I was told her and Debbie Riddle are birds of a feather abnd flock together......I think that trash need to go it stinks

Thursday, September 17, 2009
CAN CCISD'S SCHOOL BOARD CAROL SCOTT (WHO IS BENG PAID BY LAS BRISAS ENERGY) CONTINUE TO BE A "TRUSTEE" OF OUR CHILDREN? [Facebook discussion]
(To participate in this dicussion, join facebook.com and add homervillarreal@gmail as a friend. The following is an truncated abridgement of the discussion on the above mentioned issue:

Homer Villarreal
CCISD’s John Longoria just reported that Tomas Duran was a consult for CCISD, but has left. I understand (and again) I am prudently generalizing from John’s update that Thomas Duran now (who is tied in with all the big time insurances like Entrust) is free and legally able to bid on the CCISD Health Insurance. .. I believe that when they go out for insurance (from sources, I believe) will be between Carol’s buddies – Art Granato and Thomas Duran.

Homer Villarreal
WATCH CAREFULLY... Read More…Another question to ask is: “Did the Scotts use ‘La Brisas’’ money to get a new American Federation of Teachers President? I hear Art Granato donated to him also… I am just connecting the dots. Jeff Kane did comment on our board that it was “gray area” … his word was ‘leveraging”… Rene Saenz who sits on the Health Insurance Committee feels that the pressure that will be excerted by different parties will be fierce. So the new AFT president was handpicked by Carol so to speak, if the info is true.

Mark A. Di Carlo
Homer: McMurrey show, AFT President, is on my Voices show on Friday at 10:00 P.M. (On my webcite also) But I do not get it, are you inferring you campaign for the job as Union President and raise money to do it? Maybe so . . . . might have been a good subject.

Carolyn Moon
The new AFT president is a member of the CEC. send me an e-mail later.

Amadora Zapata
Yeah, AFT was the Scott's project according to my sources. They are eroding the credibility of our community: the SCOTTS.

Homer Villarreal
Homer Villarreal: " A regional government, for protecting the agenda and whims of a wife of a city councilman only, is but a carcass, and soon falls by its own CORRUPTION and decay."

Debbie Allen
There is a beauty to a cat fight; because it stems from the soul of a woman. Carol has to go!!! Yeah, the truth of her evil does not seem to matter to her, only the way she chooses to interpret it. But it is survival of a fitness. We are being taken by her, and I am sure not gonna, not gonna put up with it.

Rene Saenz
Amadora, "AFT is the scott's project" what are you inferring? I'm a member of AFT and there was no project there. In fact, I talked to Ray, the new prez, the entire time during his campaign. In fact, in the beginning we were trying to decide who should run, me or him. In the end, I deferred since I had other projects going on. I believe your source... Read More/sources are all wrong. I'm the ultimate source on this issue. But we agreed on one thing, the past president had to go. If you really want the inside, I know it all.

Amadora Zapata
I respectfully disagree Mr. Saenz...and for you to believe that the ultimate source was yourself in re: to the "Carol"/Kailo connection (implied) on the "Las Brisas dollars" (in addition to the Art Granato 's/lobbying interests in this matter) - is quite delusional, and to venture beyond the bucket of this complex issue and investigation by myself... Read More and ours in the region. To question me(or anyone here), is a matter of credibility. But be forewarned, You are welcome to post, but to admonish if "you have a dog in the fight" there are the consequences. If you are participating especially in defense of a party in question, the AFT PREST. or SCOTT's hand in this matter, you become fare game. With that said let's begin.
Mr. Saenz you were not the main source. You sit on the board that will be instrumental in later being used to justify awarding the "Health Insurance" bid contract. The board you sit on will be the raison d'etre for the Scotts (continued in another posting).
33 minutes ago • Delete

Amadora Zapata
It does not take a rocket scientist to see the "project" or "connection" between the AFT post and Carol Scott! The former AFT president took a position against "Las Brisas." But then again before proceeding, abiding by the rules of fair play, and the audience following this "connecting-the-dots" progression and story, I have to ask you sir, "Do you have a dog in this fight?" Admit it if there is, if not it will surface believe you me.

