Descriptor
| Discipline Policy | 71 |
| Due Process | 71 |
| Suspension | 71 |
| Student Rights | 53 |
| Elementary Secondary Education | 47 |
| Expulsion | 38 |
| Court Litigation | 37 |
| School Law | 28 |
| Disabilities | 15 |
| Student School Relationship | 15 |
| Student Behavior | 14 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
Author
| Phay, Robert E. | 3 |
| Flygare, Thomas J. | 2 |
| Lines, Patricia M. | 2 |
| Bernheim, Emily | 1 |
| Bittle, Edgar H. | 1 |
| Black, Susan | 1 |
| Boivin, Real G. | 1 |
| Bolmeier, Edward C. | 1 |
| Bryant, Valarie A. | 1 |
| Buss, William G. | 1 |
| Collins, Mildred | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Publication Type
Education Level
Audience
| Practitioners | 14 |
| Administrators | 8 |
| Policymakers | 5 |
| Teachers | 2 |
| Parents | 1 |
Location
| New York | 3 |
| Illinois | 2 |
| South Carolina | 2 |
| Kansas | 1 |
| Louisiana | 1 |
| Missouri | 1 |
| Nebraska | 1 |
| New Jersey | 1 |
| North Carolina | 1 |
| Ohio | 1 |
| Oregon | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Mackey, Bruce C. – 1980
The Illinois School Code requires hearing officers in student expulsion or suspension review cases to provide the school board with a written summary of the evidence heard. While no particular form is required for the summary, this document presents a sample hearing report that can serve as a model for those preparing reports. The…
Descriptors: Discipline, Discipline Policy, Due Process, Expulsion
Download full textSupreme Court of the U. S., Washington, DC. – 1975
On January 22, 1975, the Supreme Court decided that students facing temporary suspension from a public school have property and liberty interests that qualify for protection under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Having chosen to extend the right to an education to students, the State may not, without due process, withdraw that…
Descriptors: Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process, Secondary Education
Lines, Patricia M. – Inequality in Education, 1972
Argues that suspension of a student from school for disciplinary reasons should always be preceded by a hearing. (JF)
Descriptors: Behavior Problems, Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process
Kobrick, Jeff; Lines, Patricia M. – Inequality in Education, 1972
Descriptors: Behavior Standards, Discipline, Discipline Policy, Due Process
Peer reviewedHestor, Charles – Clearing House, 1977
Descriptors: Discipline Policy, Due Process, Educational Policy, Expulsion
Peer reviewedManley-Casimir, Michael E. – Administrator's Notebook, 1972
Descriptors: Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process, Expulsion
Peer reviewedBoivin, Real G. – NASSP Bulletin, 1983
A questionnaire on due process allows readers to compare their responses to hypothetical cases, beliefs concerning the impact of recent court action, and relevant legal knowledge with responses by administrators participating in a study. This study showed that administrators directly responsible for discipline complied least with due process…
Descriptors: Administrator Attitudes, Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process
Nolte, M. Chester – American School Board Journal, 1975
Discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Goss v. Lopez that public schools may not suspend a student for 10 days or less without giving him advance notice of the charges against him and allowing him to respond to the charges. (JG)
Descriptors: Discipline Policy, Due Process, Elementary Secondary Education, School Law
Flygare, Thomas J. – Phi Delta Kappan, 1974
Descriptors: Discipline, Discipline Policy, Due Process, Elementary Secondary Education
Hobbs, Gardner J. – GAMSP Journal, 1977
This paper examines the reported decisions, one unreported decision, and two Attorney Generals' opinions that deal with school punishment for the use of drugs and alcohol off campus and with suspensions pending criminal charges for student offenses committed off school property. (Author)
Descriptors: Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Drug Abuse, Due Process
Hoffmann, Earl – Thresholds in Secondary Education, 1977
The United States Supreme Court in Goss v. Lopez has established new parameters within which the disciplinarians and the disciplined may operate. Discusses the basis for the decision and examines the comments of the dissenting justices in the Court's tenuous 5 to 4 verdict. (Author/RK)
Descriptors: Discipline Policy, Due Process, Student Attitudes, Student Rights
National Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA. – 1982
The basic requirements for fair school disciplinary proceedings were set down in the Supreme Court decision of Goss v. Lopez. The requirements are that students be given oral or written notice of both the nature of the rule (violation of which will result in punishment) and the nature of the specific violation and the intended punishment. In…
Descriptors: Administrator Responsibility, Court Litigation, Disabilities, Discipline Policy
Draba, Robert E.; And Others – Viewpoints, 1976
Results of this survey indicate that the Goss v. Lopez decision, concerning notice and hearing requirements in school suspension incidents, does not represent an overwhelming administrative burden in Illinois, since many principals have long provided the safeguards that the decision mandates. (MB)
Descriptors: Civil Rights, Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process
Peer reviewedLevine, Alan H.; Kola, Arthur A. – Journal of Law and Education, 1975
Descriptors: Court Litigation, Discipline Policy, Due Process, Elementary Secondary Education
Peer reviewedFlygare, Thomas J. – Journal of Law and Education, 1974
Examines the procedural due process challenge to short-term suspensions. (Author)
Descriptors: Discipline Policy, Due Process, Elementary Secondary Education, Equal Protection
