1 / 57

The Higher Education Student Classroom R ights P oster C ampaign (pt2) Each sticker is 10” x 7.5” (on PPT)

The Higher Education Student Classroom R ights P oster C ampaign (pt2) Each sticker is 10” x 7.5” (on PPT) Print on sticker paper 2 to a sheet fit easily You can use power point to fit 4-6 to a sheet Buy sticker paper in bulk Print and cut at copy center Handout at events

sutton
Download Presentation

The Higher Education Student Classroom R ights P oster C ampaign (pt2) Each sticker is 10” x 7.5” (on PPT)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Higher Education Student Classroom Rights Poster Campaign (pt2) • Each sticker is 10” x 7.5” (on PPT) • Print on sticker paper 2 to a sheet fit easily • You can use power point to fit 4-6 to a sheet • Buy sticker paper in bulk • Print and cut at copy center • Handout at events • Make a wall display of all the stickers • Make small handbills on normal paper to hand out • Post on anything you like • Put your organizational contact info on reverse

  2. Students Classroom RightsKnow what American courts say! • Right to protection from race, color, sex, religion, national origin, or age based discrimination • Unfortunately gender, sexual orientation and gender identity are not protected (yet!) • Right to disability accommodation in classroom and testing facilities • Right to uniformity across class sections (except to correct for unequal treatment in extreme instances) • Right to protection from policies which segregate • Right to protection from arbitrary and capricious or random decision-making (meaning policies must be in writing before students are held accountable) • Students retain all constitutional rights! • Right to a contractual syllabus -- all university documents and verbal promises are contractual • Right to advertized course content covered in sufficient depth • Right to advertized level of course instruction –no higher no lower! • Right to be informed of course objectives (reasonable objectives) • Right to grading in accordance with the syllabus – no other requirements! • Right to fair grading policies. The syllabus must be fair! • Right to effective teaching • Right to protection from misuse of time. Must be related to the syllabus! • Right to protection from written and verbal abuse • Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Kaplan & Lee 2009; Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992; Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College, 2001; Bach, 2003; Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ., 1984, 1986; Poskanzer, 2002; Bishop v. University of Alabama, 1991; Edwards v. California Univ. of Pa., 1998; Mawdsley, 2004; Andre v. Pace University, 1994, 1996; Clark v. Holmes, 1972, 1973; Scalletv. Rosenblum, 1996; Keen v. Penson, 1992; Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982; Axson-Flynn v. Johnson, 2004 ; Bonnellv. Lorenzo, 2001 ; ADA , 1973; Hendrickson, 1986; Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 1979 ; Faulkner v. Jones 1995; University of Texas v. Camenisch, 1981; United States v. Fordice, 1992 .

  3. Students retain their first amendment rights in institutions of higher education (ASHE & Henderickson, 1986).Papishv. Board of Curators of the Univ. of Missouri (1973) and Joyner v. Whiting (1973) found students may engage in speech that does not interfere with the rights of others or of the operation of the school (ASHE & Henderickson). Because schools are places of education they may regulate speech by time, manner and place as long as they provide free speech zones for students (Henderickson; Perry Ed. Assoc. v. Perry Local Ed. Assoc., 1983). These cannot be used to limit expression (Henderickson; Baylessv. Maritime, 1970). If there are no free speech zones indicated or policies stated student's may understand that the whole school is a free speech zone. “You are free to express yourself” said the prof. as he belittled your argument with his gaze …he doesn't even have to say anything, but he has commented on it, oh he has commented on it!!

  4. I neeevergive 100%, there is aaalwaysroom for improvement! Students have the right to be graded fairly and in accordance with criteria set forth by the course syllabus (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Teachers have the right, under the first amendment, to communicate their opinions regarding student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions are required to meet students implied contract rights to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989). Students also have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making. Decision making should not be arbitrary or capricious / random and, thus, interfere with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences /Chicago Med. School, 1988; Healy v. Larsson, 1974; Bowden, 2007).

  5. And what kind of degree do youuu have?? .... I did my dissertation on the mating habits of bears, a little respect pleeasee! Is academic alienation abuse? Students have the right to protection from written or verbal abuse. Teachers have the right to regulated expression (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes, 1972) but may not use their first amendment privileges punitively or discriminatorily (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Axson-Flynn v. Johnson, 2004) or in a way which prevents students from learning by ridiculing, proselytizing, harassment or use of unfair grading practices (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Bonnellv. Lorenzo, 2001).

