Michael Zachary Little: Excessive Profanity In The Classroom

Fact: Michael is a sixteen year old juvenile who is already on probation from several other offenses he has gotten before this incident had occurred.

As we mentioned earlier, the freshman’s mother mentioned to coach McElroy the fact that the upperclassman was calling her son those insulting names. This incident could have been foreseeable by the coaches, and possibly the administration, if the coach reported anything to the principal and athletic director. The Mepham High School football season was eventually cancelled and the three upperclassman were charged with “involuntary deviate sexual intercourse,” “aggravated assault,” “kidnapping,” “unlawful restraint,” “false imprisonment,” “terroristic threats,” “criminal coercion,” “simple assault,” “reckless endangering of another person,” “ethnic intimidation,” and “criminal conspiracy.” Judge Robert J. Conway chose to try the accused as juveniles.

It is shocking to know that before 1967 youths in the United States did not have the same rights as adults in court. Before the landmark case In Re Gault individuals underage were not promised the freedoms under the fourteenth amendment. The court system did not take juvenile delinquent cases as seriously. It was almost as if they brushed the delinquents under the rug and put them into a detention center the first chance they got. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in the case of In Re Gault the requirements for due process were not met. This has turned into a landmark case because it has altered the way the juvenile delinquent court system runs.

On October 15, 1975 Nine students were suspended from Central High School from Columbus, Ohio. They had destroyed school property and disrupting students from learning and were suspended for 10 days.One of the students amoung them was Dwight Lopez. It was required that the student's parents be informed of the suspension within 24 hours with given reason. If the student were expelled, they would allowed to appeal to the Board of Education. The principal gave the students suspension without holding a hearing, it was okay because Ohio law did not make it required to do so.But they were also later expelled without a right to have due process. The federal courts believed that the students rights were being violated.The District Court held Central High School accountable for its violation of the 14th Amendment, it stated that

The public school officials violated the fifth and sixth amendments of the student. The student’s right to a hearing as well as notice of his suspension was stripped from him. A public entity or in this case a school is not permitted to void the people’s rights. Constitutionally this is not a sound

The lead teacher went on break and a substitute teacher entered the classroom. The assistant teacher shouted at the children to sit down at the table and to be quiet while they waited for lunch to arrive. The children ran around the classroom, talking loudly with their friends. Some settled down in their spots for lunch, but continued misbehaving at the table. The substitute teacher and assistant both requested repeatedly for the children to lower their voices. However, the students were getting increasingly loud and restless, so the substitute teacher led them in singing songs about manners. When the food arrived, both the teacher and assistant joined the children for lunch, and directed the conversation towards the upcoming holiday. The teachers ensured that the students took turns when sharing their plans for the break and that every single student received a

A historic case in the U.S. supreme court was called the Brown vs. the Board of Education. Getting a good education is essential and we can see diverse population of students from different nationality in the classroom. However, this wasn’t always the case in the United States. Up until 1954, classrooms were very different than they are today—not allowing African American students to attend schools with white students. This was allowed because of the previous court case of 1896 of Plessy vs. Ferguson. In this case, the court allowed segregation as long as the services provided were equal which meant that separation of students according to their race in schools was okay. This was accepted in many states despite the fact that the Fourteenth

This isn 't the first time that "bureaucratic determinism," where administrators declare themselves powerless to exert discretion and end up punishing students for infractions that even they agree didn 't contain any elements of threat or aggression, has triggered calls for a more lenient approach. Public outrage and media exposure have succeeded in reversing sanctions in cases such as suspensions when a student makes a "finger gun" (some schools interpret any such displays as threats).

Today’s college students are becoming more sensitized to the harshness of the outside world. Instead of learning to be resilient to others’ comments, they are being taught to take offense to any little word that could in some way be connected with a bad experience they might have had, and college administrators and professors are aiding this childish behavior. They are backing this movement to make adults into children. With this new movement to rid college campuses of any speech that may make anyone feel uncomfortable, students are being treated less like adults, and more like elementary children.

Rosario”). However, the district court decided that the plaintiff violated the “Confidentiality Act,” which “permits disclosure of confidential communications of a minor between the ages of twelve and eighteen if…the therapist finds disclosure to be in the best interest of the minor” (“Dr. Rosario”). The courts also determined that he violated “The Reporting Act,” which requires school personnel to immediately report suspected child abuse to authorities (“Pesce v. J”). Dr. Pesce also violated the J. Sterling Morton High School District Employment Contract by not promptly reporting the incident, and therefore, putting J.D. in danger. In addition, the courts decided that Pesce’s rights were not violated (“Dr. Rosario”).

In the “Bethel School District v. Fraser” case, Fraser believed that the school violated his first amendment “freedom of speech” rights. Fraser gave a speech with some inappropriate content in it and the school gave him a three day suspension because two teachers warned him before he gave the speech. Fraser took it to court and the justices said they would shorten the suspension and let him have his right to speak at graduation because the school was taking away his freedom of speech.

Although there are some cases when kids don’t learn how to act even with some punishments it’s still proved that the zero tolerance rule has no effect and should be banished. ALL of the teen at risk article make good points showing that the zero tolerance rule doesn’t make a difference but disciplinary actions do help our school society. So next time you get sent to your dean or principle just

CCIB Intake received an anonymous complaint from a parent stating a teacher named Pam Morgan hit their son Yared Ortega on the head. The incident occurred last week. The complaint was on 9/21/16. According to the complainant the child only speaks Spanish and reported to his parents that Pam hit him. The child is currently afraid of Pam due to her physical behavior towards him. The reporting party didn 't indicate if the child was injured due to the

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right of expression to citizens. Students are said to keep their Constitutional rights within the school environment, as set in place by the Tinker Standard. However, the rights that are given to students have continued to be controversial and many of these cases have ended up in the Supreme Court. The education system is supposed to help in guiding the students by correcting or disciplining their incorrect actions, but this can sometimes end up in punishing excessively, and this is proven in many cases where the Supreme Court ruled in the favor of the students and their right to their self-expression. Students are not protected by the First Amendment because school officials are

brainwashed into being fearful that if they do not comply to the systematic set of rules they’d be killed, beat and that’s where some physical violence can play a big role.