Amadora Zapata
I don't think you are being fully straight forward. Your version might just be sectarian view of the a road of intricate paths and bypaths. You are welcome to email me and share what your experience in attempting to unseat the former President. It is my duty to listen to all parties so as to not only be fair, but responsible in piecing the final view.
15 minutes ago • Delete

Amadora Zapata
What makes this so unethical Mr. Saenz is the fact that Carol Scott (is/and was being paid by "Las Brisas" an enormous salary. The former president was merely trying to be a voice for the children (adocating for the right cause) was slaughtered by a high-paid, unethical party who happened to be the President of CCISD board. She was being paid (thousands of dollars)as Prest. of the CCISD board to stifle someone who was taking against her client (LAS BRISAS). He as just trying to be a voice for the kids (in this particular issue). As far as where he stood on the school politics also, despite how controversial and different from our view, should not have been suppressed by a corporation promoting "breathing black smoke" (as Carolyn Moon put it) and paying a public official to sell out (Carol Scott/Kailo) thousands of dollars.
How could Carol Scott Scott advocate for our children, if she taking a hefty paycheck from Las Brisas?

Rene Saenz
The former AFT president took no position. I was at that meeting when the motion was made. And guess who moved the motion to take the position against Las Brisas? I made the motion and argued forcefully for it. The motion passed unanimously. In fact the former President, who you defend, had a worker who was recorded as saying her personal beef was ... Read Morenot with the building of Las Brisas, her beef was with Scott. The motion was very clear, protect the students and teachers, not go on a personal crusade against an individual for personal reasons. I do not defend Scott's postion. That's hers to take. I don't agree with it. And yes I do sit on the board that will be dealing with the Health Insurance, the very insurance that covers me and my family. Personally I think humana stinks and I will be arguing that we move to the state insurance for teachers. Personally, I think the current president of AFT is much better than the previous one. I will not e-mail you to discuss AFT politics but you are

Rene Saenz
more than welcome to contact me. One more question...how does a Amadora Zapata, with blond hair and blue eyes, where a Wisconsin shirt rather than a TEXAS shirt? Be warned that we longhorns kick ass.

Homer Villarreal
THANKS FOR POSTING MR. SAENZ:
FACT: CCISD Board President CAROL SCOTT both is and was being paid by LAS BRISAS ENERGY.
FACT: SHE WAS BEING PAID TO ATTEMPT TO STOP CRITICISM OF LAS BRISAS, the former President was critical (and I did interviewed him at Taqueria Guadalajara in Annaville).
FACT: Then it logically follows that Carol Scott as a "public official" was a high-paid "Aggressor" by LAS BRISAS to eradicate disgruntled parties with Las Brisas. In short, the entire staff of CCISD was under the gun of a Chair of the board, Ms. Scott (remember, she is a public official who both took and is taking money from Las Brisas). The few that spoke up were targeted (via Las Brisas' dollars) and punished (via las Brisas' dollars).

FACT: Ms. Scott as Chair of CCISD School Board used CCISD Employees and buses and pupils to make TV commercials that earned her a lot of money.
FACT: Ms. Scott her leverage as chair to hire "Skip" Noe (who coordinated efforts and is piecing the road open for Las Brisas to established themselves with various municipal and an inter agency network). Note: Angel Escobar wished not to venture in the 'gray area" that the EDC and Carol Scott are espousing.
FACT: The new AFT President was stamped and endorsed by a corporate movement with multi-million dollars interests being represented by KAILO (formerly Scott Public Relations).

CCISD Board PRESIDENT is their high-paid face -- i.e., Las Brisas Energy. In fact send I dare you to send an email to Las Brisas Energy at www.lasbrisasenergy.com/contact.html -- while on their website hit the contact button: and guess who will receive the message in her cell phone and computer? YOU GOT IT RIGHT. CCISD BOARD PRESIDENT CAROL SCOTT. She is the gatekeeper and face of Las Brisas Energy in the area.
Homer Villarreal
This issue is a legal matter and Las Brisas Energy has no right to pay public officials to do their bidding in our schools and use "divide and conquer" tactics to hurt and punish anyone in the district (or the community) who is against the children breathing "black smoke" (as Carolyn Moon so poetically put it).
Posted by HOMERO VILLARREAL at 9:59 PM
1 comments:

herownself said...

To use my comments (not that I disavow) them, from the message section of Facebook is underhanded.

It makes one wonder whose water you're carrying, Miss Zamora.
September 19, 2009 4:21 PM

And the reason they can find all those drop out is because they are incarcerated ....duh. Like CCISD did not know! They put them there.

Guess Truant officers are lazy to do their JOB! Carol Scott cares about that crap organization Citizens "against law suit abuse" She Has abused her position for self gain and should be impeached or pay for the costs if it were you or me to produce the same exact commercial.