  6. …and that’s why Hillary Clinton visited the proctologist…ah, no, no none of them will be on the test, and ah, no you can’t leave early Students may expect protection from the misuse of time (Bach, Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ.); teachers may not waste student’s time or use the class as a captive audience for views or lessons not related to the course (Ibid; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ. found that instructors may not “wast[e] the time of the students who have come there and paid money for a different purpose.” Students are in general protected from deviation from information advertized in class syllabi (Keen v. Penson; Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992). Syllabi may be considered binding implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer.

  7. Ah, let me see if I understand you correctly, you want me to give you credit on the test because we didn’t cover half of the questions in class? Students are protected from deviation from the class syllabus (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. Uni. of Kentucky, Wilson & Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) found institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer. These may be considered implied-in-fact contracts. Teachers, under the first amendment can communicate their opinions on student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions must meet students implied contract right to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989). Students also have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making because it interferes with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences /Chicago Med. School, 1988).

  8. I’m sorry the whole group gets the same grade! In the real world there are no such things as bonuses for those who work harder, and fu*kno your group members won’t be fired. Get used to it now before someone fires you in the real world for being a SHIT DISTURBER! Teachers, under the first amendment can communicate their opinions on student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions must meet students implied contract right to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989). Students also have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making because it interferes with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences /Chicago Med. School, 1988). Where students are assigned grades which do not reflect their effort or understanding departments may become involved in the grading process.

  9. Intervention!I know you didn’t want to meet with me but…well…ah, I’ve noticed you don’t attend on campus events. I’m worried you’re not living up to your potential. Healey v. James (1972) found students have the right to self determination. “Students—who, by reason of the 26th Amendment, become eligible to vote when 18 years of age—are adults who are members of the college or university community. Their interests and concerns are often quite different from those of the faculty. They often have values, views, and ideologies that are at war with the ones which the college has traditionally espoused or indoctrinated (Healey v. James). Bradshaw v. Rawlings (1979), which found that “adult students now demand and receive expanded rights of privacy in their college life” (Thomas, 1991).

  10. Students have the right to be graded fairly and in accordance with criteria set forth by the course syllabuses and may be protected from the addition of new grading criteria (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Teachers, under first amendment can communicate their opinions regarding student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions must meet students implied contract rights to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989). Students also have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making because it interferes with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences /Chicago Med. School, 1988). Ok, essays! I’m chill, just let me know that youknow your stuff C+ formatting MLA not APA

  11. I will‘F’you up! Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act). Don’t even bother, I am the chair of the department, teach half the major requirement classes, serve in the academic senate, sit on the disciplinary board, behavioral intervention team, scholarship review board and on the boards of three resource centers.

  12. Students have the right to be graded fairly and in accordance with criteria set forth by the course syllabuses (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Keen v. Penson, 1992). This should include the material set forth in the syllabus which should be taught in accordance with the teaching schedule set forth. Under first amendment, teachers can communicate their opinions regarding student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions must meet students implied contract rights to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989). Students also have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious decision making because it interferes with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences /Chicago Med. School, 1988). So… we aren’t going to get to chapters 9-15 before the exam? Ah, nooo but they are on the test so keep up with the reading schedule

  13. Students have the right to the advertized level of course instruction. They may expect teaching in conformity with the course level advertized (Mawdsley, 2004; Andre v. Pace University, 1994, 1996). Andre v. Pace University awarded damages on the grounds of negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract (Bach, 2003). Syllabi may be considered binding implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer. Lets start at the beginning… Uh… this is a 4000level psychology class!!

  14. I get $3000 a semester per class, I don’t give arats asshow you do on the exam! Professors in the US make on average $109, 000 a year and are paid to take a one year leave every 3-7 years. At some schools only one sixth of professors are teaching at any given time. Additional part time grad student instructors are hired on as professor substitutes to fill in when professors are on leave or engaged in research. Right now 70% of those teaching classes are instructors and not professors (1975 43%). They are not required to have training in curriculum development, teaching or grading and are paid on average only $3000 a course. The average student has no idea this takes place. - Stats by Hacker, Dreifus, 2011 Endorsed by J. Steiglitz, Chief Economist World Bank and Nobel Laurate.

