A man who works as a high school administrator is accused of intentionally hitting a cyclist with his SUV in a national park in Tennessee, and then fleeing the scene. A friend of the cyclist had a GoPro camera on his helmet and shared a video of the incident on Facebook. After that, the police were able to track down the driver, Marshall Grant Neely III.

On Sunday night, Neely, 58, was arrested on charges of felony reckless endangerment, leaving the scene of an accident, failure to immediately notify of an accident, and failure to render aid.

He was released after posting an $11,500 bail, but could still face additional federal charges. Park rangers will meet with the United States Attorney’s office this week to discuss any further charges.

The chilling footage from the incident shows two cyclists biking through the Natchez Trace Parkway. The road the two were cycling is a designated bicycle route, and bikes are legally allowed to use the whole lane when necessary. In the opening seconds of the video, a white truck passes the cyclists without incident.

Soon after, a black Volvo SUV comes up from behind and hits 23-year-old cyclist Tyler Noe, who is slightly further ahead of his friend, Greg Goodman.

But the video makes it pretty obvious that the car hit him on purpose, as there were no other cars or people in sight. Neely also did not stop to check on Noe. Luckily, Noe was not seriously injured, and was taken to a nearby hospital for treatment. Noe got up on his feet after tumbling off of the bike.

“A black Volvo passing the bicyclists struck Noe causing serious but non-life threatening injuries. The Volvo’s driver failed to stop and left the scene,” said a press release from Natchez Trace Parkway officials.

NEW: According to arrest report, Marshall Neely claimed “a man & a woman were standing in the road & threw the bicycle at his car.” @WKRN pic.twitter.com/mZKopldryE

— Josh Breslow (@JoshBreslowWKRN) July 10, 2017

According to Goodman, a witness told him that the same Volvo SUV had tried to hit someone a week earlier as well. According to the police report, Neely claimed that a man and a woman had been standing in the road and had thrown a bicycle at his car.

Neely has worked with children since 1995. Until the accident, he served as dean of students at the University School of Nashville, a K-12 private school. The school also has a mountain biking team. Neely is the father of two USN alumni, and also reportedly has a degree in law.

Neely’s profile has been deleted from the school’s website since the incident, but the school wrote on its Facebook page that he has been placed on a leave of absence while the investigation is ongoing.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post High School Employee Arrested for Hitting Cyclist and Fleeing the Scene appeared first on Law Street.

A high school in New Jersey is under fire after someone edited a photo of Grant Berardo in the yearbook without telling him. On picture day, Berardo wore a black t-shirt with the text, “TRUMP: Make America Great Again” on the chest. When he saw the result in the yearbook, he realized the text was gone. Now his parents are demanding answers and one teacher is suspended.

Critics are accusing the school, Wall Township High School, of censoring the kids and violating their First Amendment rights. Two other students also had their photos edited. Wyatt Dobrovich-Fago had a small Trump logo on his vest, and his sister Montana wanted to insert a Trump quote under her freshman class president photo. But both were missing in the final version of the yearbook.

A New Jersey high school is under fire for erasing Trump slogans from its yearbook https://t.co/8mAxFHin1H pic.twitter.com/XrPTkEaRfk

— CNN (@CNN) June 12, 2017

Now the parents of the affected students want the school to issue new yearbooks, including an explanation of what happened. According to Berardo’s father, Joseph, his son was very disappointed as this was the first election he was interested in. The school’s Superintendent Cheryl Dyer said one teacher who was overseeing the production of the yearbook has been suspended.

In a statement on its website, the school points out that there is nothing in the school’s dress code that prohibits students from expressing political views. The digital removal of the Trump slogans and logos was nothing the school’s administration was aware of. And the name of the specific teacher that was suspended has not been released. The statement said:

The allegations referenced above are disturbing, and any inappropriate challenge to these principles will be rectified as swiftly and thoroughly as possible. The actions of the staff involved will be addressed as soon as the investigation is concluded.

To the Berardos, it was peculiar that no one told Grant that there was a problem with his t-shirt to begin with. His mother Tammy works at the school and someone could easily have told her in time for him to re-take the photo. When the family received the photos by mail, the logo was still there. It was just in the final yearbook that it was gone, without any explanation.

Berardo’s father Joseph said that he doesn’t like excessive political correctness. “It gets in the way of meaningful discourse. And, frankly, I hate being on the other side of it now,” he said, referring to being the “victim.” He thinks that ultimately the whole conflict is a matter of freedom of speech. “And if we come to find out they blacked-out Clinton or Sanders shirts, that’s just as egregious,” he said.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post New Jersey School Accused of Removing Trump Logo from Yearbook Photos appeared first on Law Street.

High school journalists across the country are proof that you’re never too young to start holding people accountable.

Students at Pittsburg High School in Pittsburg, Kansas learned this lesson after their investigation into a newly-hired administrator led to her resignation. Although their incoming principal, Amy Robertson, claimed to have earned degrees from Corllins University, some background research by the reporters for the school’s paper found that this was not an accredited institution.

Last Friday, the students published an article in their newspaper, The Booster Redux, detailing how Robertson’s statements about her qualifications did not add up. On Tuesday, she officially stepped down.

Their investigative work comes at a time when journalists are fact-checking more aggressively than ever, particularly under President Donald Trump, who was explicitly called out by the New York Times for his lies—a term that many news organizations don’t use lightly.

Although scoops about Trump’s tax returns or leaked tapes in which he made derogatory remarks about women didn’t hurt his success during the election, the outcome of The Booster Redux’s work provides some hope that thorough reporting about people in power can cause direct change.

Luckily, Pittsburg students aren’t alone. In New York, staff at The Classic, the student newspaper for Townsend Harris High School in Queens, have been shedding light on the troublesome reputation of their interim principal, Rosemarie Jahoda. Jahoda was hit with complaints for unnecessarily tightening regulations and mishandling a case of discrimination against a Muslim student.

Like students at The Booster Redux, writers for The Classic faced resistance from their subject, who avoided answering many questions. An official from the New York City Department of Education, which appointed Jahoda, even referred to the publication as “fake news.” If that sounds familiar, it’s probably because Trump labeled CNN (and other outlets) the same thing at a press conference earlier this year when he refused to take their questions.

Though these aspiring reporters may be getting interested in the field at a time when the media is facing a lot of hostility, at least they’re being prepared to push back against it as early as possible.

Victoria Sheridan

Victoria is an editorial intern at Law Street. She is a senior journalism major and French minor at George Washington University. She’s also an editor at GW’s student newspaper, The Hatchet. In her free time, she is either traveling or planning her next trip abroad. Contact Victoria at VSheridan@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Looking to Avoid Fake News? Check Out These High School Journalists appeared first on Law Street.

For many people, high school is neither easy nor pleasurable. In some cases, the situation can get so bad it ends in tragedy. Seventeen-year-old Kenneth Suttner was so severely bullied both in school and at work that he took his own life on December 21. But in an unusual development, his former boss at Dairy Queen where he worked after school has now been charged with involuntary manslaughter for his death.

Friends and family members testified in court that Suttner had fought all his life to shield himself from verbal and physical bullying. He went to Glasgow High School in Missouri where he was a frequent target of bullying for his weight and speech impediment. Other parents said that the school consistently failed to deal with the problem of bullying. One of them, Barbara Smith, said she had to move her son to another school district because the situation was so bad.

In Kenneth Suttner’s case, it didn’t even end when he went home from school. At his after-school job, his 21-year-old female manager Harley Branham kept the harassment going, according to testimony from Sutter’s former coworkers. Dairy Queen employees said Branham regularly harassed Suttner, she would make Suttner lie on his stomach to clean the floor by hand and once threw a cheeseburger at him for not doing a good job. After years of bullying in school and three months of working at the Dairy Queen, Suttner wrote suicide notes to his family and shot himself in the head.

Horribly bullied teen committed suicide; Dairy Queen manager charged https://t.co/XfnaP8nFV9 pic.twitter.com/BjPdM9g3Kf

— Canoe (@Canoe) February 2, 2017

On Tuesday the county coroner, Frank Flaspohler, held an official inquest, which is a process that is similar to a grand jury investigation but open to the public. This can be sought if it is believed that an occurred death was caused by a safety or health hazard that could continue to harm people. After the six-person jury listened to six hours of testimony from almost 20 witnesses, they reached the conclusion that Branham was “was the principal in the cause of death,” that Dairy Queen had failed to properly train their employees about how to prevent bullying, and that the same went for the high school.

Branham was among the witnesses that testified and admitted she had called him names but didn’t understand how that could have caused his suicide. She claimed that everything had been in a joking manner. The special prosecutor in the case, April Wilson, said, “We wanted to be very cautious and responsible. Both sides of the issue are extremely important. A young man is dead. But we also want to acknowledge that it’s not easy being in public education.” On Wednesday, she filed a second-degree involuntary manslaughter charge against Branham.