Let's all get out there and get these kids back in school.

Hit the streets to get students in school
CCISD prepares for 2nd dropout prevention walk

By Elvia Aguilar (Contact)
Originally published 05:33 p.m., September 2, 2009
Updated 11:06 p.m., September 2, 2009

CORPUS CHRISTI — CCISD is looking for volunteers who can walk the walk and talk the talk.

About 480 high school students have not returned to school this year. Corpus Christi Independent School District officials need help giving those students a phone call Tuesday and a home visit Sept. 12 as part of the Operation Keeping Every Youth in School walk, a dropout recovery effort.

Monica Bayarena, principal of Coles High School and organizer of the walk, said of the 468 homes visited last year, 215 students returned to school. Of those students, about 60 dropped out, but 19 received a General Educational Development diploma and 27 graduated. The rest are still enrolled.

“Operation KEYS was clearly a success last year,” Bayarena said. “It gave our community an opportunity to work together to make a difference in the lives of our youth. Every child counts.”

Volunteers will call students from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Tuesday at the district’s administration building, 801 Leopard St., to confirm student addresses and whereabouts. About 40 phone bank volunteers will be needed.

“Those who may not be able to walk or can’t be out in the heat too long can help us by making a few phone calls,” Bayarena said. “They can volunteer 20 minutes or whatever they can. They don’t have to be here all day.”

About 400 volunteers will be needed to knock on doors of high school students who haven’t returned to school. Volunteers will be paired with an educator. Volunteers will be asked to share life experiences to encourage the students’ return.

If a student decides to register for school, then he will be directed to his respective high school where district staff can answer additional questions and enroll them that day.

The program started last year and is modeled after one in Houston.

The list of unenrolled students may be narrowed if volunteers find that they left the district or already returned to school.

About 280 high school students dropped out of the Corpus Christi Independent School District in 2007.

TO VOLUNTEER

Register at www.ccisd.us

You must follow these rules in order to post comments:

* 1. Keep it clean.Comments that are obscene, vulgar, lewd or sexually-oriented will get the ax. Creative spelling of such terms also will be banned.
* 2. Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
* 3. Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything.
* 4. Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
* 5. Keep it local. Do not post direct links to sites outside of Caller.com.
* 6. Police yourselves. Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
* 7. Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
* 8. Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
* 9. Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
* 10.Help us get it right. If you find a factual error or misspelling, email newmedia@caller.com or metrodesk@caller.com, or call 886-3697.

(6) User Comments:
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718561 on September 3, 2009 at 1:06 a.m.

we have a high crime and dropout problem. WHAT IS THIS TELLING YOU? SOMETHING IS WRONG HEAR. the teachers need to get their act together and fix this problem. their are major issues in this school district. can't the teachers motivate students and be better role models. theirs a big problem with one sidedness. only certain kids get taught others fall threw the cracks this must be lazyness. something is wrong and it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 706310 on September 3, 2009 at 1:39 a.m.

in response to 718561

You've got to be joking. The problem is the parents not being responsible for getting their kids to school, not the teachers. It is not the job of the teacher to get your kid to school. The teacher presents the subject material and the grade received is what the student earns. If this was a question of whether the subject material is presented right, then that is on the teacher. However, this is about getting the students to show up to class. I guess it's typical to blame others instead of placing blame where it really lies, the parent and the student.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718343 on September 3, 2009 at 5:34 p.m.

in response to 718561

Your kidding right? This is no one's problem but the parents and kids fault. Place the blame where it really belongs right smack dab back on the parents.
If the parents were not lazy and would get their act together and make their little darlings go to school instead of being afraid of them or letting the little darlings do what ever the heck they wanted to do then the problem would be solved.

There is no way I would walk the streets to try to get these kids back in school when it is the parents responsibility.

No one makes my kids wake up and come to the home school classroom they know it has to be done no if's and's or but's about it. If they decide not to participate they know there will be consequences. Instead of facing the hassle of extra chores along with extra homework and privliges taken away they chose to come to class each and every day.
No one has to walk the neighborhood here.

Oh and it is here not hear.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 711842 on September 3, 2009 at 5:48 p.m.

in response to 718561

Does your post criticizing this terrific effort actually say, "Something is wrong HEAR"?

Additionally, do you write, "THEIR are major issues in this school district"?

And then...."THEIRS a big problem," followed by "others fall THREW the cracks," and "this must be LAZYNESS."