  15. This is my ‘I amshocked and appalled by your opinion’ face. It lets you know that although I can’t endorse one set of morals over another that I am disgusted with you… so you will shut the hell up and keep your thoughts to yourself Students retain their first amendment free speech and association rights in institutions of higher education (ASHE & Henderickson, 1986). Papishv. Board of Curators of the Univ. of Missouri (1973) and Joyner v. Whiting (1973) find students may engage in speech that do not interfere with the rights of others or of the operation of the school (ASHE & Henderickson). Because schools are places of education they may regulate speech by time, manner and place as long as they provide free speech zones for students (Henderickson; Perry Ed. Assoc. v. Perry Local Ed. Assoc., 1983) as long as they are not used to limit expression (Henderickson; Baylessv. Maritime, 1970).

  16. Oh, ah, we have decided not to cut tuition but don’t get blue we have something even better. Everybody get excited!!! We are going to have a FREE campus event, with FREE food, and FREE music that is going to make you feel included, reduce mental stress and enable you to learn. • PS: Don’t worry you have already paid for your admission with your student fees. Students have the right to information on use of student fees. Van Stryv. State (1984) found institutions my not use student fees to support organizations outside the university (Henderickson). Teachers, likewise, have the right to refuse to pay union fees when they are allocated to objectionable political purposes (Henderickson; Aboodev. Detroit Board of Education, 1977). This implies that students have a right to know what activities they are being allocated towards.

  17. Students have the right to effective teaching even if it requires departmental involvement in teaching and curriculum development (Poskanzer; Rigginv. Bd. Of Trustees of Ball St. Univ., 1986). Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in class syllabi (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992) and syllabi may be considered binding implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer.Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). I am going tofailthe exam! We didn’t cover half the chapters on the test, his instructions in class and in the assignment descriptions are disjointed and vague, he keeps changing the order of the syllabus, he isn’t there during office hours and I can’t afford constant tutoring. What other option do I have?

  18. Students have the right to personal autonomy so long as it does not contradict the syllabus. Healeyv. James (1972) found students have the right to self determination. “Students—who, by reason of the 26th Amendment, become eligible to vote when 18 years of age—are adults who are members of the college or university community. Their interests and concerns are often quite different from those of the faculty. They often have values, views, and ideologies that are at war with the ones which the college has traditionally espoused or indoctrinated (Healey v. James). Bradshaw v. Rawlings (1979), which found that “Adult students now demand and receive expanded rights of privacy in their college life” (Thomas, 1991). So, can we work alone or do we have to be in groups? We don’t live near each other and some people have different quality standards… Hypocritical academic has never been in the real world Fire! Bonus! I’ve worked in the real world! Stick To the course objectives! You just don’t want to grade them • I am just preparing you for the real world, you have to learn to • work as a team

  19. Students may expect protection from the misuse of time (Bach, Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ.); teachers may not waste student’s time or use the class as a captive audience for views or lessons not related to the course (Bach, Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ.; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees found instructors may not “wast[e] the time of the students who have come there and paid money for a different purpose.” Students also have the right to personal autonomy. Healey v. James (1972) found students have the right to self determination. “Students—who, by reason of the 26th Amendment, become eligible to vote when 18 years of age—are adults who are members of the college or university community. Their interests and concerns are often quite different from those of the faculty. They often have values, views, and ideologies that are at war with the ones which the college has traditionally espoused or indoctrinated (Healey v. James). Bradshaw v. Rawlings (1979) found that “adult students now demand and receive expanded rights of privacy in their college life” (Thomas, 1991). Class, I have a special treat today! No, you can’t go home early!

  20. Students have the right to limited fiduciary care. That is, institutional care in the student’s best interest. Johnson v. Schmitz (2000), found in a federal district court, that a student’s PhD committee, established for the purpose of advising the student, had an obligation to advise the student in his best interest (Kaplan & Lee, 2011). This is a limited fiduciary right and this principle should apply to teachers and advisors as well. What do you mean you don’t feel like I have your back? I am your TEACHER. What agenda could I possibly have? (except making my job as easy as possible by supporting the status quo rather than supporting the interest of the students)

  21. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Actions must be within departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not, however, have academic freedom under the first amendment (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin Uni). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Students also have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) found that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, they may sue for damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file discrimination complaints with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act). Students also have the right to protection from foreseeable crime on campus especially when known crimes of a variety have been committed in the past (White, 2007; Miller v. State, 1984). “Following his violent revolution, Gandhi was devoured by his followers”…Of course I’m certain…write this downit’s on the test!

