2011 General Assembly Update - Virginia Association of Secondary ...

2011 General Assembly Update:Changes in Virginia School Lawby Roger E. Jones, Ed.D.September 2011, Richmond, VirginiaINTRODUCTIONSchool law is constantly evolving and changing. The past year has seen a variety of billspassed by the 2011 General Assembly that will affect public schools. In addition, the VirginiaBoard of Education made several policy decisions and provided guidance documents ontopics of critical importance to schools. The Attorney General issued several opinions of whichprincipals need to be aware. The U.S. Supreme Court recently rendered a decision related topolice questioning of students in school. The federal courts rendered three decisions regardingoff-campus cyberbulling, including a recent one by the 4 th Circuit Court of Appeals. Finally,the Office of Civil Rights issued a guidance document of importance. All are addressed in thispublication.The publication is divided into topics where each change is highlighted. The topics include thefollowing: Safety and Health Issues; Administrative Issues; Curriculum Issues; Joint Resolutions;Virginia Board of Education Policy Issues; Attorney General Opinions; Supreme Court Decision;Federal Court Decisions on Cyberbullying; and Office of Civil Rights Guidance Document.Guidelines for ConcussionsGENERAL ASSEMBLY CHANGESSAFETY AND HEALTH ISSUESSection 22.1-271.5 was added to the Code by the 2010 General Assembly requiring the VirginiaBoard of Education to work with other groups to develop guidelines for policies dealing withconcussions in student-athletes by July 1, 2011. These guidelines have been approved, andthey inform and educate coaches, student-athletes, and their parents or guardians of the natureand risk of concussions, criteria for removal from and return to play, and risks of not reportingthe injury and continuing to play. Each local school division was required to develop policiesand procedures regarding the identification and handling of suspected concussions in studentathletes.These new guidelines went into effect on July 1. (Editor’s Note: Principals need toensure that all coaches, parents, and players are familiar with the policy. Principals shouldconsider sharing a copy of the local policy with all coaches and should encourage coaches tomake this a point of emphasis for their sport. Principals should make sure that coaches of allsports have this information immediately. Do not wait until the winter or spring to share thepolicy with other coaches. With the change in the Virginia High School League (VHSL) rule,players can practice essentially year-round. With this change, it is incumbent on principals tomake sure that coaches follow safety rules whenever they are working with student-athletes.This should be a conscious effort. Do not assume that all coaches and volunteers know).A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Epilepsy Seizure Management GuidelinesThe 2010 General Assembly also passed legislation to amend § 54.1-3005 directing theBoard of Nursing, with cooperation from the Board of Medicine, to revise guidelines for seizuremanagement, including the list of rescue medications, for students with epilepsy and otherseizure disorders. These guidelines were amended and went into effect on July 1, 2010.(Editor’s Note: While these revised guidelines have been in effect for over a year, the editorhas found numerous situations where teachers and principals were unaware that the guidelineseven existed. According to Department of Education (DOE) staff, the guidelines were sharedwith every school division through communication and meetings with the school division nursecoordinators, who in turn should have shared the information with school nurses. School nursesshould have shared the information with principals and teachers. If principals have not alreadydone so, efforts should be made to ensure that faculty and staff are aware of the guidelinesand are comfortable using established seizure management techniques. Once guidelinesare established, principals and teachers run the risk of being more liable if the guidelines arenot followed. Principals should consider providing a copy of the guidelines to all faculty. Inaddition, with the VHSL change allowing teams to practice year-round, the guidelines should beemphasized with all coaches and volunteers. The guidelines are available online at:http://www.doe.virginia.gov/support/health_medical/seizure_management.pdf).Licensed Nurse PractitionersThe 2011 General Assembly amended § 22.1-271.2 to allow licensed nurse practitioners, inaddition to physicians, registered nurses, or local health department employees, to immunizepublic school students and to provide proof of such immunizations. It also provides that alicensed nurse practitioner may provide written certification that an immunization may bedetrimental to a child’s health for purposes of compliance with health requirements for publicschool students, home-instructed children, and children exempted or excused from schoolattendance. (Editor’s Note: This amendment should not impact school operations, but it isimportant to make sure that appropriate staff are aware of the change).Youth Health Risk SurveyAn amendment to § 22.1-79.3 requires the Department of Health to develop and administera random survey of students in public middle and high schools to facilitate planning andimplementation of effective programs for substance abuse prevention. The survey will providedata to assist in