No description available.

The study investigated the degree of compliance of selected Arizona public school districts with a set of state statutes which placed a limit on the amount bilingual education services a district could provide to students. The existing literature on implementation and compliance suggested that several conditions might influence districts to implement programs of instruction which would be at variance with the state laws. The study used questionnaires to gather program data from 40 school districts in southeastern Arizona. These questionnaires were screened to determine those districts offering programs of instructions which exceeded the restrictions of state law. Six such districts were found. Interviews were conducted with program administrators in each district to determine the explanations for noncompliance. An interview was also obtained with an Arizona Department of Education official to determine the role of the state regarding the bilingual statutes. Information obtained from the interviews revealed that several of the programs had been established under federal pressure to provide equal educational opportunity to limited-English-proficient children. These programs had existed long before these state statutes were put into effect in 1981. Data also indicated that the state statutes lacked enforcement mechanisms. The state agency responsible for those programs received no mandate to monitor districts or to enforce state restrictions. Also, this agency was federally-funded with a primary loyalty to federal priorities to keep programs in operation and with a service rather than an enforcement orientation toward local districts. No enforcement of the restrictions found in the 1981 bilingual statutes took place. Furthermore, administrative regulations for the 1981 statutes were formulated which permitted programs of instruction exceeding state limitations to continue. In 1984 new bilingual statutes were put into effect which removed the restrictions of the old statutes. The new statutes are discussed from the historical perspective of the earlier statutes.

Teachers are perceived by society and in law to be in a position of trust. As a result of the daily interaction with their students, educators have the opportunity to be influential and they are expected to behave in a responsible, ethical and moral manner. Being viewed as a moral compass of society is a significant responsibility and the implications of such a statement are substantial upon not only teachers but also impact on teacher education programs. This study investigates how educational law impacts on beginning teachers in light of the many legal and ethical boundaries that educators will experience throughout their career. The literature review discusses the delicate balance between an educator’s mission and the requirement to follow policies and procedures; documented court cases, which have an impact on educators; and, finally, the educational law component within the teacher education framework. Six participants were interviewed in this study of which two are teachers in their first three years of teaching, two recent graduates, a principal and an official with a teacher union who is a member from the Counseling department. All four of the teachers completed a two-year initial teacher education program. In addition, the principal is a member of the Partnership Advisory Council of the program. Maintaining the delicate balance between an educator’s mission and the law will continue to be a challenge. The direct and indirect statutory rules and regulations which impact on the education system and the supporting landmark court case decisions clearly bring to question the level of preparedness of teacher candidates and indicate a need to examine the role teacher education programs play in preparing future teachers. The major themes include the impact of educational law on the professional and personal lives of beginning teachers, the role of initial teacher education programs, and the legal enablers and barriers for educators. The key findings for each of the themes are discussed. Educators find themselves in a very complex role. The teacher education programs in Ontario need to examine the importance of including meaningful and insightful dialogue about the legal and ethical aspects of being a teacher.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--Lehigh University, 2006. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 217-223).

Thesis (PhD(Education Management and Policy Studies))--University of Pretoria, 2009. / Abstract in English. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1931. / Vita. Published also as Teachers college, Columbia university, Contributions to education, no. 474. Includes a check list of items, which will serve as an aid to school boards and as a guide to architects. Bibliography: p. 109-113.

Thèse--Université de Paris. / "Bibliographie": p. [285]-292.

During recent years, courts in the United States have in many instances attempted to force other agencies of government to take some sort of affirmative action. In doing so, they have sought repeatedly to force those other agencies to act where, left to their own accord, they would choose not to do so. A specific example of a situation of this sort is the United States Supreme Court's entry into the field of race relations with the issuance of the Brown decision in 1954. Quite obviously, in rendering that decision, the nation's highest court was seeking to force local school boards to act in a manner distinctly at odds with how they would otherwise have chosen to proceed. In the Brown situation and others like it, a crucial question which has arisen is this: to what degree is a court able to force other agencies to act where they otherwise would not? It is, moreover, with this question that this dissertation is concerned. Specifically, this volume seeks to explore the capability of the courts to force unwilling agencies to act in a manner opposed to their natural inclination by exploring the California school finance litigation and the legislative responses to it. What this exploration leads to is the conclusion that, although courts can and do force other agencies to act, their ability to do so is nonetheless limited. Specifically, it would appear that courts can act as agenda setters, thereby forcing other agencies of government to at least consider issues they otherwise would have ignored. Courts also, it would seem, can play some role in the molding of the substantive provisions of a given policy. There, though, their impact would appear not to be a particularly great one; rather, in that regard it would seem that all they are capable of doing is simply prodding other policy-makers in a given direction but little more. Indeed, it would appear that the capacity of courts to act as actual molders of substantive policy is seriously undercut by the fact that the decisions they issue are merely one component of the overall political environment with which nonjudicial officials must be concerned.

No description available.

No description available.