Classroom Discipline and Corporal Punishment

● Dogs may be used to sniff lockers and cars. Generalized canine sniffing of students is permitted only when the dogs do not touch them. ● Strip searches usually are unconstitutional and should not be conducted unless available evidence clearly indicates that a significant threat to student safety is present. ● School officials may perform a pat-down search for weapons if they have a reasonable suspicion that students are bringing dangerous weapons to school. ● School officials may conduct searches on field trips, but the usual standards for searches still apply. ● School officials’ judgments are protected by government immunity if the search is not knowingly illegal.

video surveillance and search Because videos can help with searches to identify those who have threatened or might threaten the safety of students and staff, school officials increasingly have been installing cameras and other means of surveillance. On the other hand, extensive video surveillance can violate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. Thus, the constitutionality of video surveillance hinges on its continuing reasonableness in a given situation. Few cases examining this issue have reached the courts, but in one instance, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that it was not permissible to have ongoing scrutiny of athletic locker rooms.49

drug testing as a Form of search Some school board members and other policy makers have urged administrators to introduce random testing of student athletes’ urine to detect marijuana, steroids, and other illegal substances. Historically, such testing was viewed as a potentially unconstitutional search. In 1995, however, the US Supreme Court ruled that this type of drug search is not necessarily unconstitutional even without specific reason to suspect a particular individual. A majority of the justices concluded that school officials have reasonable grounds to be especially concerned with drug use among athletes, who presumably set an example for other students. Since then, the Supreme Court has also permitted drug testing of students engaged in other activities. Students in violation of disciplinary policies involving the possession, sale, or use of prohibited substances on school property or at schoolsponsored or school-sanctioned activities can be subject to appropriate disciplinary sanctions.50

9-3g classroom discipline and corporal punishment

Classroom discipline was the issue in a case involving a sixth grader who was placed in a time-out area of the classroom whenever his behavior became disruptive. The student had a history of behavioral problems, and the teacher had tried other methods of discipline without success. While in time out, the boy was allowed to use the restroom, eat in the cafeteria, and attend other classes. His parents sued, charging that the teacher’s actions (1) deprived their son of his property interest in receiving a public education; (2) meted out punishment disproportionate to his offense, in violation of his due-process rights; and (3) inflicted emotional distress.

49Richard S. Vacca, “Student Search and Seizure,” CEPI Education Law Newsletter (March 2008), available at www.cepi.vcu.edu/publications/newsletters; Amy M. Steketee, “The Legal Implications of Video Surveillance Cameras,” District Administration (February 2012), available at www.districtadministration.com; and Andy Sevilla, “Elementary Student, Bus Driver Shot with BB Gun,” Hays Free Press (October 22, 2014). 50Richard S. Vacca, “Search and Seizure,” CEPI Education Law Newsletter (April 2010), available at www.cepi.vcu.edu/publications/newsletters; and “Frequently Asked Questions about Drug Testing in Schools,” September 2014 posting by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, available at www.drugabuse.gov.

The district court said that school officials possess broad authority to prescribe and enforce standards of conduct in the schools, but this authority is limited by the Fourteenth Amendment. In this case, the student remained in school and thus was not deprived of a public education. “Time out” was declared to be a minimal interference with the student’s property rights. The court noted that the purpose of a time out is to modify the behavior of disruptive students and to preserve the right to an education for other students in the classroom. All of the student’s charges were dismissed.51

Use of corporal punishment A particularly controversial method of classroom discipline is corporal punishment, which has a long history in American education dating back to the colonial period. Corporal punishment remains legal in nineteen states. It is unacceptable to many educators, although it enjoys considerable support within some segments of the community and is administered more frequently than educators like to admit. Surveys indicate that hundreds of thousands of children are spanked or paddled each school year, and thousands sustain injuries that require medical attention. But if the punishment results in even a small bruise, the punisher may be investigated for or charged with child abuse.52

Certain state legislatures have prohibited all corporal punishment in public schools. In states where the law is silent on this issue, local boards have wide latitude and may ban physical punishment if they choose. However, where a state statute explicitly permits corporal punishment, local boards may regulate but not prohibit its use. In this context, many school boards have developed detailed policies restricting the use of corporal punishment. Violations of policy can lead to dismissal, and legal charges are possible for excessive force, punishment based on personal malice toward the student, or unreasonable use of punishment.

Florida is an example of a state that allows corporal punishment. In 1977, the US Supreme Court, in Ingraham v. Wright, ruled on the constitutionality of this law from two federal perspectives: (1) whether use of corporal punishment was a violation of the Eighth Amendment barring cruel and unusual punishment, and (2) whether prior notice and some form of due process were required before administering punishment.

In this case, James Ingraham and Roosevelt Andrews were junior-high students in Dade County, Florida. Because Ingraham had been slow to respond to the teacher’s instructions, he received twenty paddle swats administered in the principal’s office. As a consequence, he needed medical treatment and missed a few days of school. Andrews was also paddled, but less severely. Finding that the intent of the Eighth Amendment was to protect those convicted of crimes, the justices said it did not apply to corporal punishment of schoolchildren. As to due process, the Court said, “We conclude that the Due Process clause does not require notice and a hearing prior to the imposition of corporal punishment in the public schools, as that practice is authorized and limited by common law.”53

51Dickens v. Johnson County Board of Education, 661 F. Supp. 155 (E.D. Tenn. 1987). See also Darcie A. Mulay, “Keeping All Students Safe,” Stetson Law Review (March 24, 2014), available at www .stetson.edu/law/lawreview/media/42-1mulay.pdf; and “What Is Responsive Classroom Time-Out?” July 28, 2014, posting by Responsive Classroom, available at www .responsiveclassroom.org. 52Perry A. Zirkel and David W. Van Cleaf, “Is Corporal Punishment Child Abuse?” Principal (January 1996), pp. 60–61; Martha M. McCarthy, “Corporal Punishment in Public Schools,” Educational Horizons (Summer 2005), pp. 235–240; and Arit John, “Kansas Bill Would Legalize Spanking That Leaves Bruises to Deal with ‘Defiant Children’,” The Wire (February 19, 2014). 53Ingraham v. Wright, 430 US (1977). See also Perry A. Zirkel, “You Bruise, You Lose,” Phi Delta Kappan (January 1990), pp. 410–411; Benjamin Dowling-Sendor, “A Shock to the Conscience,” American School Board Journal (April 2001); Rose Everleth, “Nineteen States Allow Teachers to Spank Children,” Smithsonian (February 19, 2014), available at www.smithsonianmag.com; and Carla Vestal, “The Low-Down on the Beat-Down,” January 13, 2015, posting by Civil Rights Clinic Blog, available at http://cslcivilrights.com.