The purposes of the study were to determine the scope and background of student due process policies and procedures utilized within Indiana school corporations, and to analyze the content of due process policies and procedures utilized within Indiana school corporations in comparison with standards recommended by legal and educational authorities.An Initial Survey form was mailed to the superintendent of each school corporation in Indiana. Superintendents reporting written, school board adopted policies and procedures for student due process were requested to send a copy for the content analysis portion of the study.A Background Survey instrument was mailed to each superintendent providing a copy of due process policies and procedures. Information was sought relative to the formulation, implementation, and utilization of student due process policies and procedures.Recommended standards and guidelines for procedural due process for students, from both legal and educational sources, were reviewed. The standards and guidelines were organized into a recording instrument to help facilitate a content analysis of the policies and procedures.Major findings of the study were:1. Superintendents from 43 of 280 Indiana school corporations reported written, school board adopted policies and procedures outlining student due process in effect as of December 1, 1971.2.The total number of school corporations with written, school board adopted due process policies and procedures has increased annually since 1969.3, The persons most directly affected by discipline and due process--students, teachers, and parents--were not involved in the formulation of policies and procedures.4. Approximately 71 per cent of the students involved in due process hearings were reported to have been suspended or expelled. Approximately 29 per cent of the students involved were reported to have been reinstated.5. The building principal was most often specified as the hearing officer. The school board was most often specified as the hearing board.6. In most instances, the student and parents received the required information in the notice of the charges; however, most notices lacked an explanation of the procedural mechanics of the hearing.7. The amount of time allowed the student to prepare a defense was arbitrary or not specified in most policies.8. As a group, the due process policies were most often lacking ini (a) including a provision for students and/or parents to give a written waiver of formal hearing procedures; (b) including a provision guaranteeing the student prior inspection of documents and evidence; and (c) Including a provision guaranteeing student protection against self-incrimination.9. The type of hearing record most often reported consisted of fill-in forms or written narrative summaries.10. Appeals were most often directed to the superintendent.Major recommendations of the study were:1. Students, parents, and teachers be involved in the formulation of due process policies and procedures.2. Humanistic aspects of the student-institutional relationship be emphasized in teacher education and school administration courses.3. In-service education relative to student due process be provided for both professional and non-professional personnel in school districts. 4. After September 1, 1972, when the Indiana student conduct and due process law becomes effective, a follow-up study be conducted to determine what changes have occurred in the scope, background, and content of student due process policies and procedures.

The purpose of the study was to state in a positive manner the rights of administrators in dealing with student suspension, expulsion, and exclusion in substantive and procedural due process matters. A legal. research was used to accomplish the purpose of the study. A review of the literature from 1969 through 1978 was made. The focus of the review was upon attitudes of administrators regarding court cases dealing with student suspension, expulsion and exclusion. A selected review and analysis of United States Constitution, Indiana state law, federal and state appellate court decisions, Indiana Attorney General Opinions and related literature was wade to identify factors guiding school officials in dealing with student due process matters. The study was limited to the laws, court decisions, and Attorney General Opinions in Indiana involving student suspension, expulsion, and exclusion.Even though the study was limited to Indiana, the following considerations would also apply throughout the United States.(1) Students have due process rights. (2) Constitutionality of a school regulation and reasonableness of a rule is a question of law to be decided exclusively by the courts. (3) Boards of education and school administrators have the power to make and enforce reasonable rules and regulations for the proper process in general. (4) Where rules infringe upon freedom of expression, the school officials have the burden of showing justification. (5) Administrators are upset over recent United States Supreme Court decisions and an apparent loss of control of students. (6) A compensatory award to students would be appropriate if the measures of impermissable motivation or disregard of a student's constitutional rights were maliciously violated. (7) Student dismissal for failure of a student to meet academic standards calls for far less stringent procedural requirements than dismissal of a student for violation of valid rules of conduct. (8) The Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution does riot apply to the internal disciplinary operations of a private school. (9) A student involved in a due process matter must take advantage of all administrative remedies available before filing a law suit. (10) School Officials have the authority to expel a student under the age of sixteen for a violation of reasonable rules and regulations. (11) The laws and recent court decisions should not hinder the fair minded school administrator. (12) School attendance records are admissable as evidence in a court of law.In addition to the study findings, the following conclusions, based upon the review and analysis of pertinent constitutional law, federal and state court decisions as well as upon the reading of related literature and conversations with attorneys and school officials were developed. (1) A school official may avoid legal problems in dealing with students if the following steps are followed: (a) The school official must make every attempt to establish reasonable rules and regulations. (b) The school official must carry out discipline procedures without malice. (c) The school official must provide the minimum essentials of due process. 1. Oral and written notice of charges are provided the student. 2. The student must have the opportunity to tell what happened in the incident under investigation. (2) The Indiana Statute on Due Process and Pupil Discipline provides the framework and guide to follow in discipline matters. School corporations may avoid time consuming and expensive court proceedings by adhering to the statute. The courts have overturned student challegnes on substantive and procedural due process if the student had not sought all remedies available under the Indiana Due Process and Pupil Discipline Statute.Even though the study was limited to Indiana, the above listed conclusions, with the exception of number two, would also apply throughout the United States.