John Dryden, is a social studies teacher at Batavia High School in Illinois. It may have been his social science background or his concern for basic rights of students, but Dryden felt that he should mention that students have constitutional rights not to incriminate themselves in a school-mandated survey. The survey, after all, was asking the student if they had used drugs, tobacco, and alcohol. In response, the school disciplined Dryden and docked his pay.
Dryden told his student about the Fifth Amendment rights but did not discourage them from filing out the survey. Batavia School Superintendent Jack Barshinger (right) would have none of it. While he said students have rights, “[t]he Fifth Amendment – you don’t typically hear about in a school setting. That’s because the law has already been set that don’t allow students to self incriminate.” I was not aware that “the law has already been set that don’t allow students to self incriminate.” Recently, in J.D.B. v. North Carolina, No. 09-11121 (2011), the Supreme Court held that age is relevant when determining police custody for Miranda purposes. Previously, in Yarborough v. Alvarado the Court wrote that a child’s age “generates commonsense conclusions about behavior and perception.” It is certainly true that the Supreme Court has reduced protections (often erroneously in my view) in the school settings, but Barshinger appears to have a more sweeping notion of school power. Regardless, in this case, a teacher was just informing students of their rights so that they could make such decisions.
I expect that the survey would not be used for reporting students to police. However, schools are increasingly cooperating with police to use their setting to interrogate students without informing their parents.
I can understand the point that the students could opt out but Dryden was giving them information relevant to that decision. For a social science teacher, it was also a teachable moment on civil liberties. At a meeting, nearly 100 students, former students and colleagues turned out to support Dryden.
What do you think?
Source: Salon
“[t]he Fifth Amendment – you don’t typically hear about in a school setting.”
No?
YOU SHOULD!!!
Bring back Civics 101 Mr. Luddite.
Nobody censors comments that I know of. However, if you use foul language in it, your comment goes into a moderation queue, and in my experience, it will take awhile to show up.
Does Professor Turley personally censor certain comments here or does one of the regular folks who post long articles do that?
BillMcW,
There is no censor on this blog. WordPress, however, disallows 5 words like the one beginning with F and refuses to allow comments with more than two links embedded.
Back to another reading of the letter.
“In this case, District teachers, social workers, guidance counselors, psychologists and others worked together for over a year …”
no experienced poll writing professional mentioned.
“….to select a data-gathering instrument that could be used to determine what social or emotional issues our high school students are experiencing,…”
isn’t this sort of information better gathered by individual teacher/student mutual interaction and trust?
“and whether individual students could benefit from new or increased supportive intervention by our staff.”
So not anonymous.
“These purposes were shared with our parents and our teachers.”
So why are the parents upset? Maybe they weren’t given enough information about exactly what kinds of questions were being asked. Maybe they don’t like social studies teachers being sanctioned for teaching.
What could possibly go wrong?
Taking the Superintendent’s letter at face value, it seems that the school was trying to define the problem to better determine if proactive efforts were needed to deal with it.
One problem: they didn’t let the parents in on their attempt to find out if the students were engaged in illegal activity. At think such an effort would have killed the project. Maybe that’s why they didn’t go that route.
Did they have an experienced poll writer help write the poll?
Were the questionnaires to be filled out anonymously? If they were interested in the level of various activities, but not in who was engaged, anonymity would be essential. The intro would say that the administration was not out to get them b/c the answers were anonymous (but never mind the number in the corner of the page that says your answers came from someone this room.) If the questionnaire was not anonymous, a discussion about 5th amendment rights would be appropriate in ALL class rooms.
mespo, When I worked for the prosecutor’s office we had a standing rule. We would never interview a juvenile w/o their parent or legal guardian present. We had a very righteous chief and she was tough, but fair.
mespo,
Excellent example … now go sit in the corner
““[t]he Fifth Amendment – you don’t typically hear about in a school setting. That’s because the law has already been set that don’t allow students to self incriminate.”
Now i admit that my grammar is at time atrocious, but then I’m not a School Superintendent. Also his view of law seems…..um……incomplete.
Much of the information that was discussed in closed session is confidential and cannot be shared. ” -Dr. Jack Barshinger
Of course it can’t…
http://bhs.bps101.net/node/5379
Letter from Dr. Jack Barshinger to the BPS101 Community
Dear Members of the BPS101 Community:
During a regularly scheduled Batavia Public School District 101 board meeting this evening (Tuesday), the Board of Education approved a Resolution Authorizing a Notice of Remediation to a Batavia High School teacher. A notice to remedy is a written warning issued by a school board that warns the employee of improper conduct and the possible consequences thereof.