You are right....something is wrong and it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Enough said.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 361861 on September 3, 2009 at 7:21 p.m.

in response to 718561

This is the most ridiculous comment I've ever read. You have no idea what you're talking about. Teachers teach each and every day. We don't wait for everyone to show up. We hope they do, but continue to work hard to educate those that are present. We make phone calls and home visits when needed. Absences concern us daily, but the ones that should be concerned are not. Some parents don't care if their kids go to school or not. They are the only ones to blame. I wish every citizen of this city would trade jobs with a teacher for a week. I can guarantee you that your opinion would change after the first day. I work hard and take my responsibility to educate every child very seriously.
Reply to this Post | Suggest removal
related links Posted by 718259 on September 3, 2009 at 9:47 p.m.

Let's all get out there and get these kids back in school. We had 27 kids graduate in addition to the others that are still persevering to get a diploma. These kids need a second chance, and education is their ticket to a better future.

Thanks in advance to all the volunteers that plan on attending this event. We changed lives and made a difference. I can tell you that I was choked up at our H.S. graduation last May when many students were walking the stage because someone cared enough to find them and keep hanging on to them during the school year.

Great job Coles H.S. for working so hard to make a difference!!!

prosecuting attorney or juvenile court that the prosecutor has dismissed the charges or that

This is the html version of the file http://www.ccisd.net/pdf_05/parents_students/CodeOfConduct.pdf.
G o o g l e automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:5FYtKOpW0XIJ:www.ccisd.net/pdf_05/parents_students/CodeOfConduct.pdf+prosecute+ccisd&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.
These search terms have been highlighted: ccisd
These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: prosecute
Page 1
Clear Creek Independent School District
STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT
I.
PURPOSE
The Student Code of Conduct is the district’s response to the requirements of Chapter 37 of the Texas
Education Code.
The Code provides methods and options for managing students in the classroom and on school
grounds, disciplining students, and preventing and intervening in student discipline problems.
The law requires the district to define misconduct that may – or must – result in a range of specific
disciplinary consequences including removal from a regular classroom or campus, suspension,
placement in a disciplinary alternative education program (DAEP), or expulsion from school.
This Student Code of Conduct has been adopted by the CCISD Board of Trustees and developed with
the advice of the district-level committee. This Code provides information to parents and students
regarding standards of conduct, consequences of misconduct, and procedures for administering
discipline.
In accordance with state law, the Code will be posted at each school campus or will be available for
review at the office of the campus principal. Parents will be notified of any conduct violation that may
result in a student being suspended, placed in a DAEP, or expelled.
Because the Student Code of Conduct is adopted by the district’s board of trustees it has the force of
policy; therefore, in case of conflict between the Code and the student handbook, the Code will
prevail.
Please note: The discipline of students with disabilities who are eligible for services under federal law
(Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973) is
subject to the provisions of those laws.
II.
GENERAL EXPECTATIONS OF STUDENTS
Each student is expected to behave in a responsible manner by:
•
Consciously participating in class and being supportive of an effective learning and teaching.
•
Demonstrating courtesy and respect for others.
•
Attending all classes regularly and on time.
•
Preparing for each class; taking appropriate materials and assignments to class.
•
Being well groomed and dressing appropriately as defined by District and/or campus dress
code.
•
Obeying all campus and classroom rules.
•
Respecting the rights and privileges of other students, District staff, and other adults on
campus or at school-related activities, on or off campus.
•
Respecting the property of others, including District property and facilities.
•
Cooperating with or assisting the school staff in maintaining safety, order, and discipline.
•
Paying required fees and fines unless waived.
•
Adhering to the Student Code of Conduct.
III. GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES
A. Supplemental Rules
The District may impose campus or classroom rules in addition to those found in the Student Code
of Conduct. These rules may be listed in the student handbook or posted in classrooms.
Page 2
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 2 of 17
B. Disrespect and Interference
A student whose behavior shows disrespect for others, including interference with their access to a
public education and a safe environment, will be subject to disciplinary action.
C. School District Authority and Jurisdiction
School rules and the authority of the district to administer discipline apply whenever the interest
of the district is involved, on or off school grounds, in conjunction with or independent of classes