identifying trends in alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use and the assessmentof risk and protective factors among youth. The amendment includes an opt-out provision forparents. The opt-out request must be provided in writing. Local school boards must developpolicies to notify parents of students selected for participation in the survey. (Editor’s Note: Thelegislation should not create major problems, but communication to parents, students, and staffwill be very important if students in your school are randomly selected for the study).Sex Offenders on School PropertyPrevious Virginia law prevented an individual labeled as a violent sex offender from being onschool property during school hours and during school-related and school-sponsored activitiesunless he or she had permission from the local circuit court and permission of the school boardto enter on the property. A 2011 amendment to § 18.2-370.5 expands the prohibition on entryonto school grounds to include any school bus as defined in § 46.2-100 and any property,A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

public or private, during hours when such property is being used solely by a public or privateelementary or secondary school for a school-related or school-sponsored activity. The penaltyis a Class 6 felony. (Editor’s Note: As the General Assembly continues to focus on schoolsafety issues, this amendment eliminates a loophole apparent in previous legislation. It will beof greatest importance to administrators of schools who hold events off school property, i.e.,football games and proms).Video-Monitoring Systems on School BussesAn amendment to § 46.2-844 authorizes localities to adopt ordinances to allow local schooldivisions to install and operate video-monitoring systems on school buses in order to detectdrivers passing stopped school buses. (Editor’s Note: Note that this legislation allows alocal city council or board of supervisors to pass an ordinance allowing a local school boardpermission to do this. Unless the local governing body passes the ordinance, the school boardmay not act. Even if the governing body passes the ordinance, the school board is not requiredto install or operate such devices. As a point of interest, there is no mention of local governmentin the U.S. Constitution; thus, local governments are created and regulated by the states. Thereare two types of states: Home rule states and Dillon rule states. In home rule states, statelegislatures can restrict localities from engaging in certain practices. Unless restricted, localitiesassume they are autonomous. In Dillon rule states, state legislatures grant autonomy, andlocalities assume they do not have autonomy unless specifically granted. Virginia is a Dillonrule state; thus, the General Assembly must grant authority for certain practices. This legislationis a good example of application of the Dillon rule).Reckless Driving and Failure to Stop for a School BusThe General Assembly amended § 46.2-859 to require all drivers to remain stopped for aschool bus until the bus is put in motion. Failure to do so is reckless driving. (Editor’s Note:Principals might consider sharing this change with students and faculty).ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUESSchool Enrollment of Children Placed in Foster CareSection 22.1-289 was amended in 2005 and § 22.1-3.4 was added to effectively treat fosterchild enrollment the same as homeless enrollment (i.e., student must be immediately enrolled,notice required that student is in good standing in the previous school, in good health, and isfree from communicable or contagious disease). An amendment by the 2011 General Assemblyadded the following language to the law: Before placing a child of school age in a foster careplacement, as defined in § 63.2-100, the local social services agency making such placementshall, in writing, determine jointly with the local school division whether it is in the child’s bestinterests to remain enrolled at the school in which he was enrolled prior to the most recent fostercare placement, pursuant to § 22.1-3.4. (Editor’s Note: The patron of the bill’s intent was toallow a child placed in foster care to remain in his or her original school if such determinationwas in the child’s best interest. The amendment appears to place as much responsibility on thelocal social services agency as it does on the school division in making the school placementdecision. It will be important to have a strong working relationship with social services. In allcases, decisions should be made around what is best for the child).A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Electronic SignaturesThe 2011 General Assembly amended § 22.1-79.3 to allow a local school board to adopt andimplement policies regarding the use of electronic records and signatures. The language reads:Local school boards may adopt and implement policies pursuant to which electronic recordsand electronic signatures may be accepted from any parent, guardian, or other person havingcontrol or charge of a child enrolled in the relevant school division, provided such policies areconsistent with the provisions of Chapter 42.1 (§ 59.1-479 et seq.) of Title 59.1. (Editor’sNote: Principals need to know if their local school board intends to develop a policy regardingelectronic signatures. If so, it will be important to communicate the process for doing so to staff,as well as to parents).Diploma SealsAn amendment to § 22.1-253.13:4 simply clarifies that local