  22. Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in the following documents: registration materials, manuals (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Mangalav. Brown University), course catalogues (Rafferty; Ross v. Creighton University; Andre v. Pace University, 1996), bulletins, circulars, regulations (Rafferty; Ross v. Creighton University), class syllabi (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992), student codes (Kaplan & Lee; Harwood v. Johns Hopkins, 2000), and handbooks (Kaplan & Lee; Fellheimerv. Middleburry College, 1994) . These documents may be considered binding implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001), has ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer. “Even though the college had reserved the right to change the student handbook unilaterally and without notice, this reservation of rights did not defeat the contractual nature of the student handbook.” I don’t care what it says in the handbook sweetie I wrote the handbook and I will rewrite the handbook

  23. There are Dumbledore’s and there are Umbridges The laws are there to protect students from the Umbridges not the Dumbledores

  24. Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act). Students also have the right to protection from foreseeable crime on campus especially when known crimes of a variety have been committed in the past (White, 2007; Miller v. State, 1984). This should include white collar. There are Dumbledore’s and there are Umbridges The laws are there to protect students from the Umbridges not the Dumbledores

  25. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Actions must act within departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Departments have the obligation to ensure teachers respect and facilitate student's right to learn. There are Dumbledore’s and there are Umbridges The laws are there to protect students from the Umbridges not the Dumbledores

  26. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Actions must be within departmental requirements whichensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have academic freedom under the first amendment – this is not a legal right (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Does this mean that teachers are responsible for citing their sources when they lecture or is this excused under the guise of Academic Freedom? I don’t know howI know, I just do

  27. What happens when teachers do not speak the language of the majority or can not speak it clearly enough for students to learn from it? Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Actions must meet departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Departments have the obligation to ensure teachers respect and facilitate student's right to learn. I am your new professor From the diversity enhancement exchange program

  28. I give as many sh*tstoday as I gave on the day I began teaching! Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (Kaplan & Lee; Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrim Act).

  29. Students have the right to personal autonomy. Healey v. James (1972) found students have the right to self determination. Does this mean they have any say in the services they purchase? “Students—who, by reason of the 26th Amendment, become eligible to vote when 18 years of age—are adults who are members of the college or university community. Their interests and concerns are often quite different from those of the faculty. They often have values, views, and ideologies that are at war with the ones which the college has traditionally espoused or indoctrinated (Healey v. James). The 2008 Higher Education Opportunity Act also requires the disclosure of athletics information including male and female undergraduate enrollment, number of teams and team statistics including the number of players, team operating expenses, recruitment, coach salaries, aid to teams and athletes and team revenue (HEOA, 2008). This information is required to ensure equality standards are met but can help potential students understand what they are expected to pay for. College athletics: You may not be good enough to make the team but you can sure as hell pay for it!

  30. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Actions must act within departmental requirements whichensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Students also have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act). I’m sorry, did you say teachyou something? You know I’m tenured, right?

  31. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Have you heard of Academic Freedom? The academic senate at this university interprets the first amendment to mean that I, as your professor, am free to express my self through my curriculum, my teaching methods and my grading style regardless if it is effective or fair to students. So, to answer your question, yes you MUST adhere to the syllabus changes.

  32. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. I take great offence to that! I have arranged six babysitters… ah, er… guest lecturers this term! I earn my pay!!

  33. Students have the right to information regarding the use of student fees. Van Stryv. State (1984) found institutions my not use student fees to support organizations outside the university (Henderickson). Teachers, likewise, have the right to refuse to pay union fees when they are allocated to objectionable political purposes (Henderickson; Aboodev. Detroit Board of Education, 1977). This implies that students have a right to know what activities they are being allocated towards. Students also have the right to protection from foreseeable crime on campus especially when known crimes of a variety have been committed in the past (White, 2007; Miller v. State, 1984). This should include protection from white collar crime especially if it adds to tuition inflation. The physics conference this year was a let down We really need to form a committee to select a new catering company

  34. Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act). You need to learn to be accepting of different cultural methodologies

  35. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within the departmental requirements, sure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. You’re going to need to repeat this perfectlyon the exam

  36. I, ah, only give an A grade to students who exceed the course objectives and go beyoooond what I have asked for in the assignment descriptions. All you have to do to get an A is start in on the content for the next grade level. We’re preparing you for the real world where 100% of your job description is just not enough! Students have the right to fair grading in accordance with the course syllabus. Students may be graded fairly and in accordance with criteria set forth by the course syllabuses and may be protected from the addition of new grading criteria (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Institutions have the responsibility of preserving quality in grade representations and comparability between classes and prevent grade inflation (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Teachers have the right, under the first amendment, to communicate their opinions regarding student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions are required to meet students implied contract rights to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor, 1989).