and school-sponsored activities.
The district has disciplinary authority over a student:
1. During the regular school day and while the student is going to and from school on district
transportation;
2. During lunch periods in which a student is allowed to leave campus;
3. While the student is in attendance at any school related activity, regardless of time or
location;
4. For any school related misconduct, regardless of time or location;
5. When retaliation against a school employee or volunteer occurs or is threatened, regardless of
time or location;
6. When criminal mischief is committed on or off school property or at a school related event;
7. For certain offenses committed within 300 feet of school property as measured from any point
on the school’s real property boundary line;
8. For certain offenses committed while on school property or while attending a school sponsored
or school related activity of another district in Texas; and
9. When the student commits a felony, as provided by Texas Education Code 37.006 or 37.0081.
D. Video/Audio Monitoring
In accordance with CCISD District Policy FO (Local) video/audio equipment may be used for safety
purposes to monitor student behavior on buses and in common areas on District campuses.
E. Enforcement of Student Code of Conduct
In general, discipline will be designed to correct misconduct and to encourage all students to
adhere to their responsibilities as citizens of the school community and, when necessary, to
protect students, school employees or property, and to maintain essential order and discipline.
Disciplinary action will draw on the professional judgment of teachers and administrators and on a
range of discipline management techniques. Disciplinary action will be correlated to the
seriousness of the offense, the student’s age and grade level, the frequency of misconduct, the
student’s attitude, the effect of the misconduct on the school environment, whether the student
acted in self-defense, intent or lack of intent at the time the student engaged in the conduct, a
student’s disciplinary history, or a disability that substantially impairs the student’s capacity to
appreciate the wrongfulness of the student’s conduct. Because of these factors, discipline for a
particular offense (unless otherwise specified by law) may bring into consideration varying
techniques and responses.
A student who violates campus or classroom rules that are not Student Code of Conduct violations
may be disciplined by one or more of the discipline management techniques listed as
consequences for general misconduct violations. For these violations, a teacher is not required to
make a Student Code of Conduct violation report, but the principal or principal’s designee shall
notify the parents as soon as feasible using the Disciplinary Referral Form.
IV.
GENERAL MISCONDUCT VIOLATIONS
A. Behaviors
Students are prohibited from:
1. Leaving school grounds or school-sponsored events without permission of the appropriate
school official.
Page 3
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 3 of 17
2. Disobeying school rules related to conduct on school buses.
3. Failing to comply with lawful directives given by school personnel thus the failure results in
insubordination.
4. Public display of affection.
5. Possessing or using matches or a lighter except as part of an instructional program.
6. Possessing, smoking, or using tobacco products.
7. Behaving in any way that disrupts the school environment or educational process.
8. Violating safety rules.
9. Violating dress and grooming standards.
10.
Violating other communicated campus or classroom standards of behavior.
11. Being in facilities designated for the opposite sex, or in facilities designated as Faculty Only,
Janitorial Only, or Custodial Only, or other restricted areas.
12. Displaying, turning on, or using paging devices or cellular phones.
13. Loitering in the parking lot or school grounds.
14. Engaging in bullying, harassment, or making hit lists.
B. Consequences
The following discipline management techniques may be used alone or in combination for Student
Code of Conduct General Misconduct Violations and non-Student Code of Conduct violations:
1. Verbal correction.
2. Cooling-off time or time-out. Time-out is defined as the removal of a student from the
instructional program to a special place either inside or outside the classroom. General
guidelines for use of time-out are:
(a) Time-out uses a reasonable amount of time for each episode. A minute or less per incident
for each year of the student’s age is a good guideline for most elementary students. A
minimum of 20-30 minutes per incident is appropriate for secondary students.
(b) Assignment to time-out shall be combined with a precise request for changed behavior.
(c) Progress toward positively changed behavior shall be rewarded.
(d) When the student has completed the period of time-out, the teacher shall restate the
original request (e.g., “Now I want you to...”).
3. Phone calls to parents.
4. Seating changes in the classroom.
5. Counseling by teachers, counselors, or administrative personnel.
6. Conference with parents and teacher.
7. Conference with parents and campus administrators.
8. Temporary confiscation of items that disrupt the educational process.
9. Grade reductions for academic dishonesty, copying, allowing others to copy work, and/or
plagiarism.
10. Community service with parental approval.
11. Rewards or demerits.
12. Behavioral contracts.
13. Office or other assigned area referral.
14. Detention (either during the student school day or outside the student school day).
