Legal and Ethical Implications for Classroom Management Essay

Todays classrooms atomic number 18 more dynamic than ever before. developmental needs of students be changing at breakneck speeds, along with the demands existence rigid on their instructors. There are associated legal and good implications that are evolving as promptly as the technology that is driving a lot of the change. In target to micturate a chance to meet the needs of students and legal/ethical obligations, educators essential have well developed classroom management techniques. These brush a situation get tricky quite often and require balancing the progressively diverse needs of m whatsoever different people.To be an effective teacher today is extremely difficult for these reasons. This essay will examine more or little of the current issues that teachers are exposed to in todays classrooms by summarizing four journal words and responding to them. The specific issues will be deliver ad answer and what it means in a civilize setting, cell bids in classro oms, push around (specifically of students with disabilities), and gender specific coif codes. Freedom of Speech The issue intercommunicate in the first article summary is freedom of speech and how it is construe in a public school setting in sexual intercourse to the distribution of religious materials.This is really non a new paper of debate. Current precedents have been set in court cases dating as far back as1969 and the Tinker vs. Desmoines case. In that case, the court decision reads that, in order to prohibit any students expression of opinion, the school must give up evidence to support the situation that the actions world suppressed would be signifi enkindletly disruptive (Essex, 2006). Because it is an issue of ongoing debate there are cases tranquilize being heard all over the country.This article is specifically in response to a case in the New York Supreme Court, where a student was prohibited from distributing religious fliers on school comelyty. The quest ion is, why was the student prevented from expressing her opinion in the first place. jibe to Essex (2006), one of the requirements placed on schools is that they remain viewpoint neutral. This means that if the literature was suppressed because it was religious in nature, the suppression violated her First Amendment rights, even in the school setting.In all court cases, the real message has been that schools are responsible for(p) for making sure parents and students are aware that the schools are merely direct messages indiscriminately from religious and non-secular sources and that they are not in support of any of them (Essex, 2006). Really the essence of the article is that sound policies must be in place, well documented, and consistently followed for a school to be able to ordain what a student says or distributes and there must be no endorsement of any particular ideas from any group or student. kiosk phones The next topic of discussion is cell phones in classrooms. The article being summarized is entitled The Only Thing We Have to Fear is120 Characters. In this article, Kevin Thomas and Christy McGee (2012) make arguments for the use of cellphones in classrooms in spite of the fact that 69% have banned them. This paper responds to the many reasons for disallowing their use, and then it goes on to highlight some ideas ab show up why cell phones should be utilize as educational tools. Both sides of the discussion certainly make logical points.If 69% schools have taken students cell phones away, there must be some reasons. Thomas & Mcgee (2012) identified and responded to four commonly offered rationales, including misuse for cheating, replenishment Standard English with textese, sexting, and cyberbulling. It seems rather obvious that these are negative side effects of the technology, however there are also positive results that can be attributed to the use of cell phones. Today, they are relatively affordable and aright miniature computers.When used properly, the possibilities for better use of time are astonishing. According to Thomas and McGee (2012), teachers need to be modeling appropriate behavior with their take-away electronic devices and taking advantage of the benefits because the technology is not the cause of the problems. The problems being associated with cell phones all existed in some form, long before new(a) technology. Thomas Diamates (2010) reports that courts have supported schools in their efforts to ban cell phone use as long as the school follow conventional procedures.Bullying The third topic has to do with bullying, specifically students with disabilities. These students stand out in the classroom, as they are different and so they are subjects of change magnitude abuse from fellow students (Eckes and Gibbs, 2012). naturalizes and teachers have an obligation to provide students with disabilities a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive surroundings according to the In dividuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004).This paper looks at the findings in some(prenominal) court cases to establish what is required of teachers in situations where students with disabilities are being bullied. What this article shows is that there are an increasing number of suits against school where disabled children are being bullied. The interpretation of what is considered an appropriate education, and whether or not the school took proper preventative/disciplinary steps in light of the bullying are the reasons for these suits.The findings of this study provide evidence that the courts will generally side with schools that have taken and documented actions to alleviate the badgering. In Brown vs. Monroe County display panel of Education (1999), the Supreme Court ruled that for a school to be liable, it must receive federal funds, it must have been aware of and acted deliberately electroneutral to the harassment, and the bullying must have been severe enough to de prive educational opportunity (Eckes and Gibbs, 2012).Basically, schools must make an adequate effort to alleviate the harassment in order to limit their liability, and this has been upheld by the courts in cases like Werth v. Board of Directors (2007), and Biggs v. Board of Education (2002). Dress codes The last article on the keep down takes a look at how and why public schools can or cannot implement gender based dress codes. Proponents of dress codes list reasons including less distractions, less pressure to dress right, safety, and lower cost to families.Opponents say that dress codes take away students expressive rights, which are already severely express mail in school settings. In this particular case, Ceara Sturgis had her picture and name take away from her senior yearbook because she is a lesbian who was more comfortable wearing away the school prescribed male outfit. The current question is whether or not this is in violation of her civil liberties. Historically the courts have upheld the rights of schools to implement dress codes with very few exceptions. In Blau v.Fort Thomas Public School District (2005), a father brought suit against the school for violating 1st and fourteenth amendment rights with their dress code. The court found no violation of rights since it is not associate to suppression of the content of expression, it furthers a substantial government interest, and it does not preventive substantially more speech than is necessary to further that interest (Dowling-Sender, p. 34, 2005). On the other side of the coin, in United States vs. Virginia (1996), schools were required to show a legitimate and important reason for any gender based restrictions (Smith, 2012).In Cearas case, the school is going to have to show that it meets all these criteria, and the take has some potentially far reaching consequences. What all this means is that education in todays classrooms must be dynamic. Teachers need to be aware of their dynamical l egal and ethical obligations as educators. Decisions must be based on sound judgment and carefully documented observations. Teachers, students, and parents must work unneurotic and communicate with each other to create the best possible learnedness environment for everyone.