school boards may award diplomaseals for all Board of Education approved diplomas: modified standard, standard, standardtechnical, advanced studies, and advanced technical. (Editor’s Note: This is a technicalamendment to make sure that the legislative language matches the changes in the types ofdiplomas offered).Violations Related to Secure Mandatory TestingThe General Assembly amended language to three sections of the Code (§ 22.1-19.1, 22.1-253.13:3, and 22.1-192.1) to add the act of excluding students from testing who are requiredto be assessed to the conditions under which the Board of Education may (i) bring a cause ofaction, (ii) suspend or revoke an administrative or teaching license, or (iii) initiate or cause tobe initiated a review or investigation of any alleged break in security, unauthorized alteration,or improper administration of tests. The bill clarifies that any cause of action brought on behalfof the Board of Education may not be brought against a student enrolled in a public school.(Editor’s Note: The General Assembly wanted to make sure that the law was clear thatstudents who are required to be assessed in the testing program are, in fact, assessed. Failureto do so may have significant consequences).School Board Staffing FlexibilityAmendments to § 22.1-253.13:2 provide local school divisions some flexibility in the use offunds related to staff. Algebra readiness funds may be used to hire math specialists. Fundsdesignated for Prevention, Intervention, and Remediation of English Language Learners (ELL)may be used to hire ELL teachers. Early Reading Intervention funds may be used to employreading specialists. Instructional technology resource teacher funds may be used to employa data coordinator position, an instructional technology resource teacher position, or a datacoordinator/instructional resource teacher blended position. In addition, school divisions thatmeet the assistant principal staffing requirements of the law “may assign assistant principalsto schools within the division according to the area of greatest need, regardless of whethersuch schools are elementary, middle, or secondary.” (Editor’s Note: These amendments wererecommendations from the Virginia Board of Education. The amended legislation continuesto mandate staffing requirements for assistant principals division-wide, but it gives local schooldivisions the flexibility to place those assistant principals in schools with the greatest need.This means that an elementary assistant principal could be assigned to a middle or high schoolif there was a greater need at the secondary school. The reverse would also be true: A highA PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

departments to ensure that identified teachers receive the training and certification opportunitiesnecessary for teachers to be ASE certified).JOINT RESOLUTIONSThe House of Delegates and the Senate often pass joint resolutions that give educators an ideaof General Assembly issues of importance. Two joint resolutions of interest were passed in the2011 session. The resolutions deal with year-round schools and anti-bullying policies.Year-Round Schools StudyThe Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) was directed to study the efficacyof year-round schools. Elements of the study were very prescriptive and directed JLARC to(i) review the Board of Education’s procedure for approving year-round schools; (ii) determinewhich school divisions have implemented year-round schools and evaluate their experience withthis alternative method of providing education; (iii) conduct a comprehensive analysis of eachyear-round school, including scheduling format, offerings of instructional and extracurricularprograms, and the enrollment in the year-round school; (iv) consider the minimum numberof required teaching days or hours that should constitute the length of a school term and theissues attendant thereto; (v) identify and review year-round schools offered by other statesand countries, noting advantages and disadvantages; (vi) ascertain and weigh the essentialfactors that must be considered before implementing year-round schools statewide, including,but not limited to, instructional costs, transportation and special education services, and theneed for additional classroom teachers, staff, and support services; (vii) evaluate the impact ofchanging the scheduling format on school functions, length of terms, and school breaks; and(viii) consider and thoroughly vet other issues and matters related to year-round schools asthe Commission may deem necessary to provide feasible and appropriate recommendations.(Editor’s Note: While the joint resolution does not mandate or encourage year-round schools,it does demonstrate interest by some members of the General Assembly to revisit the calendar.Principals are encouraged to monitor the work of the commission).Anti-bullying PoliciesThe General Assembly directed the Department of Education to study the anti-bullyingmeasures being implemented across the Commonwealth. Specifically, the DOE was directedto (i) review and compare anti-bullying measures in the student codes of conduct from eachschool division; (ii) compare existing policies with the Department’s model policy for codes ofstudent conduct; and (iii) determine if improvements to existing policies are warranted, in orderto more effectively combat bullying in Virginia’s public schools. The DOE is to complete itsstudy by November 30, 2011, and is to submit an executive summary and a report