, if a student does drugs, fine. If a staff member at the school finds out that it happened off of school grounds, then that staff member is legally obligated to inform the guardians of the student that this is an occurrence. Otherwise, the school has no control over the student; nor should the school be able to punish a student who has not affected the safe learning environment at the school itself.
Schools have many regulations already, a teacher is just a normal person, outside of the school they should have no power over anyone else, THIS IS AMERICA-A FREE COUNTRY, letting schools have power outside of school would be making it a dictatorship, giving up our rights to the school, the school should only have power on their grounds, it's the parent or guardians job outside of school, do whatever you want, as long as its legal.
It is up to the parent. For example a school bans hoodies, but you wear a hoodie at the local mall, they can't do anything about it, unless what you did has broken the law. It is the parent's job. Schools have no jurisdiction out of school grounds, so in conclusion, they have no right over the students if the students are not on school grounds or on school field trips
Jurisdiction. A school's sphere of control end at the school's physical boundaries. Once the individual is off campus, the school is not responsible for the actions of sed individual. When Ryan Kuhl and Justin Neal (listed and described above) created a website slandering their school, the school itself had no grounds to intervene upon. They were presumably at home on their personal computers, with the only connection to the school being the subject matter. If anything were to be done AT ALL, it would of been the responsibility of local law enforcement. Schools are NOT Law Enforcement Agencies, and therefore have no place taking punitive actions against an individuals actions OUTSIDE of school grounds. The only reason the school has the ability to punish it's students on campus is, in most cases, due to the signing of a legal document stating that the individual in question is okay with surrendering certain freedoms and accepting punishment for certain activities performed upon SCHOOL GROUNDS or directly interfering with the educational process, and even at that students have a very well laid out system of structural punishment, meaning that a certain action will warrant a certain response. Not a single school that I or my colleagues are aware of includes in sed legal document that a students actions outside of school (not including altrecations involving law enforcement though that is specific to the school and the offense) can and will warrant a punishment on campus, a seperate entity.
When a student streaked at a football game, he was suspended from school. Now, at first this seems reasonable, but he was out-of-district, and his school was not involved with the game in any way. This should be taken as a count of indecent exposure, and the police should have taken action. Instead, the nearby school worked with the student's school to suspend him. Schools are supposed to punish students based on actions that disrupt their environment substantially. He did not disrupt his school's environment, and he did not attend Valparaiso High School. This is just one example, but there are many.
Ryan Kuhl and Justin Neal created websites attacking their school verbally and visually. They used violent images and offensive words to express the way they felt about Greenwood High School. Their principal, Jerry Efurd, ordered them to take down the sites, and in response, they sued their school, claiming that their 1st Amendment rights had been violated. They won the case based on 1969 Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community District.
We already give away too many of our children's first amendment rights during school hours. Students are taught to conform to authority and accept the ideology and authority. Stripping them of their individuality and independence. Bad enough they force a standard curriculum and behavior practices in school. Hands off after hours. When it comes to verbal bullying especially. There should be 0 tolerance. I mean, 0 tolerance for accepting any unconstitutional punishment. The first amendment protects every citizen of this country, when you attend school there is not an exception. School teaches us The Bill of Rights on one hand (do they still?) and tramples on possibly the most important right of all, "Free Speech". What kind of sick irony is this. They have some so desensitized to false authority enforcing unconstitutional punishment that they don't even see it. Besides the "free speech", in regards to a school's authority after school hours there is no need. We already have law enforcement agencies (plenty) from state to federal, which enforce the law of the land. What do the schools want to take over these jobs? Yes because the younger you get the future generations desensitized to unconstitutional and authority as a whole, the faster you can force on that society under your complete authoritarian control. Communist revolutions throughout history start by controlling the next generation through the government run education system and that is exactly what has been going on throughout our school system nation wide.
Now people, isn't it the parents job to discipline their kids? Not the schools job? Schools are meant for education, that is it.. Schools can punish for behavior on campus because that is completely understandable and their jobs, but however off campus; that is NOT their jobs at all. End of discussion
If it dosnt happen on their property i dont think they should have the right to invade your privacy. If its a problem authority or your parents can deal with it. But if its on their property i think they have the right on some cases of bullying i perhaps agree it is theyre business only over the internet.