Administrators at the Santa Clara, Utah, elementary school (named, ironically, Arrowhead), got a very public education in Native American tradition after deeming young Jakobe Sanden’s haircut “a distraction” and notifying his parents that the boy would have to get it cut or leave school.
Many schools have taken a hard stance against anything that might taint the learning environment or jeopardize the safety of our children. The results can be amusingly absurd, but it’s a bit sad how collective fear can override common sense.
In a recent NakedLaw blog post, I wrote that the state of Texas was ignoring historical facts by downplaying the role of slavery as the primary cause of the American Civil War. That blog incited a rash of commentary, almost all of it taking me to task for ignoring the real cause of the war. In response, I thought I might discuss the nature of historical fact and the processes that guide our acceptance or rejection of it.
This fall, five million public school students in Texas began using new social studies textbooks based on state academic standards that barely touch on the shameful history of racial segregation, do not mention the Ku Klux Klan or Jim Crow laws, and soften the role that slavery played in the US Civil War. Why is the school board in Texas making these kinds of changes?
On the heels of a dodgeball ban in New Hampshire, we now have a school district in Washington State trying to ban the game of tag. Recognizing their mistake and hoping to quell the outcry, the Mercer Island School District reversed the ban within days. The reversal, written by Superintendent Gary Plano, claims that there is no ban on tag—the principal was simply talking about a “hands-off expectation at recess.”
Dress codes have long prompted debates among not just the students who are forced to abide by them, but by the adults who are asked to justify them. Proponents praise the simplicity of solid, straightforward color schemes and claim that uniforms reduce student-led ridicule over brands and style— placing high- and low-income populations on equal footing in the classroom. On the other hand, many oppose the imposition of a dress code on the grounds that it stifles creativity, limits student expression, and infringes on students’ First Amendment rights.
The Washington State Supreme Court just set a new precedent for bad timing. As of 3:55pm on September 4, 2015—just days before thousands of kids would go back to school—a 116- year-old decision (School District No. 20 v. Bryan) suddenly became the single most important document in the battle for school choice in Washington State. Surprise!
Avvo attorneys answer your legal questions. This week: Florida immigration attorney Peter Loughlin explains the F-1 student visa.
An #EqualPayDay roundup of the top tweets and articles that got us thinking about gender dynamics in our personal and professional lives.
At least eight states have anti-LGBT curriculum laws that expressly require demeaning LGBT relationships or sexuality.