Dairy Queen released a statement saying that it was gathering more information about the case and that the restaurant is run by an independently owned franchise. County coroner Flaspohler hopes his decision to hold the inquest will lead to some change in how schools deal with bullied children. “Hopefully this makes the school pay attention to what’s going on. And it’s not just in that school. We all need to wake up and say this exists and we need to take care of it,” he said. Kenneth Suttner’s family also hoped the school would take action, saying, “If this can help one child at least Kenneth’s death wasn’t in vain.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dairy Queen Manager Charged With Manslaughter in Bullied Teenager’s Suicide appeared first on Law Street.

A new study confirms the fears of those who criticize the United States’ education system–we’re lagging behind. A Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) study by the Department of Education compares workers’ skills in various developed countries to the U.S., and discovered that Americans perform particularly poorly in basic reading, math, and technology skills. In fact, in some cases the results of our high school graduates were about on par with peer nations’ high school dropouts.

The PIACC tests adults’ skills over four areas. According to the report:

PIAAC defines four core competency domains of adult cognitive skills that are seen as key to facilitating the social and economic participation of adults in advanced economies: literacy, reading components, numeracy, and problem solving in technology-rich environments.

In the U.S., literacy skills overall were average, compared to other nations. But young people with a high school diploma or less scored well below average. Similar results held true on math tests–Americans who had high school diplomas were about on par with  high school dropouts in other nations. When technology skills were tested–things like using an email, naming a file on a computer, or buying and returning things online–Americans came in dead last.

Japan and Finland scored in the number one and number two spots in all three measures. Other nations consistently topping the charts included the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, and Belgium.

The fact that Americans who only had high school diplomas or less fared so poorly in comparison to individuals from other nations is particularly troubling given how expensive a college education is today. Students who aren’t able to afford college, or do not wish to go to college, should still be able to depend on their required 12 years of schooling to help them acquire the skills needed to be an active part of the American workforce. But according to the PIAAC, that simply does not appear to be the case. As Peggy Carr, the acting commissioner of the government’s National Center for Education Statistics, stated: “clearly, we have some work to do in this country.”

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Americans with High School Diplomas Don’t Have Same Level of Skills as International Peers appeared first on Law Street.

A recent study discovered something rather upsetting about our nation’s science teachers: roughly two-thirds are misinformed when it comes to climate science and change.

This revelation came from a survey conducted by Eric Plutzer of Pennsylvania State University, as well as collaborators from Wright State University and the National Center for Science Education. According to Vox:

The researchers mailed questionnaires to 1,500 science teachers, who taught disciplines ranging from biology, chemistry, physics, and earth sciences, since the study of climate change straddles fields and they weren’t sure which classes were paying the subject more attention.

The study participants included both middle school and high school teachers.

An overwhelming majority of scientists believe that climate change is being caused by humans–roughly 97 percent. It’s viewed as a consensus in the scientific community. However, about 30 percent of American science teachers teach their students that climate change is caused by natural causes, another roughly 30 percent instruct that it’s caused by a combination of human actions and natural causes. Both of these lessons are problematic, and inaccurate.

There’s some debate over why teachers are teaching climate change incorrectly–it’s no secret that in some parts of the country, teaching climate change accurately could be protested by parents and the community. While this recent study only found that only about 4 percent of teachers reported feeling pressured to teach climate science a certain way, earlier studies have put the number as high as 15 percent.

The researchers also found, quite alarmingly, that many teachers didn’t even know they were teaching anything incorrectly, as only 30 percent of the middle school teachers and 45 percent of high school teachers even knew that there is such a thing as a scientific consensus on climate change.

Many of the teachers also answered that they hadn’t received much formal education on climate change, although the good news is that two-thirds would like to learn. So, if it’s possible to provide that kind of education to our teachers, we may soon see a change to way that climate change is taught to young American students.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Two-Thirds of American Science Teachers Misinformed on Climate Change appeared first on Law Street.

Just two days after the horrific mass shooting at Umpqua Community College, where nine people were killed and nine were injured, four California high school students were arrested after their detailed plan to shoot students and faculty members at Summerville High School in Tuolumne, California was uncovered.

Officials say the plot was revealed on Wednesday when a group of students alerted a teacher that they overheard several students discussing a plan to open fire on the school at an upcoming event. The sheriff’s department was contacted by Summerville High School administrators regarding the students who were making threats. The high school officials reported to authorities that three students were planning to carry out an attack on them. During their investigation, detectives discovered that a fourth student was involved in the plot as well.

Authorities found a list of names that the students had of who they planned to kill. Tuolumne County Sheriff Jim Mele said the students confessed “that they were going to come on campus and shoot and kill as many people as possible.” The students were taken into custody on Saturday. Police officials say that the students’ plan was in its beginning stages and they were in the process of obtaining the weapons that they wanted to use. The sheriff’s department said in a Facebook post:

The suspects plan was very detailed in nature and included names of would be victims, locations and the methods in which the plan was to be carried out.

Because the students are juveniles, their names will not be released, but they were identified as all male. The four students have been arrested for conspiracy to commit an assault with deadly weapons. This is a very terrifying time for the students and faculty at Summerville. Parents are terrified as well for the safety of their children. Kristin Wilson, who has a daughter attending Summerville High, stated,  “I can’t imagine getting a phone call that something like that had happened at that school.” Luckily the plot was caught in its beginning phase and no one was harmed.

Summerville High parents, however, are still unhappy about the situation because they were not notified of the incident until the following day. Shannon Duckworth has two children who attend Summerville High and only knew about the incident because her son told her through a text message. Duckworth stated, “I got a text from my son who lives in Washington asking me what’s going on about this shooting plot. What shooting plot?…We should’ve had full disclosure.” Other parents expressed similar concerns.

A motive for the shooting at Summerville has not yet been determined. Authorities plan to talk more with the teens who created the plot to get further information. Eric Hovatter, an assistant district attorney, stated,

It is clear from past history such as Columbine and Sandy Hook, as well as other recent events in Oregon, that children are willing and capable of planning and carrying out acts of violence against students and teachers on school grounds. While it is easy to say that could never happen in Tuolomne County, the public and local law enforcement must remain vigilant, as they did here. That the suspects are young does not minimize the gravity of the conduct nor the potential for great harm to many innocent people.

There have been 45 school shootings in 2015 alone, many of which didn’t make the news. Gun violence is affecting students everywhere–thankfully this story didn’t end in tragedy.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Shooting Plot Discovered: Four California High School Students Arrested appeared first on Law Street.

I recently went to my cousin’s high school graduation. As I rode with her to the civic center where the grand event would take place, I informed her that I had every intention of embarrassing her by being the person who cheered and whistled (or, since I can’t whistle, making whistle-like sounds) when they called her name despite the fact that they would clearly request at the beginning of the graduation to hold all cheering and applause until the end.

She told me she was fine with me doing this so long as I met one requirement: I could only cheer for her if someone made a lot of noise for any of the graduates before her.

I’d like to take a minute here to thank Emi for being smart. Since she graduated at the top of her class, very few students went before her. Which means that the cheering did not start until later in the program. Which means I kept my big mouth shut when her name was called. And that’s good because apparently you can get in a lot of trouble for screaming like a banshee in the middle of a dignified graduation ceremony.

All Those S’s in Mississippi Must Stand For Sssssshh!

Before Superintendent Jay Foster started reading names at the Senatobia High School graduation, he warned everyone that they better shut up until all the graduates’ names had been read. After all, Mississippi and dignified go hand in hand (is that the first time anybody has ever said that?), and he wanted this dignity reflected in the ceremony.

Now, as a member of a large family, I have been to way too many graduations. I have had to force myself to stay awake through some truly awful speeches and long lists of people of whom I only knew one. I can walk you through the steps of a graduation. And if there is one thing I know, it is that no matter how nicely you ask, there are going to be screamers in the audience.

Courtesy of Giphy.

(Disclaimer: the graduations I attend tend to be at small, Southern, extremely country schools, so if more ritzy schools don’t have this problem, please excuse my ignorance. Also, please excuse my earlier dig at Mississippi, where I am sure people really are generally dignified. But I’m from Alabama, and Mississippi jokes are all we have.)

Anyway, I have yet to hear of a school properly shushing the rowdy crowds that graduations tend to attract. That is, until I learned what Foster did when people disobeyed his direct orders.

You see, Foster was not joking when he told people to hold their applause. A few people must have thought he was, though. Because they cheered. And all sorts of chaos began.

Courtesy of Giphy.