Transportation is the parent’s/guardian’s responsibility.
15. Assigned school duties other than class tasks.
16. Withdrawal of privileges, such as participation in extracurricular activities and eligibility for
seeking and holding honorary offices.
17. Withdrawing or restricting bus privileges.
18. Techniques or penalties identified in individual student organizations codes of conduct.
19. School-assessed and school-administered probation.
20. Referral to outside agency and/or legal authority for criminal prosecution in addition to
disciplinary measures imposed by the District.
21. Other strategies and consequences as specified by the Student Code of Conduct.
C. Appeal
Parental questions or complaints regarding disciplinary measures taken should be addressed to
the teacher or campus administration, as appropriate.
General Guidelines are:
Page 4
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 4 of 17
Offenses resulting in detention, In-School Suspension, and suspension from school may be
appealed to the campus principal within 2 working days of the recommended disciplinary action.
The decision of the principal is final and may not be appealed. Non Juvenile Justice Disciplinary
Alternative Educational Placement (e.g., Disciplinary AEP) may be appealed to the appropriate
assistant superintendent. The decision of the assistant superintendent is final and may not be
appealed.
Offenses resulting in recommendations for expulsion and Juvenile Justice AEP may be appealed to
the campus principal or principal’s designee, the Superintendent of Schools or Superintendent’s
designee, the School Board or School Board’s designee, and finally a district court. (See Appeal
Procedures for AEP & Expulsions in Index.)
V.
STUDENT REMOVAL FROM CLASS BY TEACHERS
A. Discretionary Removal by the Teacher
Violation of classroom rules or general misconduct violations as outlined in the Student Code of
Conduct will not necessarily result in the formal removal of the student from class or another
placement, but may result in a routine referral to the principal or the principal’s designee, or the
use of any other discipline management technique.
If the student is referred to the principal or the principal’s designee for disciplinary action, the
principal or the principal’s designee will make the decision on the appropriate disciplinary action.
The principal or the principal’s designee shall be sent a copy of the disciplinary referral by the
teacher together with the disciplinary action taken, as soon as feasible after the student is sent to
the principal or principal designee’s office. A copy of the completed disciplinary referral form will
be returned to the teacher, a copy sent home with the student, and a copy placed in the student’s
disciplinary file.
B. Formal Removal by the Teacher
Formal removal may occur if the student’s behavior has been documented by the teacher as
repeatedly interfering with the teacher’s ability to teach his or her class, or the behavior is so
unruly, disruptive, or abusive that the teacher cannot teach.
A teacher must remove a student from class and refer him/her to the principal or principal’s
designee for an offense for which a student may be suspended and/or placed in a disciplinary AEP.
A teacher must also remove a student from class for an expellable offense.
C. Procedure for Removal
1. If the violation results in removal, the principal or principal’s designee will schedule a
conference within three (3) school days with the student’s parent, the teacher, and the
student.
2. At the conference, the student is entitled to written or oral notice of the reasons for the
removal, an explanation of the basis for the removal, and an opportunity to respond to the
reasons for the removal. The student may not be returned to his/her regular classroom before
the conference.
3. After the conference, the principal or principal’s designee will notify the student and parents of
the consequences of the Student Code of Conduct violation.
4. When a student is removed from the regular classroom and a conference with parents or a
hearing is pending, the principal or principal’s designee may place a student in:
(a) Another appropriate classroom.
(b) In-School Suspension.
(c) A disciplinary AEP in which the student must be separated from other students for the
entire school program day and will be provided instruction in the core subjects.
Counseling will also be provided to the student.
(d) Suspension for a maximum of three (3) days provided the behavior could result in
placement in a disciplinary AEP.
5. When a student has been removed from class by a teacher, the principal may not return the
student to the teacher’s class without the teacher’s consent unless the placement review
committee determines that the teacher’s class is the best or only alternative available except if
Page 5
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 5 of 17
the teacher removed the student from class because the student engaged in assault,
aggravated assault, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, or assault against a school
district employee or volunteer, the student may not be returned to the teacher’s class without
the teacher’s consent.
VI. REMOVAL FROM THE REGULAR EDUCATIONAL SETTING
A. In-School Suspension (ISS)
1. Behaviors Resulting in ISS
Disciplinary action resulting in ISS placement will be correlated to the seriousness of the
offense, the student’s age and grade level, the frequency of misconduct, the student’s
attitude, the effect of the misconduct on the school environment, whether the student acted in