Much of the information that was discussed in closed session is confidential and cannot be shared. Please rest assured that during the review of this employee matter, the Board of Education was given all of the facts, which may or may not be the same as information you may have read in the newspaper or on social media websites.
That said, there is some context that I feel would be appropriate to share.
In this case, District teachers, social workers, guidance counselors, psychologists and others worked together for over a year to select a data-gathering instrument that could be used to determine what social or emotional issues our high school students are experiencing, and whether individual students could benefit from new or increased supportive intervention by our staff. These purposes were shared with our parents and our teachers.
The issue before the Board tonight was whether one employee has the right to mischaracterize the efforts of our teachers, counselors, social workers and others; and tell our students, in effect, that the adults are not here to help, but that they are trying to get you to “incriminate” yourselves.
Disagreement with District initiatives has happened before and it will happen again. What the BPS101 Board does not, and will not support, is any employee giving students false impressions about the motivations of those who come here every day to try to improve the lives of the students entrusted to our care. At no time was student discipline discussed or contemplated as a response to disclosures made by our students.
I understand that some people feel we could have done a better job explaining our goals and a better job working hand in hand with parents on these sensitive issues, and we will. The Board has asked my administration to take steps in the future to increase parental awareness and transparency when gathering data about sensitive issues such as mental health or substance abuse issues. When a plan of action is developed, we have agreed to share those details with our community.
We understand and appreciate the concern shown by our parents and our staff members for the welfare of our students. In all things we do, the best interests of the students must, and will, always come first.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jack Barshinger
Superintendent
“However, schools are increasingly cooperating with police to use their setting to interrogate students without informing their parents.”
****************************
That is why I suggest every parent submit a letter to the school principal each year with a copy to the school board attorney invoking their child’s right to counsel and against self-incrimination whenever questioned by any state actor at school including the police. School officials are deemed state actors under New Jersey v. T. L. O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985),.
Here’s a sample letter not meant as advice merely as example:
Dear Principal Skinner:
I am the custodial parent of Bart Simpson who is attending your school. Please let this letter serve as formal notice that my child is invoking his/her rights to counsel and against self-incrimination as guaranteed under the United States and Virginia Constitutions with respect to any interaction with any state, local or national law enforcement organization and/or other investigatory organization including but not limited to school investigations of alleged wrongdoing. I am likewise expressing my request to be notified prior to any attempted questioning of my child about any alleged wrongdoing by any person.
My attorney is Lionel Hutz, Esq. and he can be contacted at (804) _______ if you have any questions about this Notice or the legal foundation thereof. Please maintain this Notice as part of my child’s permanent file and provide actual notice of this invocation of constitutional rights to any of your staff who may have occasion to regularly interact with my child and to any law enforcement personnel who may seek to question him/her.
Sincerely,
Homer Simpson
Cc: School Board Attorney
Teaching students not to trust their government one blunder at a time.
I think that this was a good lesson for the kids – don’t cite your rights or you will be in trouble (like when cops beat people and arrest them for recording them). Just keep your head down and be like everybody else. Obey.
Rights are only for the elites who are taught their rights, not for the everyday masses.
If I was the teacher, I would sue. Informing, in other words, teaching, students that they have the right to remain silent as is expressed in the U.S. Constitution is clearly not a sanctionable offense in a public school setting.
I think we are conditioning our young for further erosion of rights. I think we are witnessing a death spiral of our Constitution and nation as we know it unless something drastic happens and not only halts it but also REVERSES prior damage and soon
Batavia High School
“Always Learning, Always Growing”
http://bhs.bps101.net/
You can teach it, just not apply it.
Public school is not the setting for learning about the constitution and bill of rights? Who knew.
I taught history in high school and would have done the same. I taught all my students and my kids about the 4th amendment and how they didn’t have to open their car trunks for cops. However, unlike some here, I gave them the sage advice of being respectful, even if the cop wasn’t. That’s as valuable as the constitutional advice, although some folks never get that simple common sense.
Oh my… And knowing your rights is abad thing…. We sure live in a complicated society…. Or is that complicit…..