Seventeen-year-old Tanya is popular with her peers and frequently at odds with school rules. Tanya has been suspended on numerous occasions for disrespecting faculty, fighting, and general mischievousness. Several teachers as well as Assistant Principal Donner were convinced that Tanya significantly contributed to an increase in student disorder. During class passing time in late April social

Question

studies teacher Frank Elliot reported to Assistant Principal Donner that he had seen Tanya follow Senior Franklyn Smith into the men's restroom. Mr. Elliot reported that Tanya was in the restroom about a minute. Surveillance cameras confirmed Mr. Elliot's report.

AP Donner confronted Tanya with the surveillance recording and stated "Tanya, did you really follow Franklyn into the men's restroom?" Tanya admitted to following Franklyn into the restroom, but claimed that he had taken her cell phone and had dared her to follow him into the restroom to reclaim her property. School rules forbid the possession of cell phones during school hours. Students who violate the rule are assigned Saturday detention. AP Donner decided to suspend Tanya for 10 days for possession of a cell phone in school, flagrant disregard for school rules and disregard for decorum. Tanya's parents immediately hired an attorney.

Does this scenario represent a structured or ill-structured problem? Identify two characteristics of the case that support your answer.

What is the legal question(s) in this scenario?

Did AP Donner provide sufficient procedural due process before deciding to suspend Tanya for 10-days? Use an example from the scenario to justify your response. Did AP Donner violate Tanya's substantive due process rights?

Argue for or against Tanya's 10-day suspension for following Franklyn into the men's restroom to allegedly retrieve her cell phone.

Does the suspension and recommendation for expulsion promote or detract from the concept of a well-ordered school? Why or why not?

Answer 1

Answer Key

Teens are remarkably creative and it is almost impossible to have rules for every behavior they can come up with. Many secondary schools have ‘catch-all' rules such as the ‘flagrant disregard for school rules and disregard for decorum.' The question of course is what do these rules mean? School rules do not have to be as detailed as criminal codes, but rules should be written in a way that most students and teachers understand what behavior the rule restricts. Most school codes of conduct would not have a rule against young women following young men into restrooms. But is this an example of behavior that students should just know are not appropriate? Did AP Donner violate Tanya's substantive due process rights? An accomplished response may include:

1. Analysis: Candidates may consider this case to be structured since Tanya did admit to following Franklyn into the men's restroom. However, she was trying to retrieve what she believes to be a valuable, although forbidden in school, item. Franklyn did allegedly dare her to retrieve her property. An accomplished response would include considerations of procedural and substantive due process and the basic fairness of Principal Donner's decision.

2. Legal Question: Did AP Donner violate Tanya's procedural and substantial due process rights when she suspended Tanya for 10 days for following Franklyn into the men's restroom at school for flagrant disregard for school rules and disregard for decorum.

3. Ethical Perspectives: In this case, an accomplished response would consider the idea of a well-ordered school and the impact of AP Donner's decision to suspend Tanya.

4. Legal Knowledge: Candidates should demonstrate knowledge and appropriate application of procedural and substantive due process.

5. Standards Based Knowledge: ISLLC Standards 5b (Model principles of self-awareness, reflective practice, transparency, and ethical behavior), 5c (Safeguard the values of democracy, equity, and diversity), and 5d (Consider and evaluate the potential moral and legal consequences of decision-making) are appropriate standards.

6. Depth of Knowledge: An accomplished response should demonstrate an analysis of the legal and ethical challenges presented by the case and the synthesis of this knowledge into a coherent argument.