By Danny Kelleher
Sports Editor
The U.S. was built upon the idea of individual rights. The First Amendment, the California Education codes and Supreme Court rulings on freedom of expression all help to clearly define what students, teachers, and administrators can and cannot do.
At Mira Costa, students are hindered by a lack of knowledge of their rights. Two major examples of this unawareness include students not knowing what the administration’s policy is regarding student expression and their rights under the California Ed Code regarding make-up work after an excused absence.
Ed Code 48907, the standard for freedom of speech for students in California, provides the base for what administrators can regulate.
Students are allowed the distribution of printed materials, use of bulletin boards, signing of petitions, and wearing of insignia as forms of expression so long as it is not obscene, libelous, slanderous or substantially disruptive to the school environment.
Because of this, administrators have the right of prior restraint, unless the expression is an official school publication.
According to administrators, Costa practices a policy in which all posters are reviewed before they are posted on campus for obscenity, slander, libel or substantial disruption of the school environment.
As far as administrators know, this policy is not formalized in any written document. The policy would be more widely publicized to the student body if it were formalized in a written document for students to reference and follow. If administrators were to publicize this formalized policy to students, there would be less of a gray area as to what students can and cannot do.
If a poster is rejected, the administration should provide a clear, documented reason for rejection. This would make the administration accountable for its decisions and allow students to appeal the decisions they take issue with in a proper manner.
Another issue where more knowledge of students rights would greatly benefit students is the completion of make-up work after an excused absence.
In some teachers’ syllabi, they state their personal policies regarding absence from school. Sometimes this includes not allowing students to take reasonably equivalent make-up tests even if their absence from school on the day of the test is excused.
Legally, teachers cannot prevent students from making up tests and assignments after excused absences.
The practice violates Ed Code section 48205B, which states that a pupil with an excused absence “shall be allowed to complete all assignments and tests missed during the absence that can be reasonably provided and, upon satisfactory completion within a reasonable period of time.”
The section goes on to state that although the make-up work doesn’t need to be identical to the original work, it must be “reasonably equivalent.”
Administrators admit that it is difficult for them to enforce this law. They are usually only alerted to problems when a student or parent complains.
If students were aware of the rights given to them by Ed Code 48205B, they could improve their grades and avoid considerable stress in case of absence.
Students are not completely at fault for being unaware of their rights. Administrative policy regarding expression is not clearly defined or widely publicized, and it is the duty of the administration to uphold the Ed Code in the school environment.
However, that being said, it is necessary that students make an effort to know all the rights they have at school.
These examples serve to demonstrate that it is essential for students to know their rights in order to be able to fully express themselves and take advantage of all of their academic opportunities.
Leave a Reply