  37. Students have contract rights. Carr v. St. Johns University (1962) and Healey v. Larsson (1971, 1974) established that students and institutions of higher education formed a contractual relationship. Institutions must ensure contracts, including those implied and verbal, are fair (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995), in good faith (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Beukasv. Fairleigh, 1991, 1992) and not unconscionable (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Albert Merrill School v. Godoy, 1974). Students also have a right to fulfillment of verbal promises. Verbal contracts are binding (Rafferty 1993; Ross v. Creighton University, 1992). The North Carolina Court of Appeals in Long v. University of North Carolina at Wilmington (1995), found, however, that verbal agreements must be made in an official capacity in order to be binding (Bowden, 2007). Dezickv. Umpqua Community College (1979) found a student was compensated because classes offered orally by the dean were not provided. Healy v. Larsson (1974) found that a student who completed degree requirements prescribed by an academic advisor was entitled to a degree on the basis that this was an implied contract. An advisor should, thus, be considered an official source of information. Oh, you’re working in the Women’s Resource Center part time and your boss has you do forty hours of work in a twenty hour work week. I ah, wish I had a pamphlet here… but the college doesn’t really issue any information resources like that!

  38. Educators have no more Academic Freedom than any student. By virtue of the fist amendment, we are all at liberty to speak our mind and share our views freely. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within departmental requirements whichensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. No professor has the right to completesovereignty in the classroom, to teach and grade in any way they see fit without ensuring that curriculum, assignments and grading are accurate, fair and in accordance with course objectives.

  39. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. Teachers must act within departmental requirements whichensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. Do not justify your treatment of students by saying you are preparing them for the real world, the real word is a sum of the individuals within it. We do not want our children growing up in a world where it is acceptable to perpetuate the abuses we ourselves would not like to endure.

  40. Teachers do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school – they are not legal. While a teacher may have the right within the university under the principle of Academic Freedom to grade students down for late assignments is this always ethical? Does a grade include punctuality? What are we grading punctuality or content knowledge? Maybe they can refuse to grade something at all if there is no excuse for tardiness but can they say the quality was poorer than it was in reality? As professors, we are in the unique position to help students struggling to balance school and life. Why would we fail them for a late assignment if they understand the content. It is not my right to assign a grade which does not accurately reflect a student’s knowledge.

  41. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within departmental requirements to ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school. As teachers we can be examples of best practices. We can show students how to be clear and concise, how to make good use of time and resources and be a productive, insightful individual. It is unfortunate that there are so few teachers and professors who choose to do so.

  42. Professors nowadays feel it is acceptable to be hypocrites, to grade students down for their lack of organization while providing a discombobulated syllabus and poor assignment instructions, failing to follow their own syllabus and materials and grading on a curve to make up for shoddy methodology and test construction. Students have the right to learn (Kapan, 2011; Rosenberger v. Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia, 1995; Poskanzer, 2002; Sweezyv. New Hampshire, 1957; Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Teachers do not have free reign in the classroom. They must act within departmental requirements which ensure students right to learn and must be considered effective (Poskanzer, 2002; Clark v. Holmes 1972). Sweezyv. New Hampshire (1957) found that teachers have the right to lecture. They do not have complete academic freedom under the law (Hillisv. Stephen F. Austin University, 1982). Any academic freedom rules are put in place by the school.

  43. Students retain their first amendment free speech and association rights in institutions of higher education (ASHE & Henderickson, 1986). Papishv. Board of Curators of the Univ. of Missouri (1973) and Joyner v. Whiting (1973) find students may engage in speech that do not interfere with the rights of others or of the operation of the school (ASHE & Henderickson). Because schools are places of education they may regulate speech by time, manner and place as long as they provide free speech zones for students (Henderickson; Perry Ed. Assoc. v. Perry Local Ed. Assoc., 1983) as long as they are not used to limit expression (Henderickson; Baylessv. Maritime, 1970). The question is if, students are regulated should teachers be regulated as well to even out the balance of power? I have the Academic Freedom to teach from a Marxist perspective… You, unfortunately, “do not” have the Academic Freedom to complete your assignments from a Christian perspective … something to do with you needing proof… but, I have a Phd. so well…

