Julie H. Rucker
|
 |
Standard 5: A school administrator is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by acting with integrity, fairness, and in an ethical manner.
Questions:
When should the good of the school and community supercede an administrator's own personal interests?
Where can an administrator draw the line in regards to a student's rights granted by the U.S. Constitution?
Why is it important for an administrator to accept the consequences of his own actions within the community, even for actions that occur outside of the school?
Situation:
A senior at Tannenbaum High School has been asked not to wear a particular shirt to school because of its inflammatory, racist nature. The student wears the shirt to school anyway, and when told to leave, insists that his first amendment rights have been violated. The student is told he will be allowed to return to school the next day as long as he is not wearing the shirt with the inflammatory, racist message. The next day, the student returns to school wearing a t-shirt with a different message: "The principal can be arrested for DUI, but I cannot exercise my first amendment rights." The student's parent has also called the local news outlet and complained that her student's first amendment rights are being violated. They take their story to the local media, which runs a front page article for the whole town to see, including a picture of the student's t-shirt criticizing the school principal's past infraction. In the story, the reporter notes that the principal was asked to comment on the accusations and the student's discipline records at the school. The principal commented that he was going to adhere to the school system's dress code policy that did apply in this case. He declined to give any information to the news outlet about the student or his school discipline records.
What the Principal Discovered:
The student in this situation had been referred to an assistant principal many times over the past school year. The student had missed eight days of school for the current semester and had been referred a total of six times by teachers for disrupting class and dress code violations. The principal was already aware of this student's discipline and attendance records and was keeping a close eye on the student's actions. The student had been told that he would face a possible suspension for another dress code violation, so the student chose to push the envelope and wear an article that flagrantly violated the dress code policy, planning the whole time to bring in outside media attention. What the principal did not expect was for the student to make a personal jab at him by resurrecting an old DUI charge the principal had received his first year with the school system after leaving a cookout at a friend's home two blocks from his own house. Fortunately, the principal handled his arrest and charge in an appropriate manner with the school board, coming forward immediately with what had happened, and apologizing to the community. He accepted the consequences for his actions at that time in an appropriate manner. Through this experience, what the principal already knew was confirmed: the community in which he lived and worked expected a person in his position to have integrity and to accept the consequences for a bad decision. Any infraction could be resurrected to place him in a negative light within the community, and the way he previously responded could set the tone for the later public accusation.
What Changes Will Be Made As a Result:
While the principal would probably want to change the fact that he did receive a DUI previously, he cannot. The way he handled himself at that time and the way he handled this public situation where he was maligned he handled with integrity. He acted in a lawful and ethical manner befitting his position as principal of the school. He knew it was in violation of the law to discuss student records with the public and refused to reveal negative facts about the student who was blasting him in the local media. Instead of using his position as principal to malign a student's reputation, he chose to act in the best interest of this student and the other students within his school by not giving in and using the local media to continue a distructive dialogue about the student or himself.
Responding to the Questions:
When should the good of the school and community supercede an administrator's own personal interests?
In this particular instance, nothing good would come from the principal defending himself from a previous misjudgement at the expense of a student or the good of the school or community. Instead, taking the high road would be refusing to participate in an exchange of heated words in the news media, allowing the story to die on the front page where it began. Anything the administrator would have said in his defense and at the expense of the student would have continued to fuel the flames of the story.
Where can an administrator draw the line in regards to a student's rights granted by the U.S. Constitution?
The issue of first amendment rights was brought up in this case by the student's initial dress code violation. In the case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484, U.S. 260 (1988), the Supreme Court held that " First Amendment rights of students in the public schools are not automatically coextensive with the rights of adults in other settings, and must be applied in light of the special characteristics of the school environment. A school need not tolerate student speech that is inconsistent with its basic educational mission, even though the government could not censor similar speech outside the school." The principal was within his rights to forbid the student to wear an inflammatory, racist t-shirt to school. Further, the student was given notice that he was not to wear the shirt; therefore, the principal was also attending to the student's 14th ammendment rights.
Why is it important for an administrator to accept the consequences of his own actions within the community, even for actions that occur outside of the school?
Because the principal had accepted the consequences of his actions when he was arrested for DUI and been honest and open about the charges against him, he did not lose credibility with the community at a later time when this previous incident was again raised by the disgruntled student and parent.
Assessment of Administrator: Accomplished
While the principal did not make a wise decision in his personal life (thus the DUI), he handled the situation in a professional, ethical manner, as described earlier in the case study. Through this experience, he had to accept responsiblity not only as a private individual but also as the leader of a school who made a bad choice in his private life yet realized he was under public scrutiny.
When the latter incident involving a digruntled parent and student revived the past indiscretion, this principal continued to act in an appropriate manner by attending to the student's constitutional rights as well as his own ethical and legal responsiblity of protecting student information.