of its findingsand recommendations to the Governor and the General Assembly. (Editor’s Note: The issueof bullying continues to concern many educators and legislators. It is also becoming a complexlegal issue, especially with the rapid changes in technology and the ability to make anonymousthreats and statements. A recent article from the Charlottesville Daily Progress,(http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2011/jul/07/uva-study-bullying-top-concern-state-studentsar-1158890/)stated the following: “Bullying remains the top safety concern among Virginia’spublic school students, according to a statewide survey conducted by University of Virginiaresearchers. The Virginia School Safety Survey found that among the 737 elementary, middle,and high schools that gave students anonymous safety surveys, bullying emerged as students’main concern at all grade levels in 2009-10, the most recent data available. The study showedA PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

that nearly 92 percent of those middle schools reported that their students were concerned withbullying, compared to 83 percent of elementary schools, and 77 percent of high schools.”)OTHER SCHOOL LAW AND POLICY CHANGESAccreditation of SchoolsVIRGINIA BOARD OF EDUCATION POLICY ISSUESThe Virginia Board of Education approved changes to the accreditation standards over fouryears ago, but the General Assembly has passed legislation for the past three sessions todelay the implementation of some of the changes. While the 2011 General Assembly passedsimilar legislation to delay implementation of statutes and regulations not in effect on June 30,2008, the legislation clearly notes that a course in economics and financial literacy becomes agraduation requirement beginning July 1, 2011. In addition, changes approved by the Boardof Education relating to increased graduation requirements for the standard and advancedstudies diplomas also took effect July 1, 2011. (Editor’s Note: The high school Graduationand Completion Index was a part of the original accreditation changes made by the StateBoard. Full implementation of the index occurred with the graduating class of 2011. Therewill be a large number of high schools that will be provisionally accredited or accredited withwarning in the fall of 2011 because of their score on the index. High school principals mustmaintain a diligent focus on the index and must work with division staff, elementary schoolprincipals, and middle school principals to develop K-12 initiatives to keep students in schooland keep them on grade level. Principals are encouraged to read a recent study titled “DoubleJeopardy: How Third-Grade Reading Skills and Poverty Influence High School GraduationRate.” The study can be downloaded at the following website: http://www.aecf.org/~/media/Pubs/Topics/Education/Other/DoubleJeopardyHowThirdGradeReadingSkillsandPovery/DoubleJeopardyReport040511FINAL.pdf. In addition, high school principals and staff have tomonitor and follow every student who enters the 9 th grade. Students who drop out need to beidentified and initiatives designed and developed to get these students back in school, back ontrack for graduation, and/or in a G.E.D. program.High school principals also need to communicate the changes in the graduation requirementsfor the freshman class of 2011 to students and to their parents. They also need to ensure thatmiddle school principals and staff understand the changes and that these changes are sharedwith parents of both middle and elementary school students. While the requirement for a coursein economics and financial literacy starts with the 2011 entering freshman class, school divisionshave flexibility in deciding when that course will be offered. With the addition of this course,there are related changes to requirements for the standard and advanced studies diplomas.While the standard diploma still requires 22 credits to graduate, students will take one lesselective in order to add the requirement for economics and financial literacy. Students pursuingan advanced studies diploma will see their graduation requirements jump from 24 credits to 26credits, one of which must be economics and financial literacy. The additional credit will be anelective).Revised State Regulation on Student Fees (8 VAC 20 – 720)The State Board of Education revised and approved changes to the regulations concerningstudent fees (8 VAC 20 – 720) to specify what fees public schools are allowed to chargeA PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

students and their families. The regulation has gone through all review processes and beenapproved by the Attorney General and the Secretary of Education. It awaits the Governor’sreview and signature. It does not become effective until signed by the Governor. Theregulation has been on the Governor’s desk for 219 days [as of the writing of this publication]awaiting his signature. If signed by the Governor, the regulation would require each schooldivision to have a clear fee policy in place, as well as a process to inform low-income familiesof how to get such costs waived or reduced. Among other requirements, school boards thatcharge fees must issue copies of their fee policies and schedules to parents annually andpost the documents on the school divisions’ websites. The rules also prohibit schools fromsuspending or expelling students or withholding their schedules, report cards, or diplomas forfailure to pay fees. The policy and fee schedule would be required to be consistent across theschool division, although there may be different fee schedules for elementary, middle, and highschools. No fees could be charged that have not been approved by the local school board.