self-defense, intent or lack of intent at the time the student engaged in the conduct, a
student’s disciplinary history, or a disability that substantially impairs the student’s capacity to
appreciate the wrongfulness of the student’s conduct. A student may be assigned to ISS if the
student commits any of the following offenses on school property, or while attending a school-
sponsored or school-related activity on or off school property.
(a) Academic dishonesty or copying the work of another, or allowing others to copy work. In
addition, academic
dishonesty or copying will result in a grade of zero (0).
(b) Displaying inappropriate pictures, photos, or drawings.
(c) Using profanity, vulgar language, or inappropriate obscene gestures, pictures, photos, or
drawings.
(d) Physically aggressive behavior such as, but not limited to, pushing, scuffling, or fighting
which is not defined as assault. Fighting may also result in charges being filed. (The
offense of assault is addressed later in the Student Code of Conduct.)
(e) Stealing from students, staff, or the school.
(f) Damaging or vandalizing property owned by others. (Also may be required to make
restitution.) Depending upon the seriousness of the damage, the student may be expelled.
(g) Possession of fireworks, matches, stun guns, or shocking devices (pens, lighters, etc.)
(h) Hazing as defined by Board Policy FNCC (LEGAL) and the Education Code, Section 37.151
(i) Name-calling, ethnic or racial slurs, or derogatory statements that school officials have
reason to believe will substantially disrupt the school program or incite violence.
(j) Insubordination.
(k) Aggressive, disruptive action or group demonstration that school officials believe does or
may substantially disrupt or materially interfere with the school program, school activities,
or incites violence. (This may also result in a citation.)
(l) Falsification of records, passes, or other school-related documents including, but not
limited to, computer hacking, theft of, or misuse of software.
(m)Smoking, use of, or possession of tobacco products.
(n) Possession of chemical stink/smoke bombs or any other pyrotechnic device.
(o) Repeated general misconduct violations. (The District defines “repeated” to be 2 or more
infractions of the general misconduct violations. These may be different violations or
repeated violations of the same offense.)
(p) Gambling on school property.
(a) Truancy.
(b) Written or verbal offensive or threatening remarks.
(c) Bullying, harassment, or making hit lists
(d) Violating computer use policies, rules, or agreements signed by the student and/or
agreements signed by the student’s parent.
(e) Using the Internet or other electronic communications to threaten students or employees
or cause disruption to the educational program.
(f) Sending or posting electronic messages that are abusive, obscene, sexually oriented,
threatening, harassing, damaging to another’s reputation, or illegal.
(g) Using email or Web sites at school to encourage illegal behavior or threaten school safety.
2. Procedures for Assigning Students to ISS
Below are procedures for assigning students to ISS:
(a) Inform student of accusations and provide an opportunity for student to present his/her
side.
Page 6
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 6 of 17
(b) Investigate as necessary.
(c) Decide upon the innocence or guilt of the student.
(d) If guilty, decide on the number of days to be assigned to ISS and inform student verbally
and in writing.
(e) Written notice sent home to parent with student.
(f) Telephone call to parent.
(g) Student’s counselor notified.
(h) Student’s teachers are notified so that the lessons may be provided to ISS.
(i) Student brings all books to ISS.
(j) Upon finishing (completing) ISS, student receives completion form from ISS teachers or
person responsible for ISS. Student meets with principal or assistant principal. Principal
or assistant principal conferences with student who signs completion form. Student shows
each teacher his completion form as he/she returns to each class.
3. Length of Assignment to ISS
The minimum length of assignment to ISS shall be one day and the maximum ten days per
offense, unless the student commits a violation of the ISS rules or the Student Code of
Conduct while assigned to ISS. This could result in the assignment of additional days to a
maximum of ten days, suspension from school, or assignment to a disciplinary alternative
education program, depending upon the seriousness of the offense.
4. Sanctions
A student who has been assigned to ISS may not participate in nor attend school-sponsored or
school-related extracurricular or co-curricular activities during the period of assignment.
5. Continuation of Coursework
If a student is removed from the regular classroom and placed in in-school suspension or
another setting other than a disciplinary alternative education program, the District shall offer
the student the opportunity to complete, before the beginning of the next school year, each
course in which the student was enrolled at the time of the removal. Such an opportunity may
be provided by any method available, including a correspondence course, distance learning, or
summer school.
B. Suspension From School
Disciplinary action resulting in suspension from school will be correlated to the seriousness of the
offense, the student’s age and grade level, the frequency of misconduct, the student’s attitude,
the effect of the misconduct on the school environment, whether the student acted in self-