As the ceremony progressed, the people who cheered when told not to cheer were escorted out. Okay. A little tough, but understandable. And it sent others the message. After all, only four people had to be asked to leave. Assuming the graduating class had more than a handful of graduates, that is not all that bad. So mission accomplished, Mr. Foster. Good job!

Wait! You don’t think that was enough punishment? You don’t think it will stop people from cheering at next year’s ceremony? But what else could you possibly do to teach them this valuable lesson on respect?

Hmm. I hadn’t thought about tracking three of them down and going to the police to press charges against them for disturbing the peace. That will teach them!

Foster thought of it, though. And more than just thinking about it, he actually did it.

What Will the Verdict Be?

Can cheering ever lead to an actual charge? (One which, by the way, could be punishable with up to six months in jail and fines of up to $500.)

We may never know. Because on Monday, the school district decided to drop the case–a day before the court appearances were set and more than three weeks after the infamous ceremony. And I don’t know how I feel about this. In order to sort through my feelings, I made a pros and cons list.

Pros of dropping the case:

• The school will not be wasting their own time or that of the defendants and the court with a case they probably do not have much chance of winning. After all, in the words of one of the defendant’s lawyers, “You don’t yell fire in a crowded theater. That said, you are entitled to clap.”
• They will stop getting the bad press associated with their actions, which many for some reason believe to be too harsh.
• They could avoid a lawsuit or two from the harassed cheerers.
• People might think a little bit better about Mississippi in general.
• It is just plain right–and smart–to do.

Cons of dropping the case:  

• People might find out that charges won’t be pressed, and so they might actually risk the wrath of the school district next year and–I don’t even want to think about it–clap in excitement for the accomplishments of somebody they love even if it is rude to the rest of the attendants.

After reviewing my list, I see that there is a clear winner. Should we really be encouraging all those cheerers by not pressing charges against them? I don’t think so. Stop being so soft on these criminals, people. If we let them get away with things like this, we might not ever get a quiet graduation. And that is a thought just not worth contemplating.

Courtesy of Giphy.

Ashley Shaw

Ashley Shaw is an Alabama native and current New Jersey resident. A graduate of both Kennesaw State University and Thomas Goode Jones School of Law, she spends her free time reading, writing, boxing, horseback riding, playing trivia, flying helicopters, playing sports, and a whole lot else. So maybe she has too much spare time. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Mississippi Superintendent Hates Fun, Presses Charges Against Cheerers appeared first on Law Street.

Fashion is meant to be a form of self expression, but if you’re currently a teenage girl in high school that expression might be seriously limited due to strict dress code restrictions. Of course making sure there are no visible butt cracks, nipples, or genitals is a must for school administrators, but when bare shoulders, backs, and thighs are considered just as taboo there’s a serious problem. In the past week alone I’ve read two stories about obscene dress code restrictions and sexist double standards in both the New York Times and Buzzfeed that call for some rant worthy commentary.

Now about 100 years ago it was positively scandalous for a woman to show a bare ankle in public, but it’s not the Victorian era anymore. Unlike the oppressed women back then, we have the right to vote, serve in the military, obtain an education, and take birth control, just for starters. So you’d think that with all of these advancements in women’s rights, women would have the right to decide for themselves what to wear, right? Wrong.

The New York Times wrote a very interesting piece discussing the issue after speaking with high schools girls who were told by administrators that the expensive dresses they’d purchased for prom weren’t acceptable and either needed to be altered or they wouldn’t be permitted to attend. In their piece Kristin Hussey and Marc Santora write:

Girls have been told to cover up shoulders, knees and backs. They have been reprimanded for partially exposed stomachs and thighs and excessive cleavage. They have been ordered to wear jackets, ordered to go home and suspended.

For one girl in the article, that meant a dress and alterations that cost $400 on top of the $90 prom ticket. Some schools have even begun to require girls to take pictures of their gowns and submit them to administrators for approval before they’re even able to buy a ticket to the dance. When asked why the rules are so strict, one superintendent they spoke with said “We want our young ladies to be dressed beautifully; we want them to be dressed with class and dignity. But we are going to draw the line relative to attire that would be deemed overexposing oneself.”

This idea that schools need to protect girls from overexposing themselves isn’t restricted to just the U.S. Take 17-year-old Canadian teen Laura Wiggins, for example. Laura looked in her closet one morning and decided she wanted to wear a full-length halter dress to her high school in New Brunswick. Her legs weren’t showing. Her belly button wasn’t hanging out. Her breasts weren’t on display. The ensemble did, however, showcase her bare arms and a semi-bare back.

A Canadian Teen Wrote The Best Rebuttal After Getting Detention For Wearing A Halter Dress http://t.co/hS4WHTHsf0 pic.twitter.com/hfZSXjghbB

— BuzzFeed Canada (@BuzzFeedCanada) May 13, 2015

That was apparently enough for Laura to receive a detention for being a “sexual distraction” to her male classmates, because if there’s anything that gets a teenage boy all hot and bothered, it’s a back. Isn’t that what Justin Timberlake meant when he said he was “bringing sexy back?”

But it’s the way that Laura dealt with the situation that is truly amazing. Instead of taking the detention quietly, she chose to write a letter to her school’s vice principal and it was very eloquent, impressive, and inspiring. I won’t quote the whole badass letter, but here are two passages that particularly stood out to me:

In today’s society, a woman’s body is constantly discriminated against and hypersexualized to the point where we can no longer wear the clothing that we feel comfortable in without the accusation and/or assumption that we are being provocative.[…]

Then she continues with,

So no, Mr. Sturgeon, I will not search for something to cover up my back and shoulders because I am not showing them off with the intention to gain positive sexual feedback from the teenage boys in my school. I am especially not showing them to receive any comments, positive or negative, from anybody else besides myself because the only person who can make any sort of judgment on my body and the fabrics I place on it is me.

So instead of focusing on what causes boys to be “distracted” my advice to schools would be to try teaching them self control. These young men will need that in the real world, especially with all these empowered girls walking around in yoga pants everywhere.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Are Schools Going Too Far with These Dress Code Rules? appeared first on Law Street.

At a time when the media is full of references to rising levels of childhood obesity and Diabetes, the debate over mandating physical education classes in elementary, middle, and high schools is a particularly passionate one for many teachers, parents, doctors, and students. But is mandatory physical education helpful, harmful, or a mixture of both?

“Just Do It”–Because Kids Won’t

Across the country, only one quarter of youths are engaging in physical activity for at least an hour a day: that means that three quarters of surveyed young people in the U.S. are arguably at increased risk for various health impairments often associated with weight gain and/or inactivity such as Diabetes and heart disease.

Whether it’s because of long commutes to school, piles of extra homework due to high-stakes testing, race- and class-based inaccessibility to play spaces, or the rise in mobile devices that keep many young people stationary, physical activity is often not prioritized for youths.

Schools are often not helping with this problem, as most schools across the country do not adhere to National Association of Sports and Physical Education standards that school children should participate in 150 minutes of physical education per week.

Advocates of mandatory PE in schools often argue that because school is where most young people spend the overwhelming majority of their time, a lack of gym requirements, combined with increasing restrictions on or complete eliminations of recess time, can be devastating for young people’s health. Proponents argue that schools should require PE classes not only for the present fitness benefits, but for the formation of long-term fitness habits.

The goal, for better and for worse, of much of the U.S. education system currently is to channel many students into jobs that will be stationary: jobs that require us to sit at our desks all day, every day. This is similar to being in school: in this work structure, time must be set aside for physical activity. Getting young people into this habit of going out of their way to exercise each day can help them form routines that will assist with avoiding some of the health risks of remaining stationary for so long.

This is especially important because as young people age, they become less physically active, especially if they enter the nine-to-five workforce. Additionally, young people usually have less independence than adults; while it is an option for an adult with a full-time job to go to the gym either before or after work, young people usually don’t have the same option. Therefore, setting aside mandatory time for them to move around while they are in school is arguably an excellent–and one of the only–options to provide students with access to physical fitness.

In addition to the importance of habit formation and access to spaces where healthy levels of activity are encouraged, mandatory PE is often touted as being emotionally and mentally healthy for young people. Exercise is known to reduce stress and anxiety, and especially when anxiety-inducing high-stakes testing is part of most students’ lives, making the time for PE classes can help reduce this stress, and go a long way toward improving the lives of students.

Not All Gym Classes Are Created Equal

Despite the acknowledged benefits of exercise itself, many argue against PE requirements in schools. Students themselves often bristle at the requirements–according to a major study of PE programs across the country conducted by Cornell University, most students believe that gym classes are ineffective.

Cathy Brewton of the Florida Department of Health surveyed students across five counties in her state and found that:

The reasons [the students] didn’t exercise in school was because they didn’t like getting dressed, getting sweaty during the day, and their classes were over-capacitated… Kids said if they were going to do phys ed, they wanted to do something fun.