(Editor’s Note: When the regulation is implemented, principals will need to examine their feesand ensure that all have been approved by the local board and that they are consistent withother like schools in the school division. This will be an important regulation to monitor).Teacher EvaluationThe Virginia Board of Education approved a new model for teacher evaluation on April 28,2011. The changes are included in the revised guidance document, Guidelines for UniformPerformance Standards and Evaluation Criteria for Teachers, located on the DOE website.According to the Board of Education president, “It is designed to give school divisions a meansof evaluating teachers fairly while identifying the supports and professional development neededto improve quality and effectiveness.” The model is research-based and designed to identifyteachers who are exemplary, proficient, need improvement, or unacceptable. The model isa major initiative to focus on teacher quality. The model assesses professional knowledge,instructional planning, instructional delivery, assessment of and for student learning, learningenvironment, and professionalism. In addition, a major change in the model is that 40% of ateacher’s evaluation is to be based on student academic progress. It is up to school divisionsto define how they will measure such progress. The state will provide data for language artsand math teachers who teach SOL-assessed classes in grades 3-8 through the AcademicGrowth Model. Using a mathematical calculation, student progress will be measured from oneyear to the next to determine whether or not a student demonstrated one year of academicgrowth in one year. The new evaluation model becomes effective July 1, 2012. (Editor’sNote: School divisions have the option to use the state model or to develop their own; however,even if they develop their own, school divisions must implement a revised plan that includesevidence of student growth. This change is coupled with a new requirement from the UnitedStates Department of Education to publish aggregate teacher evaluation data for each school.Thus, for each school, data will be posted indicating the number and percentage of teachersin each school who were exemplary, proficient, need improvement, or unacceptable. Theobvious fallout from this will be community members and/or leaders who will link accreditationand AYP status to teacher evaluation data and ask questions like “how can all teachers meetor exceed evaluation standards when the school is not accredited or has not made AYP?” Itcreates the potential for some very challenging conversations. In addition, this change willstimulate further discussions about performance-pay plans. Earlier this summer, Governor BobMcDonnell announced that teachers in 25 schools across the Commonwealth will participatein performance-pay pilot programs during the 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 school years. Theparticipating schools must implement the performance standards and model teacher-evaluationsystem approved by the Board of Education).A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Guidelines for the Prevention of Sexual Misconduct and AbuseThe Virginia Board of Education approved on March 24, 2011 the Guidelines for the Preventionof Sexual Misconduct and Abuse in Virginia Public Schools. The guidelines are designedto help school divisions create and implement policies and procedures that establish clearand reasonable boundaries for interactions among students and teachers, other schoolboard employees, and adult volunteers. The guidelines focus on school board responsibility;prevention; in-person communication and interactions; electronic communication; and reporting,training, and discipline. (Editor’s Note: Principals should be familiar with the state guidelineswhich can be accessed at: http://www.doe.virginia.gov/boe/guidance/safety/prevent_sexual_misconductabuse.pdf. School boards developing policies in this area will use this documentfor guidance. Even in the absence of a specific school board policy, the guidance documentis a valuable reference. It is possible that this document is the first of what is on the horizon.According to the July 19, 2011 issue of the National School Boards’ Association (NSBA) LegalClips, Missouri has enacted legislation relating to teacher’s online contact with students. Thelegislation requires school districts to develop policies by 2012 for communication betweenteachers and students that includes text messages, social networking websites, and otherelectronic devices. Those policies are to restrict teachers from interacting with students onwebsites or in ways that are not also accessible to others, including school administratorsand parents. It is important for principals to emphasize to teachers and staff the importance ofcommunicating professionally with students in all venues).Sheriff Assistance in Truancy MeetingsATTORNEY GENERAL OPINIONSThe Attorney General issued an opinion (Attorney General opinion 10-096) that a sheriff’s officeis permitted to assist a local school division with enforcing compulsory attendance laws byserving notice of an upcoming meeting to the parents or custodians of a truant student, providedthe local school board, division superintendent, or the administration of a particular