Typescript. / Bibliography: leaves 175-180. / Photocopy. / Microfilm. / xii, 180 leaves, bound ill. 29 cm

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to examine and analyze federal and Virginia statutes along with selected state and federal court decisions which govern the legal rights and responsibilities of educators in the Commonwealth of Virginia in the areas of 1) liability; 2) terms of employment; 3) legal relationships with students; and 4) legal responsibilities to students with disabilities. The legal resources for this study were the United States Constitution; the Code of Virginia; other federal and Virginia legislation; and Virginia and federal judicial opinions. The methods of research employed in this study were the "descriptive word" or "fact word" approach and the case method. The computer-assisted legal research services, Lexis and Westlaw, were used extensively in this study. The conclusions resulting from this study are as follows: 1) The doctrine of sovereign immunity absolutely protects Virginia school boards and administrators from liability for negligence. Virginia teachers are also protected by sovereign immunity but only for acts of simple negligence. Sovereign immunity does not bar Virginia's teachers from actions involving gross negligence and does not protect school districts and school personnel for constitutional torts. 2. To obtain employment in Virginia, an educator must hold a license issued by the State Board of Education, pass a professional teachers' examination and execute a written contract with the school board. To obtain continuing contract status in Virginia, educators must serve a three-year probationary period in the same school division. Virginia educators may be dismissed, suspended or placed on probation for cause. 3. School age children are mandated to attend school in Virginia. Local school boards possess statutory authority to employ reasonable measures to maintain discipline in the schools. Virginia students may be suspended or expelled provided they receive procedural due process. Students possess constitutional rights under the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments. 4. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act mandates that students with disabilities be provided a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment. The IDEA and Virginia regulations governing special education outline comprehensive and detailed procedural requirements guaranteeing the rights of parents of children with disabilities. / Ed. D.

This study has provided an up-to-date source of information for North Carolina public school teachers to help them understand the sources of school law, the legal basis for education, the system of state and federal courts, and their rights and responsibilities. Appropriate federal and state judicial decisions, federal and state constitutional law, state statutes, State Board of Education policies, and the opinions of the Attorney General have been analyzed to determine legal principles in the following areas: 1. constitutional rights of teachers as a public school employee and a private citizen which included the areas of freedom of speech and expression; academic freedom, freedom of religion; private life; personal appearance; loyalty; 2. terms and conditions of employment which included certification, tenure, teacher's duties, due process for tenured teachers, procedural rights for nontenured teachers, dismissal for cause; and the 3. teacher's liability for students. Tort liability included strict liability; the intentional torts of assault and battery, defamation, and false imprisonment; the unintentional tort of negligence and its elements and defenses; educational malpractice; governmental immunity; and students' records. Of particular concern were assault and battery and child abuse cases as related to corporal punishment, the use of qualified privilege as a defense in defamation, and the option provided by the legislature for school boards to waive governmental immunity. North Carolina courts have determined that the fundamental principle of negligence cases in North Carolina is foreseeability of harm. As a result of this study, it has been recommended that the study be updated on an ongoing basis to maintain an up-to-date source of legal information for North Carolina teachers. ln addition, a similar study has been recommended for other states. lt was further recommended that a study examine the developing case law in educational malpractice along with state legal restrictions which interfere with good educational practices. / Ed. D. / incomplete_metadata

M.Ed. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No description available.

Please read the abstract in the section 00front of this document / Thesis (PhD (Education Management))--University of Pretoria, 2002. / Education Management and Policy Studies / unrestricted

This study was concerned with determining the awareness of secondary public school teachers, in the Lewisville Independent School District, regarding the laws which relate to their profession. Fifty-nine true or false statements, involving nine areas of public school law, were administered. The study compared teachers' knowledge in areas of school law based on their personal background. The thesis was divided into five chapters. These chapters included the Introduction, Review of Literature, Procedure, Analysis of Data, and Summary and Recommendations. The findings of this study indicated the majority of teachers and administrators had an average knowledge of school law. Areas with lower incorrect responses included students' rights and the copyright law. A recommendation was made to plan an inservice meeting with emphasis placed on the most frequently missed responses

No description available.

Before the 1981 enactment of the Term Contract Nonrenewal Act in Texas, term contract teachers were entitled to a hearing only when the employment contract was terminated during the contract period or when the cause for nonrenewal was made public and had a stigmatizing effect on the reputational rights of the teacher. This new act has the effect of bridging the gap between what has been legal and what many would consider to be fundamentally fair in employment practices. The immediate impact of this law has left educators with the need to investigate the adequacy of the procedure used by the Texas Education Agency in implementing the hearings and appeals process regarding nonrenewal of term contracts. This, then, is the problem of this study.