And surely not all students have fun when the rest of their class is playing basketball. For example, many students in mandatory PE classes spend most of their time standing or sitting on the sidelines while more traditionally athletic students play. Not only does this exclude many students, but it illustrates that, even when PE classes are required, fitness goals are not being met for all or even most students.

Critics say that academic goals, too, are sidelined by mandatory PE classes. Mark Terry, the president of the National Association of Elementary School Principles, argues that while public school budgets are tightening to begin with, there are many impossible choices that must be made when choosing to require PE classes. He asks,

What are you going to do less of? Are you going to do away with art or cut back on music or cut back on the minutes you have in the classroom?

Bullying in Gym 

Furthermore, many students–even when PE is required–simply do not exercise during the classes, and many are in fact actively discouraged from doing so by mandatory PE classes, particularly through bullying.

A great deal of students are actively alienated in gym classes. These students are often those with dis/abilities, students from low-income families, students considered overweight, and/or LGBTQ students.

Public school teacher Jim Dilmon, who has Aspergers, has written of his experience with gym classes that,

Social settings, including physical education class, often heighten the stress or anxiety levels of kids with Aspergers. However, if properly addressed, the physical education classroom offers a good opportunity for kids with and without disabilities to interact with peers.

He goes on to enumerate and explain many useful strategies that PE teachers can use to make gym classes better and more effective spaces for students on the spectrum.

Short of implementing these recommendations and making curricula overall more accommodating to all students, PE classes may very well increase the stress and anxiety levels (not to mention decrease the physical activity levels) of many students. Even though, as mentioned above, exercise is known to reduce stress and anxiety, the setting of PE classes often induces anxiety for many students. The most basic Google search of “gym class anxiety” will reveal a plethora of cries for help from students and parents alike who make it clear that the stress and anxiety that accompanies mandatory gym classes can be extremely debilitating.

Students who experience this anxiety are often subjected to bullying during PE class. Students who endure maltreatment in their gym classes are shown to stop many forms of physical activity in the long term. LGBTQ students are especially prone to be targeted for bullying–most LGBTQ students report being bullied in PE classes–as are students considered to be overweight and/or dis/abled.

It is not just cruel children who are responsible for this bullying and anxiety, however: there is a larger structure at play in advocacy for mandatory gym classes that values thin, able-bodied, gender-conforming students over those who do not conform to societal standards. By placing such an emphasis on certain kinds of physical abilities and weight loss, mandatory PE increases the anxiety, stress, and feelings of extreme guilt and failure that often accompany the emphasis on obtaining a certain kind of body.

Missing the Bigger Picture?

Even if mandatory PE classes did not risk harming many students, critics argue that emphasizing PE classes as a means to “fight obesity” is completely missing the point.

Schools are struggling for resources as it is, and schools in impoverished areas–often in neighborhoods of color–are struggling more than others. It is precisely in these neighborhoods that young people are more likely to be subjected to the impacts of environmental racism that cause many health problems. That raises the question: would focusing on these structural problems of access be more effective than focusing on symptoms (by mandating physical education classes) rather than causes (which include massive food and diet corporations profiting off of each other)?

Another crucial question about structure relates to intra-school dynamics: would freeing children from being forced to be still at desks all day–changing the structure of education to be itself more holistically active–go a longer way toward encouraging activity than setting aside a half hour to an hour for specific kinds of activity every other day? Perhaps, but there’s no way to know for certain.

So, is PE Good or Bad?

As with everything in education, the answer depends on both the individual students and their circumstances. Overall, it seems that both critics and proponents of mandatory physical education classes agree that in order to be effective, existing PE classes need to exist in the context of broader changes and revamp their curricula to reach more students without alienating those who are often harmed by current PE class structures.

Resources

Time: Couch Culture: Only a Quarter of U.S. Youth Get Recommended Excercise

Time: Childhood Obesity: Most U.S. Schools Don’t Require P.E. Classes

Education.com: Physical Education is Critical to a Complete Education

Time: The Older Kids Get, the Less They Move

Anxiety and Depression Association of America: Physical Activity Reduces Stress

Public School Review: The Pros and Cons of Mandatory Gym Class in Public Schools

NBC News: So Just How Bad is Your Child’s Gym Class?

ABC News: No Sweat When Gym Class Cut

USA Today: More PE, Activity Programs Needed in Schools

University of Michigan: Physical Education in America’s Public Schools

Jezebel: Being the Last One Picked in Gym Class Really Messes You Up

My Aspergers Child: Aspergers Children and “Physical Education” Class

Study Mode: Physical Education Class: The Perfect Place to be Bullied?

Huffington Post: Majority of LGBT Students Bullied in Gym Class and Feel Unsafe

Slate: Food Deserts Aren’t the Problem

Guardian: Fat Profits: How the Food Industry Cashed in on Obesity

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Phys Ed in Schools: Improving Health or Breeding Bullying? appeared first on Law Street.

In an exceedingly odd move, a legislative committee in Oklahoma voted this week to eliminate Advanced Placement U.S. History classes. This decision is part of a large, equally bizarre move to get rid of AP classes altogether across the state. Furthermore, the move away from AP U.S. History (APUSH) in Oklahoma is a facet of a much larger debate over what parts of American history we should be teaching our children.

The legislators who pushed for this change in claim that the APUSH curriculum only teaches “what is bad about America.” They also argue that it’s a revisionist view of history. Representative Dan Fish, who introduced the bill, also argues that it doesn’t fairly include a Christian perspective or teach “American exceptionalism.”

Before you think this view is coming from a few crazy crackpots, it’s important to point out that the Republican National Committee itself has weighed in on the debate. Last summer it released a resolution slamming the APUSH curriculum. According to the RNC, the recently revised APUSH guidelines: “reflect a radically revisionist view of American history that emphasizes negative aspects of our nation’s history while omitting or minimizing positive aspects.”

I’m sure some of you are wondering how people can quibble over history–after all, aren’t most facts undisputed? Well, it’s pretty much universally accepted that history can be taught from different perspectives and through various lenses–take the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II, for example. One perspective may teach that those bombings, while yielding tragic results, stopped the war and prevented further deaths through protracted fighting. Another perspective could argue that regardless of why the bombs were deployed, the mass destruction of civilians is unacceptable. While neither of these perspectives is necessarily wrong–they do each adhere to the facts of those historical events–they by nature tell different narratives.

So that leaves us with a conundrum–there’s no real right or wrong answer to how we should teach our history. Clearly, some people in Oklahoma disagree with how it’s being taught there, and while I can’t emphasize how much I disagree with their concerns, they are still allowed to have those concerns.

Like I mentioned above, there’s also a bigger debate brewing over the applicability of AP classes in general. They’re standardized nationwide–although of course only students who sign up for the elite classes take them. They are also mostly uniformly accepted by different universities, although they’re applied to university curriculum requirements on a case-by-case basis. Oklahoma lawmakers are trying to do away with those as a whole, too. Another representative, Sally Kern, claims that AP classes violate a law passed in Oklahoma last year that eliminates Common Core standards.

While I don’t necessarily disagree with the premise that states should be able to dictate what their students learn, I think that AP courses fall into a whole different category. First of all, they’re not universally prescribed; each student makes the choice about what class he or she wants to take. Most colleges do view them favorably, and again, they can be used to obtain certain college credits. Robbing Oklahoma’s students of that opportunity just because you don’t agree with the perspective from which the history curriculum is taught seems petty and short-sighted.

History will never be one sizes fits all, and I think that students should have every opportunity to learn about the important events in our nation’s history from as many view points as possible. That being said, with the inability to learn from our APUSH curriculum, Oklahoma’s students have just been robbed as one of those perspectives.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Will AP History Become a Thing of the Past in Oklahoma? appeared first on Law Street.

Schools are constantly feeling the push from colleges, the government, and parents to produce high performers; however, in order for young adults and children to learn, they need to feel safe in their learning environment. One thing that establishes that feeling of ease and safety is for it to be bully-free.

Kids and teens who find themselves becoming victims of either physical or verbal bullying can suffer from bruising and injuries, but can also suffer from depression, anxiety, fear, and low self-esteem. Students who are subjected to the highest levels of bullying have higher amounts of tardiness, absence, and dropouts. But what can and should schools do to prevent this issue? Read on to learn about the bullying that happens in our schools, the steps schools have taken to stop it, and what happens when schools don’t do enough.

How prevalent is bullying?

Bullying breaks down as follows, according to statistics from the National Bullying Prevention Center.