  44. Take your punishment like a grownup and don’t challenge me! I will point at you and raise my eyebrows authoritatively! Students have the right to due process in disciplinary action. Matthews v. Elderidge (1976) found when there is the possibility that one’s interests will be deprived through procedural error, the value of additional safe guards and governmental interests, including monetary expenses, should be weighed (Bach, 2003). Due process is required when actions have the potential to result in a property or monetary loss or loss of income or future income etc. This includes degree revocation (Bach, 2003; Crook v. Baker) or dismissal. Students have a property interest in remaining at the institution and have protection form undue removal (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Mangalav. Brown University, 1998). Students also have a liberty right to protect themselves from defamation of character or a threat to their reputation. Federal district courts have, therefore, found that due process is required in cases involving charges of plagiarism, cheating (Henderickson, 1986; Tully v. Orr, 1985) and falsification of research data (Bach, 2003; Crook v. Baker).

  45. You want to report that do you? I will fu*kyou up! Students have the right to a grievance filing process. Dixon v. Alabama (1961) determined that when student’s constitutional rights are not upheld, students are eligible to sue for damages in a court of law for monetary or material damages (Section 504 Rehabilitation Act, 1973; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Salvador v. Bennett, 1986; Church of the LukumiBabalu Aye v. City of Hileah, 1993; Cooper v. Nix, 1974). Individuals may also file complaints regarding discrimination with the federal Office of Civil Rights (OCR) (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Civil Rights Office Tanbergv. Weld County Sheriff, 1992; 1975 Age Discrimination Act).

  46. I have the syllabus right here! None of that crap is in it! Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in class syllabi (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Syllabi may be considered binding implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer.

  47. Students may expect protection from the misuse of time (Bach, Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ.); teachers may not waste student’s time or use the class as a captive audience for views or lessons not related to the course (Bach, Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ.; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Rigginv. Bd. of Trustees of Ball St. Univ. found that instructors may not “wast[e] the time of the students who have come there and paid money for a different purpose.” Seriously, we get English credit for analyzing book characters in accordance with Freudian theory?

  48. You werrre given advanced notice! I emailed you last night at 11:30, did you not check your email as is required by the student teacher contract? Students are protected from deviation from information advertized in class syllabi (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Hill v. University of Kentucky, Wilson, and Schwartz, 1992; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Syllabi may be considered implied-in-fact contracts. Goodman v. President and Trustees of Bowdoin College (2001) ruled that institutional documents are still contractual regardless if they have a disclaimer.

  49. Students have the right to protection from arbitrary or capricious / random decision making because it interferes with fairness (Bach, 2003; Anderson v. Mass. Inst of Tech, 1995; Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Sharickv. Southeastern University of the Health Sciences, 2000; Brody v. Finch University of Health Sciences Chicago Med. School, 1988; Healy v. Larsson, 1974; Bowden, 2007). Students also have the right to be graded fairly and in accordance with criteria set forth by the course syllabuses and may be protected from the addition of new grading criteria (Parkes and Harris, 2002; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Institutions have the responsibility of preserving quality of grade representations, comparability between classes and grade inflation (Kaplan & Lee, 2011; Keen v. Penson, 1992). Teachers have the right, under the first amendment, to communicate their opinions regarding student grades (Paratev. Isibor, 1989; Poskanzer, 2002), but institutions are required to meet students implied contract rights to fair grading practices. Departments may change grades issued by teachers which are not in line with grading policies or are unfair or unreasonable (Hills v. Stephen F. Austin State Univ., 1982; Paratev. Isibor). On occasion I will award an A grade. But this is a grade reserved for truly exceptional students. Don’t expect to a get an A simply by meeting the course objectives.

  50. So, you think you’re a dance major so you don’t need this computer course? Students have the right to personal autonomy. Healey v. James (1972) found students have the right to self determination. “Students—who, by reason of the 26th Amendment, become eligible to vote when 18 years of age—are adults who are members of the college or university community. Their interests and concerns are often quite different from those of the faculty. They often have values, views, and ideologies that are at war with the ones which the college has traditionally espoused or indoctrinated (Healey v. James). Bradshaw v. Rawlings (1979), found that “adult students now demand and receive expanded rights of privacy in their college life” (Thomas, 1991).

More Related