Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Student Searches, Free Speech & Expression, and Privacy in the Wired Age
Student searches and in-school discipline for off-campus conduct
Free Speech and Expression on and off campus
Privacy in the wired age on and off campus. (Facebook, twitter, myspace, blogs, cellphones)
What are a students' constitutional rights when it comes to searches and seizures, on and off campus discipline, free speech, expression, and privacy in the wired age when on and off campus? How are students protected by the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights when it pertains to the three items listed above?
Students are often subject to rules and regulations that are associated with school codes of conduct and those rules and regulations are sometimes not reflective of constitutional rights to free speech and free action inside the laws. These long list of potential violations are printed by institutions and are made available to students, in secondary and postsecondary schools. Students are then subject to these rules often as a condition of enrollment. While some schools require students to acknowledge receipt of these codes of conduct most do not make a student sign or read the actual document but in the fine print of enrollment documents will include a clause regarding the students responsibility to uphold these codes of conduct. Students have only minimal constitutional protection from search and seizure as well as from accountability for off campus behaviors, even where they are otherwise illegal because they or their parents in the case of minors sign enrollment documents that include these clauses associated with institutional codes of conduct. This is true of both public and private institutions, and can include issues as innocuous as dress codes but also include violations of the law that have an ultimate penalty of expulsion from the institution.
It must also be mentioned that similar codes of conduct are present in many workplaces and institutions other than schools (Williamson, 2009). In other words workplaces consider ethical, moral and legal behavior as a condition of employment, and this can even go as far as firing and employee...
Enforcement is also often outlined in codes of conduct and more and more these codes of conduct include issues that are inclusive of the new information age, where students are held accountable for online behaviors including negative and/or illegal statements about or toward others as well as posting photographs of themselves or others that either demonstrate immoral or illegal acts or violate others rights.
The fact that many of the technologies associated with these new regulations are new demonstrates that many of the rules are also new, but are reflective of actual rather than historical events that have negatively affected people. In other words the conduct rules as well as laws about online and information age rules and laws are being written as they are needed rather than relying on previous legal and/or criminal precedence. For this reason many of these rules and regulations have also not been tested by legal civil rights challenges that are so much a part of the fiber of the system in the U.S. Though new cases, such as those which are reflective of real harm, such as suicide or serious legal infractions that are evidenced by offsite (or even on campus) activities on social networking sites like face book or twitter are coming of age in the legal system and creating legal precedence for the future (Wheeler, 2011).
The legal climate of such situations, and especially those that are more minor such as an individual posting pictures of drunken antics online of themselves or other is still very much up in the air but like search and seizure issues on campus it is unlikely that minors especially will be afforded any greater rights than they have been in the past and will likely be held to a higher standard, with less constitutional protections than adults in many ways. This is in large part associated with the condition of enrollment issues mentioned above, where institutions hold individuals accountable for both on and off campus behaviors that are seen as harmful to, themselves others or to the…
In short students and especially minor students and their parents should make themselves aware of the codes of conduct the student is expected to uphold and live within those guidelines even if they feel the guidelines are overreaching as students have little recourse because even most public institutions such as public schools are still considered voluntary and enrollment in them requires certain standards to be upheld. This is not to say it is likely that all new students will read and memorize a code of conduct but they must beware that violations especially that hurt others will not likely be tolerated. It is not likely that the constitutional protection of students will be expanded, rather to the contrary laws that protect others from immoral, unethical and/or illegal or harmful behaviors in a public forum such as the internet, across email, and cell phones will likely be expanded. It also must be made clear that the intent to harm another does not have to be present for that harm to be done or for the individual(s) responsible to be held accountable for it. In other words consider yourself under public scrutiny when you are enrolled in any institution and act accordingly, upholding the law and the moral and ethical standards associated with your role as a student.
Wheeler, T. (2011). Facebook Fatalities: Students, Social Networking, and the First Amendment. Pace Law Review, 31(1), 182-227. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Williamson, L. (2009). Private Rants Become Public When Aired Online. InsideCounsel, 20(211), 67-68. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Pedagogic Model for Teaching of Technology to Special Education Students Almost thirty years ago, the American federal government passed an act mandating the availability of a free and appropriate public education for all handicapped children. In 1990, this act was updated and reformed as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which itself was reformed in 1997. At each step, the goal was to make education more equitable and more accessible to
547-548). The problem is stated clearly by Graham: "The legal community has paid little attention to the consequences for individual privacy of the development of computers" (Graham 1987, p. 1396). Graham does say that the common law has the capacity to protect privacy rights from invasion of privacy just as it expanded to combat threats in the past, but he also says that privacy law has lagged behind technology: "Privacy