According to the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 50 percent of children are bullied at some point and ten percent are victims of bullying on a regular basis. Since 1992, there have been more than 250 violent deaths that were a direct result of bullying within schools, and it has also been a factor in several famous school shootings, including Columbine.

Cyber Bullying

Social media, text messaging, and other forms of bullying online have taken an issue that most students could escape at home, and made it nearly impossible to escape. Examples of cyber bullying include mean or nasty text messages and emails, rumors spread by social networking sites, and embarrassing pictures, videos, websites, or fake profiles. Cyber bullying is especially problematic for schools because it often happens off campus and can even be done anonymously. Many schools even question what jurisdiction they have over things that happen outside of schools grounds.

The number of students being cyber bullied has only grown with “secret” apps like YikYak. The 2010-2011 School Crime Supplement indicated that nine percent of students in grades six through 12 experienced cyber bullying; however, the 2013 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey found that 15 percent of high school students (grades nine through 12) were electronically bullied in that year. It is difficult to combat cyber bullying because just when one app or social media service is fixed, another emerges.

What policies and procedures do schools have in place?

Forty-nine states have anti-bullying legislation–Montana is the one exception–but that seems to not be enough. Schools have no way of enforcing some of the policies, especially when no one is a witness to the bullying. Many have claimed that coming up with actionable steps has proven to be more difficult than it seems because of the wide range of types of bullying. Illinois requires schools to institute social-emotional learning to prevent bullying, whereas other schools have mediation and continual programming. Five states don’t have any repercussions for the anti-bullying laws, while 12 states can actually pursue criminal charges against bullies. These sanctions range anywhere from suspension to community service or even jail time.

Many parents and administrators feel that bullying is a rite of passage of the coming of age process, or a way to toughen up students. Especially with male-on-male bullying, it isn’t always taken seriously; however, those entering the guidance field are starting to receive more training on how to handle bullying situations. The topic has been especially visible in media since shows like “Glee,” “Degrassi,” and even “Hannah Montana” have highlighted the lack of attention placed on bullying in schools. Shows like “Glee,” where the character of Kurt was bullied to the point that he left school, have resonated with students and caused many states to reconsider their actions against bullies.

Still, as the consequences make more noise, administrators, teachers, and students are starting to be held accountable for the behaviors within school walls. The Department of Education recently issued guidance to educators on when acts of student bullying could violate federal education anti-discrimination laws.

What can schools do to prevent bullying?

The truth of bullying is that it isn’t always easily seen, nor is it always black and white. Many people who bully have also been bullied. There is no preventative measure that will eliminate it 100 percent; however, what can be done is to curb the bullying to an immediate, manageable level.

Websites like StopBullying, Jim Wright Online, and the National School Safety Center all offer solutions to the bullying problems. Some of the highlights include programs, group activities, and even ongoing programs for both the bully and the bullied. They also map out the different things the schools can do in a situation where someone is bullied.

For example, an investigation should start immediately after the concern is raised. Anyone can raise the concern, including teachers, students, siblings, parents, bus drivers, and other faculty members. The next step is to have a meeting with the child to find out what is going on–but never with the bully at the same time. Peer mediation has its place, but it should not happen between a bully and a victim.

If the bullying is physical, there should be steps taken to provide for the physical safety of the student, and someone needs to alert necessary faculty and staff members to be on the lookout. The bully also needs to have one-on-one meetings to make sure he or she understands the severity of the problem.

The most important thing is that the school does a thorough investigation into the bullying so that it stops and doesn’t hinder anyone anymore–as bullying often has far-reaching effects that can even hurt the atmosphere of the classroom.

What happens if the bullying doesn’t stop?

Unfortunately, that’s a gray area as well. Many schools have faced lawsuits and fines because they didn’t investigate bullying enough. Schools could face anything from fines in court, being sued by the student or the student’s family, or even mandatory programs within the school. The biggest problems could come for the teachers and administrators who either ignored the bullying, or did as little as possible while it occurred. Some courts are even calling it child endangerment, especially in cases of sexual harassment, abuse, and hate crimes. An even bigger problem comes from cyber bullying and the photos that have been taken of students. Some of these images could be called child pornography.

Case Studies

Kara Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools, et al. (4th Cir. July 2011)

In this case, a student sued the school district for limiting her First Amendment free speech rights after suspending her for creating a website that was attacking another student in the school. The website, called “Students Against Shay’s Herpes,” stated that the student had an STD, and created a comments section to gossip about the girl. Doctored photos also appeared on the website. Along with suspension, she was excluded from school festivities like a Charm Review, and she was kicked off the cheerleading squad.

The appeals court said the web page was created primarily for Kowalski’s classmates, so the school had the right to discipline her for disrupting the learning environment. They concluded that Kowalski had created a “hate website” in violation of the school’s anti-bullying policy.

The Judge in the case, Paul V. Niemeyer wrote:

Kowalski’s role in the `S.A.S.H.’ webpage, which was used to ridicule and demean a fellow student, was particularly mean-spirited and hateful. Regretfully, she yet fails to see that such harassment and bullying is inappropriate and hurtful and that it must be taken seriously by school administrators.

Still, it is a tricky area for schools, as many could see this as a freedom of speech violation, and because the website was made outside of school.

L.W. v. Toms River Regional School Board of Education, 189 N.J. 381 (2007)

In L.W. ex rel. L.G. v. Toms River Regional School Board of Education, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that a school district can be held accountable for bullying a student because of sexual orientation under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD); however, this only applies when the district is aware of the harassment but fails to take reasonable steps to stop it.

The plaintiff’s mother filed a complaint under the LAD in the Division of Civil Rights in which she alleged that the defendant, the Board of Education, failed to take action in response to the harassment that her child suffered due to his perceived sexual orientation. The Division of Civil Rights found that the Board of Education was liable for the peer harassment that L.W. had endured. The Appellate Division affirmed the decision of the Division on Civil Rights.

The case documented several years of abuse that started in fourth grade and continued into his freshman year, where he was bullied to the point of physical attacks. He was removed from the school and enrolled in a nearby district. As punishment for the initial bullying in elementary school, the school had students write apology letters. When he was taunted in seventh grade, the Assistant Principal broke up the fight, but found that L.W.’s behavior “provoked” the incident. More and more incidents occurred but the students only received verbal reprimands.

The school boasted a “zero tolerance bullying policy” the entire time. L.W.’s school addressed the policy in an assembly at the beginning of the school year, but there was no subsequent communication on the policy throughout the year. Eventually, L.W. withdrew from the school and enrolled at a school in a neighboring town. His attendance and transportation expenses were subsidized by the defendant Board of Education.

The Court concluded that the school had not taken reasonable steps to stop the bullying, and that there was more that could have been done on all levels. The Court differentiated L.W.’s situation from “isolated schoolyard insults” or “classroom taunts,” which is how the school had treated them.

Morrow v. Balaski 

At the end of 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal seeking to hold a Pennsylvania School District responsible for the repeated bullying of a student by her peers. The case involved Brittany Morrow and the Blackhawk High School in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. Her bullying included racial threats, physical assaults, and cyber bullying. In one incident described in the case, Brittany was suspended after defending herself during a lunchroom attack. When her parents asked the school how to keep her safe, they suggested another school. They later filed a lawsuit against the Blackhawk school district and an assistant principal for alleged violations of their 14th Amendment substantive-due-process rights.

In their appeal to the Supreme Court in Morrow v. Balaski, the family said school officials “acted to allow the aggressor to return to school following her temporary suspension and despite court orders mandating no contact. They opened the front door of the school to a person they knew would cause harm to the children.” The appeals court ruled nine to five in favor of the school that there was no “special relationship” between schools and students and ten to four that legal injuries to the victims were not the result of actions taken by administrators under a “state-created danger” theory of liability.

The court was torn about the case, saying “Parents … should be able to send their children off to school with some level of comfort that those children will be safe from bullies. Nonetheless, the Constitution does not provide judicial remedies for every social ill.”

Conclusion

Bullying is a serious problem, and that is especially evident within schools. From simple teasing to physical threats and even assault, bullying weakens the education system. Schools are creating programs and offering tools to try to combat it; however, many people think that teachers and administrators are failing to properly address bullying. It isn’t always easy, when bullying now takes on so many forms, including on the web, schools have a changing relationship with students.

Resources

Primary

Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals: Kara Kowalski v. Berkeley Country Schools, et al.

Supreme Court of New Jersey: L.W. v. Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education, 189 N.J. 381 (2007)

Additional

Governing: 49 States Now Have Anti-Bullying Laws. How’s that Working Out?

AACAP: Bullying

Web MD: Social Bullying Common in TV Shows Kids Watch

Education Week: Supreme Court Declines to Take Up School Bullying Case 

Pacer: National Bullying Prevention Center

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bullying in Schools: Who Gets the Blame? appeared first on Law Street.