school hasrequested such assistance from the sheriff. (Editor’s Note: This request for an opinion wasbased on a Hampton initiative to combat truancy. The initiative includes holding meetings withparents/guardians or truant students prior to filing criminal truancy charges or a child-in-needof-supervision(CHINS) petition. The Attorney General’s opinion, however, is very clear that thesheriff’s assistance is legal as long as it is requested by appropriate school division personnel).Fees for Advanced Placement CoursesThe Attorney General issued an opinion (Attorney General opinion 10-121) stating that a localschool board cannot impose a mandatory fee on students taking advanced placement (AP)courses for the required taking of the AP examination. (Editor’s Note: Fairfax County requiredstudents enrolled in advanced placement courses to take the advanced placement examinationas the end-of-course testing. According to the Attorney General’s opinion, Fairfax County wasnot within its rights to charge such fees since students enrolled in AP courses were requiredto take the AP examination as the end-of-course test. The opinion did not directly address theissue of payment of AP fees of students who are not required to take the AP exam in orderto receive credit for the course. Before deciding how to proceed with these students, schooldivision legal counsel should be consulted and school board policy should be addressed).A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Search and SeizureThe Virginia Attorney General issued a ruling (Virginia Attorney General ruling 10-105)concerning student cell phone and computer searches. According to the Attorney General,searches and seizures of students’ cellular phones and laptops are permitted when there isa reasonable suspicion that the student is violating the law or the rules of the school. TheAttorney General is very specific in stating that school officials should not share explicitmaterials depicting minors with other school personnel, but rather the material should bebrought to the attention of the appropriate law enforcement agents. (Editor’s Note: Principalsneed to review school board policy relating to search and seizure. An Attorney General’sopinion does provide guidance, but it is only guidance. The ruling is his interpretation ofhow the courts would rule if faced with the situation. Principals are driven by school boardpolicies. Handling cell phone and computer searches in your school should be driven bypolicy. Principals should check to see if their policies have changed as a result of the AttorneyGeneral’s ruling).Police Questioning of Students in SchoolUNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONInformation about this case is edited from NSBA’s Legal Clips. In a 5-4 split decision, theU.S. Supreme Court has broadened the use of the Miranda warning for suspects, extendingit to students questioned by police in school. The Court ruled in J.B.D. v. North Carolina thatage must be considered in determining whether or not a suspect is in custody for purposes ofadministering a Miranda warning.J.D.B. was a 13-year-old special education student attending school in North Carolina. A policeofficer arranged to have the student pulled from class and interrogated the student for over 30minutes about a rash of burglaries that had occurred in the area. An assistant principal andtwo other school officials were present during the questioning. The student’s legal guardian,his grandmother, was never contacted, and the student was not given a Miranda warning. Thestudent eventually confessed to the thefts.At trial, the student’s attorney successfully had the confession suppressed on the grounds thatgiven J.D.B.’s age and the circumstances of the interrogation, the confession was, in essence,coerced, and that the student should have been advised of his right to an attorney and toremain silent. The state argued that the student was not in custody; and that age should notbe considered in determining whether or not police warn suspects of their rights. The U.S.Supreme Court ruled that the age of a child subjected to police questioning is relevant to thecustody analysis.The majority noted that it was common sense that “children will often feel bound to submit topolice questioning when an adult in the same circumstances” would not. The court further notedthat a student required by law to attend school, and who is subject to disciplinary action, mightwell believe that he or she must answer all police questions. The majority of the court ruled thatpolice and judges must consider age in determining whether or not a child should have beenadvised of his or her legal rights. (Editor’s Note: The court decision did not address whether ornot simply giving a Miranda warning to a student was sufficient. Thus, the decision leaves openthe question of whether or not police must ensure that students who are questioned understandtheir rights. While this decision does not affect administrative questioning of students connectedto school disciplinary matters, it does raise an issue of which principals should be aware.A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