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Some things make more sense when it comes to the dress code: no short-shorts, no shirts with offensive sayings, and no pants that sag too low. There are also some questionable additions to the dress code, namely yoga pants, leggings, spandex running pants and other clothing that fights tightly to the body. With the seemingly endless stream of issues that American school teachers are responsible for this begs the question, are yoga pants really the problem?

What’s the fuss about yoga pants?

Yoga pants have really become a hot button topic among everyone from teenagers to fashion’s biggest designers. The pants are made out of a thin material that stretches and gives, which is why they’re comfortable for people to wear. The pants are usually credited as flattering on most body types because they cling to the legs and give definition where there may not be any. The pants also can become sheer when someone bends over, which is a chief complaint among the trend’s naysayers; however, if they are the proper size, that may not be an issue–especially with yoga pants, which tend to be thick. Many schools are dealing with the dilemma of whether or not they are proper attire for the classroom, and emotions run deep on both sides.

What sort of punishments can yoga pants get you in school?

Regulations vary from school district to school district, but an increasing number of them are outlawing yoga pants, leggings, and similar wear. The punishments and ramifications also vary, but they usually involve a request to change into either clothes brought by parents, or provided by the school.

Ashley Crtalic published a well written letter in the Billings Gazette a few weeks ago that raised some interesting points about her local high school dress code, including a punishment that is increasingly popular in public schools: public shaming and humiliation for not following the dress code. Some schools have extra, extra large shirts that say “I disobeyed the Dress Code,” or “Dress Code Reinforcement” on them, showing everyone in the school that that person broke the rules. Students have to either wear the shirt or have a parent bring in a spare pair of clothes.

Alternatively, some schools will have their students sit in the office until parents come in with a change of clothes. The concern with this is that today in America, if a home does have two parents, they usually both work, so requiring a parent to leave work in order to bring alternative clothing to school can be a burden. These students are missing out on important class time that they need, especially if they want to go onto college–all because they wore yoga pants to school. Other punishments range from detention, demerits, loss of privileges, and loss of activities.

How are students fighting back?

Feminism is reaching a whole new, younger audience thanks to social media websites like Tumblr. It is through those platforms that people are hearing more and more about these argued injustices. A 14-year-old student recently put up these posters over signs announcing her school’s dress code, protesting against them publicly and hoping to gain support.

Many school officials claim “distraction” is why these types of pants are banned. Students have responded to that criticism with concerns of their own, however, that such strict dress codes and punishments unduly distract female students. If a female student has to sit in the classroom with an embarrassing shirt on, or sit in the office waiting for a new outfit, she is probably not able to pay full attention to her studies.

Students who disagree with these dress codes argue that the distraction comes in many forms–gossip, catcalling, attention, unwanted touching, or even unwanted pictures. If it is as bad as has been reported at some schools, it would be bordering on sexual harassment, which shouldn’t be tolerated by any school. Those who stand against such dress restrictions argue that part of the purpose of school is to prepare young people to be functioning members of society, one of those things should be how to properly function in public.

So, is banning yoga pants a good idea?

Some argue that not allowing girls to wear yoga pants or leggings to school is a way to keep them responsible for their own appearances, and provide training for when they go into the real world. Girls won’t be allowed to wear leggings or yoga pants to the office, and school is preparing young adults to go out into the work force. Schools have banned pajamas, basketball shorts, and sweatpants for students for similar reasons–they aren’t the correct attire to wear in a professional environment. Supporters argue that it’s not an attack on young women, but rather a valuable teaching moment for students.

Other parents say that not allowing yoga pants or leggings in schools will cut down on the bullying and taunting of other students, namely females. Many girls who are bigger get made fun of for wearing leggings, especially if they cannot find them in the correct size. There is also a question of classism within leggings. Those who can afford the more expensive leggings are more likely to not have a problem with the sheerer, cheaper variety.

Some of the parents who are for banning yoga pants are in favor of instituting a much stricter dress code overall for all students, limiting them to shirts with collars and khaki pants. This works to eliminate some of the label mongering that many schools face, as the outfits will all be similar. It also prepares students for being comfortable in what would be a business casual outfit in college or a work place.

Case Study: Haven Middle School

The administrators of Haven Middle School in Illinois told parents in September that their daughters were no longer allowed to wear shorts, leggings, or yoga pants to school because they were “too distracting.” Parents fought against the rule because they didn’t think it was the girls’ responsibility to stop boys from becoming distracted.

They wrote a petition that 500 students went on to sign, claiming that the rule was sexist. Some students wore yoga pants anyway, in protest. One girl told the Evanston Review that, “Not being able to wear leggings because it’s ‘too distracting for boys’ is giving us the impression we should be guilty for what guys do.”

The parents are fighting back as well, say that, “This kind of message lands itself squarely on a continuum that blames girls and women for assault by men. It also sends the message to boys that their behaviors are excusable, or understandable given what the girls are wearing. We really hope that you will consider the impact of these policies and how they contribute to rape culture.”

As of publication time the dress code at Haven Middle School is still up for review.

Case Study: Skyview High School

When the administrators of the small Billings, Montana high school decided to add the following provision to the handbook over the summer, they didn’t think it would cause a big problem: “Leggings, jeggings, and tights ARE NOT pants and must be worn with dress code appropriate shorts, skirts, dresses, or pants.”

But it was a problem for many students, including one who went to the school board and declared that they were shaming the women in the school. “It’s completely sexist and misogynistic,” she said. “This tells women that our bodies are something that need to be hidden.” It is important to note that boys in the school were allowed to wear sleeveless t-shirts as they are a part of their uniforms.

No one has been sent home for violating the new code, but the principal has said that she has asked students to put on a longer top or sweatshirt. If they don’t have one, they can borrow one from the office. By a week after the ban, 200 students wore yoga pants on the same day.

Conclusion

Dress codes do have a place in our public schools. It is the job of the school district to prepare students for their best possible futures–futures that probably don’t include wearing leggings or yoga pants to the office. They are fine for gym class, for lounging around on the weekends, but in school, the goal should be to learn, not be comfortable. In fact, not allowing any sort of loungewear on the school grounds is a great way to improve the wardrobe of students before they go into college or the workforce. Let’s teach our kids how to dress for success.  As is currently the case of some dress codes or dressing standards, schools are typically assuming that boys can’t pay attention because of the way girls dress; however, we might not be giving either party the benefit of the doubt. By high school, if schools have done their jobs, our students should know how to act. If they don’t, then it is up to principals, guidance counselors, teachers, or other male students to have a meeting of the minds with these young men. This is a topic that will continue to cause contention in our public schools as districts deal with new trends and fads.

Resources

NY Daily News: ‘Distracting’ Yoga Pants Banned By Officials at North Dakota High School

Billings Gazette: Why Yoga Pants Are Incredibly Dangerous to Today’s Youth

My Fox Philly: High School Bans Yoga Pants

Alternet: High School Bans Dangerous Threat to Male Students: Yoga Pants

Fox 17: Leggings and Yoga Pants Are Banned at Niles High School

Boston.com: Your Guide to America’s War on Yoga Pants

Noel Diem

Law Street contributor Noel Diem is an editor and aspiring author based in Reading, Pennsylvania. She is an alum of Albright College where she studied English and Secondary Education. In her spare time she enjoys traveling, theater, fashion, and literature. Contact Noel at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem? appeared first on Law Street.

For the average American public high school student, school starts around 8:00am. When you factor in the fact that bus and/or driving transportation is required, the day can start much earlier for most students. Many people have argued that school should start later for growing adolescents. Read on to learn about the laws surrounding our educational start times, the debate about changing the times, and what factors are taken into account when planning a school’s first bell.

Why does school start so early?

There’s not actually a very good answer to this question. It’s partly tradition — school has always started early, possibly as a way to “train” students for the real world. There’s also the desire to make time for extracurriculars. A packed resume becomes more desirable for college applicants, so schools want to leave plenty of time in the afternoon for students to engage in sports, clubs, part-time jobs, and other activities. With regard to sports and other outdoor activities, schools want to leave enough time for students to be able to be outside before it gets too dark. There’s also the transportation argument — often school districts stagger when local levels of schools start so they don’t need to send out buses for elementary, middle, and high school students at the same time.

What would be the benefits to changing the start times?

Less Tardiness, More Participation 

It is no secret that during their first period of the day, high school students are often still mentally asleep, which creates problems involving both class participation and school tardiness. The University of Minnesota conducted a study when the Minneapolis Public School System changed the starting time of seven high schools from 7:15am to 8:40am. The study found that students benefited academically from gaining additional hours of sleep each week. Advocates of later morning bells argue that this shift would enable students and teachers to make more of the school day.

Preventing Accidents

Additionally, many high school juniors and seniors who drive to high school in the morning are often “driving drowsy” and the decreased alertness caused by driving this early in the morning is often a factor in many adolescent automobile accidents. “Driving drowsy” is incredibly dangerous:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration conservatively estimates that 100,000 police-reported crashes are the direct result of driver fatigue each year. This results in an estimated 1,550 deaths, 71,000 injuries, and $12.5 billion in monetary losses. These figures may be the tip of the iceberg, since currently it is difficult to attribute crashes to sleepiness.

Additionally, according to the National Sleep Foundation, adults between 18-29 are more likely to get into accidents from driving drowsy. While there doesn’t appear to be statistics available for 16 and 17-year-old drivers, it’s safe to assume they’d be consistent with or worse than that of their slightly older counterparts. Allowing students to get more adequate nights of sleep would help prevent potentially dangerous accidents.

Helping Teenagers to Grow

One of the most convincing arguments for why we might want to change the start times at the high school level is that they don’t work with the specific circadian rhythms of teenagers. According to doctors, when adolescents hit puberty, their bodies release melatonin later into the night than adults. This makes it very difficult for them to fall asleep, even if they go to bed early, and therefore harder to wake up first thing in the morning. In addition, teenagers need more sleep than adults, given that they are usually still growing. It’s estimated that a teenager needs about nine-and-a-half hours of sleep on any given night.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has recently started advocating for a school day that starts at 8:30am or later. The doctors explain that sleep deprivation can have very negative ramifications on students’ health. It’s unsurprisingly much harder to concentrate on school work and tests when you’re running on less sleep than your body needs to operate. But there are also lesser known consequences: lack of sleep among teenagers hasbeen linked to higher rates of depression, anxiety, and obesity.

What are the arguments against changing school start times?

Opponents acknowledge that current school schedules are out of sync with teenagers’ natural sleep cycles; however, many parents and administrators argue that these changes would bring about a number of problems, and therefore would not be worth the questionable academic benefits to their students.

As more students each year apply to colleges, extracurricular activities and sports have become vital in rounding out a student’s resume; however, if school starts and ends later, students will have less time for these extracurricular activities. Additionally, many students either have to watch younger siblings after school while their parents work or have after-school jobs themselves, both of which would become problematic if these students were to get out of school later. Busing would become a major problem, as well. Administrators have stated that it would be impossible to bus high school, middle school, and elementary students all at the same time, and they are unwilling to have elementary school children walking to school or waiting for the bus at 6:45 in the morning.

High school students driving to school later would often end up getting caught right in the middle of morning rush hour traffic, negating the decrease in the risk of accidents due to drowsy driving. Lastly, there are many who feel that if school were to start later, students would simply use that as an excuse to go to bed late. Oponents instead argue that it is the parent’s jobs to strictly enforce curfews to ensure that their children get adequate sleep in preparation of their early schedules, and that students need to learn to get up early before entering the real world.

What else can be done to help students get more sleep?

While it seems like schools are starting to consider later start times, and more and more doctors are advocating for these changes, we probably won’t be seeing changes anytime soon. There are a lot of logistical, financial, and policy issues that need to be untangled before schools shift start times dramatically. In the mean time, doctors recommend that students attempt to get the appropriate amount of sleep whenever possible, and that their parents help as much as they can.

One big recommendation deals with the increasingly common use of electronics before bed time. As Children’s Hospital pediatrician Mary Palmer points out:

As society has moved along, now we have things that keep us awake after the sun goes down. You have to have a time to process and decompress and if you’re still multitasking, which most of our electronics have us doing. I mean, we’re going from email to Twitter and there’s just so many inputs, so you have to have less distractors.

While adolescents’ Circadian rhythms may be different than those of adults, it’s still important to listen to advice like Palmer’s. Steps can be taken that make it easier for students to fall asleep at times that will give them the appropriate amount of shut-eye before school starts in the morning. While many schools are still working their way through instituting later start times for high school students, this advice is especially valuable.

Resources

Primary 

U.S. House of Representatives:  H. Con. Res. 176 ZZZ’s to A’s Resolution

Fairfax County School Board: Goal to Start High Schools After 8:00AM

Additional

KUOW.org: Sleep-Deprived Teenagers? Starting School Later Could Help Them Catch Up

Today: Teen Sleep Zombies: Should High Schools Have Later Start Times?

Smithsonian: School Really Should Start Later

National Sleep Foundation: School Start Time and Sleep

Start School Later: What’s the Big Deal?

Bethesda Magazine: Not Everyone Thinks MCPS High Schools Should Start Later

The New York Times: Are You Up Yet?

WFSU: Proposal to Push Back High School Start Times Raised School Districts’ Ire

Washington Post: Spend Millions to Let Teens Sleep Later?

mLive: Why Do High School Kids Go to School So Early? Because That’s the Way it’s Always Been

Week: Should High School Start Later?

ABC WFTS: More Debate On if High School Students Should Start Classes Later

Huffington Post: Should a School Change Start Time For Sleep? Later School Times Improve Student Performance: Study

Associated Press: Starting High School Later May Help Sleepy Teens

CBS: Stop Starting School So Early Doctors Say

Joseph Palmisano

Joseph Palmisano is a graduate of The College of New Jersey with a degree in History and Education. He has a background in historical preservation, public education, freelance writing, and business. While currently employed as an insurance underwriter, he maintains an interest in environmental and educational reform. Contact Joseph at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post School Start Times: Do More ZZZs Equal More A’s? appeared first on Law Street.

Millennials love the Internet, and most can tell you that from a young age, bullying was as present there as it was on the playground. As states have struggled to keep changing technology on the books to prevent bullying, they have faced challenges when it comes to preventing, or correcting, behavior that happens online and outside of school.

In Illinois, the Senate just passed a law that would ban students from using phones and computers as mechanisms for cyberbullying- whether in school or at home. The bill is on its way to the governor’s desk, and if signed, would be one of few around the country to include such far-reaching rules for cyberbullying; most only tackle in-school behavior. But critics call into question whether the bill can be effective, and even if it is, whether or not it goes too far- making school administrators step in where law enforcement should instead. The law in Illinois previously covered cyberbullying only if it took place on school computers- this new bill goes far beyond that.

This Illinois bill, while in many ways necessary, calls into question a number of things, the first of which being the jurisdiction of a school’s administration. If cyberbullying is taking place outside of school altogether, it is hard to find legal precedent for why the matter should be brought inside the school. Some critics of this bill, and of others like it, say cyberbullying is best dealt with by local police authorities instead of those at the school. Furthermore, not all cyberbullying is a result of students being victimized by others at the same school- it is entirely possible that the bullying can happen from students in other school districts, other states, or even other countries.

Another potential problem with this bill would be the mechanisms by which it is enforced. The simplest way to keep track of this cyberbullying would be to have victims show school administrators websites or other social media platforms that have the bullying. But oftentimes, victims are too scared or embarrassed to do that. And even for those who do come forward, social media websites like Facebook and Twitter, and other new platforms like YikYak (which has already been called a haven for bad behavior), can allow bullies to act anonymously. Of course, some simple sleuth work or help from law enforcement would be able to dig up a lot of information on the root of the cyberbullying, but with many schools being underfunded and understaffed, there are questions about how effective administrators could be about looking into all of these instances.

But even if it were possible for school officials to effectively monitor this kind of behavior- what are the legal complications of instituting this kind of policy?

1. Historical Precedent

At public schools, students are granted a degree of free speech, and there have been a plethora of court cases trying to define such boundaries. One of the earliest is the famed Tinker v. Des Moines, which held students have the right to free speech so long as they don’t disrupt what’s supposed to happen at school (learning in a calm environment). One of the reasons cyberbullying is difficult to mesh in with a case law on free speech, is because it usually does not take place on campus, so that “disruption” is more difficult to pinpoint.

2. Different ways cyberbullying is defined

Currently, 13 states have off-campus behaviors included in their cyberbullying policies, all to varying degrees. Some states, like Arkansas, require off-campus attacks to be directed at students or staff and be “intended for the purpose of disrupting school, and has a high likelihood of succeeding in that purpose.” Other states, like Connecticut, define cyberbullying a bit more broadly, considering cyberbullying anything that “creates a hostile environment at school for the victim.” Obviously, the more broadly defined, the more instances of bullying it will include, and the more work that will need to be done by school officials as a result.

In Illinois, bullying is defined as “any severe or pervasive physical or verbal act of conduct, including communications made in writing or electronically” that results in a student fearing harm of self or property, that substantially interferes with academic performance, or causes harm to a student’s physical or mental health. That definition has always been in place in Illinois, just now extends further to cover off-campus online bullying, too.