at a school-sponsored event and that caused no substantial disruptionat school…. An opposite holding would significantly broaden schooldistricts’ authority over student speech and would vest school officials withdangerously overbroad censorship discretion.Court Upholds Discipline of Student over Internet BullyingThe most recent case is one from the 4 th Circuit Court of Appeals, which includes Virginia, wherethe court upheld the school discipline of a student who allegedly bullied a classmate with anInternet page describing her as a “slut” with herpes. Information about the case noted below isedited from the Education Law Association’s School Law Blog.“Such harassment and bullying is inappropriate and hurtful and ... it must be taken seriously byschool administrators in order to preserve an appropriate pedagogical environment,” said theunanimous opinion by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, inRichmond, VA.The 4th Circuit case involves a student who was disciplined for creating a MySpace pagetargeting another student at Musselman High School in Berkeley County, WV. According tocourt papers, in 2005 the student created a page called “Students Against Sluts Herpes” andinvited other MySpace participants from her school to join it. About two dozen Musselman Highstudents joined the group, including one who accepted his invitation on a school computer. Thatmale posted photos of the female student who was the target of ridicule by the group.The parents of the targeted girl complained to school officials, who disciplined the creator of thewebsite. School officials concluded that the student had created a “hate” website in violation ofschool policies against harassment, bullying, and intimidation. She was suspended from schoolfor five days and given a “social suspension” of 90 days, meaning she was barred from certainschool activities, including the cheerleading squad.The student sued the Berkeley County school district and various officials, alleging that she waspunished for speech that was created outside of school in violation of the First Amendment.A federal district court granted summary judgment to the defendants. In its July 27 opinionin Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools, the 4th Circuit court also upheld the right of schooladministrators to punish such harassing behavior.“Kowalski used the Internet to orchestrate a targeted attack on a classmate, and did so in amanner that was sufficiently connected to the school environment as to implicate the schooldistrict’s recognized authority to discipline speech which materially and substantially interfereswith the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school and collides withthe rights of others,” the court said, citing language from Tinker v. Des Moines IndependentCommunity School District, the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision on student speech rightsin school.While Kowalski created the MySpace group at home, she knew that the group would includefellow Musselman High students and that the discussion targeting a female student would resultin fallout at school, the court said. “Given the targeted, defamatory nature of Kowalski’s speech,aimed at a fellow classmate, it created actual or nascent substantial disorder and disruption inthe school,” the court said.A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

The court called the “S.A.S.H.” web page “particularly mean-spirited and hateful” and expresseddisapproval that Kowalski sued school officials rather than “respond constructively to theschool’s efforts to bring order and provide a lesson after the incident.”“School administrators are becoming increasingly alarmed by the phenomenon” of harassmentand bullying, the court said. “Where such speech has a sufficient nexus with the school, theConstitution is not written to hinder school administrators’ good faith efforts to address theproblem.” (Editor’s Note: In making their decisions, the federal courts still rely on the fourmajor United States Supreme Court student freedom of speech cases: Tinker v. Des Moines,393 U.S. 503 (1969), Bethel v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986), Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S.260 (1988), and Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007). Lower courts have generally ruled infavor of the student in these cyberbullying cases unless school officials can show a significantdisruption on school operations. The most recent case in the 4 th Circuit, Kowalski v. BerkeleyCounty, No. 10-1098 (4 th Cir. July 27, 2011), is very important for all Virginia principals. It is,however, always best before disciplining students for off-campus speech to talk to the divisionsuperintendent and to seek competent legal counsel).Dear Colleague LetterOFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS GUIDANCE DOCUMENTU.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan sent a “Dear Colleague” letter this summer to schooldistricts nationwide warning school officials against taking steps to ban students from forminggay-straight alliances and similar support groups in their schools. The letter states: “Officialsneed not endorse any particular student organization, but federal law requires that they affordall student groups the same opportunities to form, to convene on school grounds, and tohave access to the same resources available to other student groups.” The letter is basedon the Equal Access Act and references the verbal and physical abuse these students oftenexperience. (Editor’s Note: Federal courts have consistently found in favor of these studentgroups when schools have denied them the opportunity to form. Should a request be submittedin a school, principals should talk with the superintendent before making a decision).About the EditorRoger E. Jones (rjones@vassp.org) has been the Director of the Virginia Association ofSecondary School Principals Center for Educational Leadership at Lynchburg College since2003. Dr. Jones is a former VASSP president and has served as an assistant superintendentand principal at the middle and high school levels. He has been VASSP’s legal editor since1988.For More InformationFor more information about the impact of laws passed by the Virginia General Assembly,policies and regulations passed by the Virginia Board of Education, and laws passed byCongress, log-on to VASSP’s website at www.vaprincipals.org. Postings are made regularly onthe website by VASSP Director of Government Relations Elizabeth “Bet” Neale(bneale@vassp.org). Ms. Neale and VASSP Executive Director Dr. Randy Barrack(rbarrack@vassp.org) are General Assembly lobbyists.A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

For case law affecting the principal’s role in public school education read VASSP’s bimonthlypublication, Developments in School Law, written by T. Page Johnson (tpjohnson@vassp.org).Developments in School Law is now in its twenty-sixth year of continuous publication.Mr. Johnson, a former VASSP director of government relations, is a consultant on school lawand policy and serves as an adjunct professor of school law at the University of Virginia.Mr. Johnson, Dr. Jones, and Dr. Barrack are authors of The Legal Handbook for Virginia SchoolAdministrators, 3rd edition, Omni Publishers, Inc. Bulverde, Texas.2011-2012 Board of DirectorsPresident: Mrs. Carolyn F. Bernard, PrincipalGrassfield HS, 2007 Grizzly Trail, Chesapeake 23323Executive Director/CEO: Dr. Randy D. BarrackVASSP, 4909 Cutshaw Avenue, Richmond 23230President Elect: Dr. Keith Perrigan, PrincipalPatrick Henry HS, 31437 Hillman Highway, Glade Spring 24340Immediate Past President: Dr. Richard A. Turner, PrincipalWilliam Byrd HS, 2902 Washington Avenue, Roanoke 24179State Coordinator: Mrs. Janice Koslowski, PrincipalPotomac Falls HS, 46400 Algonkian Parkway, Sterling 20165DOE Representative: Dr. Patricia I. Wright, State SuperintendentVA Dept. of Education, P.O. Box 2120, Richmond 23218-2120Mr. David S. Ellena, PrincipalTomahawk Creek MS, 1600 Learning Pl. Loop, Midlothian 23114Dr. Brian K. Matney, PrincipalLandstown HS, 2001 Concert Drive., Virginia Beach 23456Ms. Michelle Morgan, PrincipalStaunton River HS, 1095 Golden Eagle Drive, Moneta 24121Mr. Scott Habeeb, Assistant PrincipalSalem HS, 400 Spartan Drive, Salem 24153-3296Ms. Shirley Booker, PrincipalAmelia County MS, 8740 Otterburn Road, Amelia 23002-4884Dr. John A. Word, Sr., PrincipalKenmore MS, 200 S. Carlin Springs Road, Arlington 22204A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS/NASSPUNIFIED MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORMNameSchoolNamePositionSchoolDivisionSchool Address City Zip CodeSchool Phone ( ) School Fax ( ) e-mail:Yes, I am an administrator at a middle level, high, or vocational school and I want to join VASSP/NASSP.MEMBERSHIP CATEGORY: Please check ( ) one: VASSP/NASSP Unified Individual MembershipThis membership is paid by the individual member. VASSP/NASSP Institutional MembershipAn institutional membership is paid for and owned by the school, but in the name ofan an individual. Only that individual may receive member benefits. For furtherexplanation, contact the VASSP membership coordinator.DUES AMOUNT$520$520METHOD OF PAYMENT: Please check ( ) one:Full Payment: I am paying the entire amount now. Please find enclosed a check for $ .Installment Plan: I will pay in four (4) equal monthly installments of $130. Enclose first paymentwith this form. Sorry, VASSP cannot bill.Payroll Deduction: I have informed my school board payroll department to begin deduction of mymembership dues of $520.Automatic Bank Draft: I will pay in twelve (12) equal monthly installments. Please contact theVASSP Membership Coordinator to receive the necessary enrollment forms to initiate automatic monthlypayments from my bank account. (A popular hassle-free option!)Credit Card: I am charging my membership dues to: check ( ) one Visa ____ MasterCard ____Name and Address of CardholderAccount No.SignatureExpiration DateFor questions about joining VASSP/NASSP, please call the Richmond office at 1-800-249-8001. Request to speak with themembership coordinator. Dues are effective for one year from date of membership enrollment or anniversary due date. Regardlessof which enrollment plan above you use, please return this enrollment form to: VASSP, 4909 Cutshaw Avenue, Richmond, VA 23230.A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals’Annual Report of 2011 General Assembly Update: Changes in School Law2011-2012 VASSP Government Relations CouncilCarolyn F. Bernard, PresidentRandy Barrack, Executive DirectorElizabeth “Bet” Neale, Director of Governmental RelationsJanice Koslowski, State CoordinatorLawrence W. Lenz, Education Policy Analyst & Director of Web CommunicationsMISSION STATEMENTThe mission of the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. is tosupport school principals and assistant principals in providing leadership to their schoolsand communities for the purpose of improving the education of Virginia’s youth.VISION STATEMENTThe vision of the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. is to be theCommonwealth’s foremost authority on school leadership for Virginia’s youth.A PUBLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS, INC.Copyright © 2011 by the Virginia Association of Secondary School Principals, Inc. All rights reserved.