It is not yet clear where the line will be drawn in terms of cyberbullying rules each school can enact. It seems that as long as schools can prove the bullying (on campus, or off) led to significant disruption within the school, they are within their rights to enact these policies.

[Education Week] [State Facts] [Tinker v. Des Moines] [boston.com]

—

Molly Hogan (@molly_hogan13)

Featured image courtesy of [Flickr- woodleywonderworks]

Molly Hogan

Molly Hogan is a student at The George Washington University and formerly an intern at Law Street Media. Contact Molly at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Illinois Tries to Expand Cyberbullying Laws Outside of Schools appeared first on Law Street.

Merry Christmas Eve, folks!

Today, I’ve got ridiculousness upon ridiculousness. And it’s infuriating.

Salon reported today, via Raw Story and NBC News, on Rachel Bradshaw-Bean, a young woman from Texas who was raped in the band room at Henderson High School back in 2010, when she was just 17 years old. This is the first time Rachel has spoken out to the media about her experience – and she’s telling an awful story.

In an interview with NBC, Rachel recounted how in 2010, when she initially reported the rape, her school told her to “work it out.”

Are you kidding? Go kiss and make up with your rapist, sweetheart, no big deal.

I can’t.

News of the assault traveled to a school vice principal the following day, and Rachel was sent to a health clinic for examination. The clinic confirmed that her injuries were consistent with her report.

Despite the fact that medical professionals confirmed Rachel had experienced a rape, the Texas police informed her and her parents that no charges would be filed.

NO CHARGES WOULD BE FILED.

As in, you got raped, darling, but no one really cares. Get over it.

WTF?! This is the actual worst.

Except it’s not! Because things got worse for Rachel. Her high school opted not to carry out its own, independent investigation — which is required by law under Title IX. Instead, they decided to ship Rachel and her attacker off to a disciplinary school for 45 days with charges of “public lewdness.”

That’s right. Public fucking lewdness. How dare you get raped — how indecent of you!

So, Rachel’s mom tried to transfer her daughter to a different school. You know, where maybe she wouldn’t get treated like a criminal as punishment for being the victim of a sexual assault. And guess what? That didn’t pan out. Since Rachel was technically suspended from her original school, no other school would take her in. Ridiculous.

Seriously so bad.

So, Rachel and her family went to the ACLU, where they were told that, sadly, their situation was far from unusual. According to the ACLU, school officials often don’t understand the laws, so they don’t put much stock in following them.

The Department of Education does, though. A year after Rachel’s ordeal, it ruled that Henderson High School had violated Title IX by failing to investigate the attack, and by retaliating against the victim with her exile to a disciplinary school. As a result, the school was given a 13-point plan for Title IX compliance, mandatory staff training around rape and sexual assault, and was ordered to pay for Rachel’s counseling.

I’m glad that at least there were some consequences for this shit hole of a case.

There are so many issues here. Let’s start with the fundamental lack of empathy or concern for Rachel. WTF. This is misogyny at its finest. Misogyny, if you’re rusty on your Women’s Studies vocab, is defined as having a hatred for women. And that’s all I can really explain this as. Hatred of women. Because how else do you understand such heartless behavior? Here’s a person who was violently attacked. She’s in physical pain, she’s mentally and emotionally traumatized — this is a terrible thing that’s happened. People should respond with some empathy, am I right? There should be a collective desire to help the victim heal, and to teach the perpetrator never to cause this type of harm again.

That’s what should have happened. But it didn’t. Instead, Rachel was treated with carelessness at best and outright contempt at worst. Why would you treat a victim that way? It’s disgusting.

Seriously gross.

Moving right along, let’s tackle this issue of telling women to get over it. I’m so, so, so very sick of this sentiment. And I hear it way too often.

When someone is hurting, and they’re told to get over it, do you know what they’re hearing? They’re hearing that they don’t matter. That their feelings, and experiences, and their pain doesn’t matter. They’re being dismissed, denied, and ignored. And when that happens, a fundamental lack of trust forms in the space where healing should have started. Because, how do you feel safe in a world where you fundamentally don’t matter?

You don’t.

That’s where we’re at right now, people. And we’ve been here for a long time. Every time a woman like Rachel gets brushed aside, women everywhere are being reminded that we don’t matter. Not really. Not in this moment, not in this society.

So, for Christmas, let’s change that, shall we? Let’s use all those warm, fuzzy feelings of love and goodwill, and let’s start transferring them to all the people who need it most. Some of those people will be like Rachel. And some of them will be in totally different, but equally awful, circumstances.

Either way, let’s spread the love this year. We could all use a little extra.

—

Hannah R. Winsten (@HannahRWinsten) is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow.

Featured image courtesy of [The Untrained Eye via Flickr]

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post All I Want For Christmas: Stop Telling Rape Victims to Get Over it appeared first on Law Street.

After a young woman in North Andover, Massachusetts named Erin Cox was punished for picking up an intoxicated friend from a party, her story is receiving national attention. Formerly the varsity volleyball captain, she has been stripped of her captainship and suspended for five games.

The story of what happened that night shows that Cox is a strong, independent, and compassionate young woman. On a weekend evening early in October, she received a text from a friend who was at a party and intoxicated. Being a good friend, Cox decided to go pick her up. However she arrived there at the same time as the police, who had come to break up the rowdy underage party. About a dozen students were arrested, and another dozen or so were warned that they could be summoned to court for drinking underage.

Cox was one of the students who received that warning, despite the fact that she had just arrived and had not been drinking. In fact, a police officer at the scene who performed sobriety tests vouched for Cox’s claim that she had not had even a sip of alcohol.

Cox explained in an interview with the Boston Herald that she truly felt as though she was doing the right thing. “But I wasn’t drinking,” she told me. “And I felt like going to get her was the right thing to do. Saving her from getting in the car when she was intoxicated and hurt herself or getting in the car with someone else who was drinking. I’d give her a ride home.”

After the police reported the party break-up to the school, many students faced various punishments for breaking the school’s zero tolerance policy on drugs and alcohol. Cox was one of them. The school has claimed that simply because she was at the party when the police arrived, regardless of her purpose or sobriety, that she was in the wrong. They also claim that being a student athlete, moreover a student athlete with a leadership position, is a privilege that can be revoked for inappropriate behavior. Cox’s family is standing behind her, stating that they’re proud of their daughter’s attempt to be a good friend and responsible young adult. Her mother attempted to sue the school district, but was told that the district court did not have the appropriate jurisdiction. They are now expected to move onto a federal claim.

I have a few different issues with the punishment of Erin Cox. First, this sends a horrible message to students. Seniors in high school are taught to weight their worth on what they plan on doing after graduation. For some, the attempt to get into a college of their choice becomes all-consuming. The message that North Andover High School sent to its students preached selfishness—essentially Cox’s punishment indicated that helping your friends is not worth it because it may get you in trouble. That’s not the lesson that young people should be learning as they go out into college or the real world. High school isn’t just about algebra and AP Tests; it’s about teaching you how to be a decent human being. Furthermore, the school implicitly told Cox that she should have let her friend drive drunk, or get into a car with someone who had been drinking. Did that friend make a mistake? Yes. Did that mean she was unworthy of Cox’s help? Absolutely not.

This news story reminded me of another instance in which young high school athletes were present at a crazy, unruly party rife with underage drinking. The Steubenville case took the nation by storm, and raised important questions about appropriate behavior in teens. But Cox’s story is the flipside.

Let’s compare the two situations: Here, a young woman in Massachusetts who serves as the captain of her volleyball team is caught by the police, sober, picking up a drunk friend from a party. Her captain title is stripped, and she is suspended for five games. In Steubenville, two young men who are on the football team in non-leadership capacities are drunken underage at a party and sexually assault another teenager. Multiple partygoers take pictures, talk about the incident on social media, and harass this young woman. As recent grand jury indictments show, the high school these young men attend help them cover up the whole thing.

Now my comparison probably falls into the category of apples and oranges, but it is fair to ask: why the enormous disparity in the way these two incidents were treated? I’m not sure. It could be because of different policies at the schools. It could be because high school volleyball in Massachusetts is probably lucky to draw a 10^th of the crowd as high school football in Ohio. It could be because Ma’Lik Richmond and Trent Mays were young men, but Erin Cox was a young woman. There are any number of reasons to explain why these two stories are so divergent, but none of them are particularly comforting. High schools are supposed to teach their students to be adults who are capable of acting appropriately, making good decisions, and determining right from wrong. Then these institutions of education are supposed to hold their students accountable to these standards. In my book, Stuebenville and North Andover, different as the cases may be, both failed.

[Huffington Post]

—

Featured image courtesy of [bankbryan via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post High School Student Punished for Being a Good Friend appeared first on Law Street.