defense, intent or lack of intent at the time the student engaged in the conduct, a student’s
disciplinary history, or a disability that substantially impairs the student’s capacity to appreciate
the wrongfulness of the student’s conduct.
1. Behaviors Resulting in Suspension From School
Students may be suspended from school for conduct for which they may be placed in a
disciplinary AEP or ISS Program, and pending removal from a disciplinary AEP or expulsion.
(See behaviors resulting in discretionary disciplinary AEP assignment, below.).
2. Length of Suspension From School
State law allows a student to be suspended for up to three (3) school days per offense, with
no limit on the number of times a student may be suspended in a semester or school year.
The principal or principal’s designee shall set the length of the suspension from school. When
a student is suspended, the student is expected to be under the supervision of the parent,
guardian or other responsible adult.
3. Procedures for Suspension From School
A student who is to be suspended shall be entitled to participate in an informal conference
during which the principal or principal’s designee will advise the student of the conduct with
which he or she is charged and will give the student the opportunity to explain his or her
version of the incident. If the principal or principal’s designee believes the student has
engaged in prohibited conduct, the student will be suspended from school. The duration of a
student’s suspension, which cannot exceed three (3) school days, will be determined by the
principal or principal’s designee. Parents will be notified in writing.
4. Sanctions
A student who has been suspended may not participate in or attend school-sponsored or
school-related extracurricular and co-curricular activities during the period of suspension.
5. Absence from School
Page 7
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 7 of 17
Suspension from school is considered an excused absence. Students are to request makeup
work when they return to school and will receive full credit for work missed if the work is
made up in accordance with campus and classroom rules.
C. Alternative Education Program (Non-Juvenile Justice)
Disciplinary action resulting in placement in disciplinary AEP (DAEP) will be correlated to the
seriousness of the offense, the student’s age and grade level, the frequency of misconduct, the
student’s attitude, the effect of the misconduct on the school environment, whether the student
acted in self-defense, intent or lack of intent at the time the student engaged in the conduct, a
student’s disciplinary history, or a disability that substantially impairs the student’s capacity to
appreciate the wrongfulness of the student’s conduct.
1. Behaviors Resulting in Discretionary Disciplinary AEP Assignment
A student may be placed in a disciplinary AEP if the student commits any of the following
offenses on school property or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity on
or off school property. The principal may place students in a disciplinary AEP for any of the
behaviors listed below:
(a) Throwing objects that can cause bodily injury or property damage.
(b) Committing extortion, coercion, or blackmail (obtaining money or another object of value
from an unwilling person), or forcing an individual to act through the use of force or threat
of force.
(c) Committing or assisting in a robbery or theft that does not constitute a felony according
to the Texas Penal Code.
(Felony robbery or theft offenses are addressed later in the Student Code of Conduct).
(d) Engaging in sexual contact.
(e) Engaging in conduct that constitutes sexual harassment or sexual abuse whether the
conduct is by word, gesture, or any other sexual conduct, including requests for sexual
favors, and the dissemination of sexually oriented materials.
(f) Possessing or selling look-alike drugs or weapons or items attempted to be passed off as
drugs or weapons or contraband.
(g) Abusing the student’s own prescription drug, giving a prescription drug to another student,
or possessing or being under the influence of another person’s prescription drug on school
property or at a school related event.
(h) Having or taking prescription drugs or over-the-counter drugs at school other than as
provided by district policy.
(i) Possessing drug paraphernalia.
(j) Repeated misbehavior if a student, after being placed in ISS, continues to violate the
Student Code of Conduct. (The District defines “repeated” to be 2 or more violations of
the Student Code of Conduct in general or repeated occurrences of the same violations.)
(k) Engaging in conduct that constitutes criminal mischief that is not punishable as a felony.
(l) Possessing or distributing pornographic materials.
(m)Kidnapping which is not aggravated kidnapping (for aggravated kidnapping, see
Expulsions).
(n) Being involved in gang activity, including participating as a member or pledge, or soliciting
another person to become a pledge or member of a gang: A gang is defined as “any group
of two (2) or more persons whose purposes include the commission of illegal acts.”
No student on or about school property or at any school activity shall wear, possess, use,
distribute, display or sell any clothing, jewelry, emblem, badge, symbol, sign or other
things which are evidence of membership or affiliation in any gang; shall commit any act
or omission in furtherance of the interests of any gang or gang activity, including but not
limited to, soliciting others for membership in any gangs; requesting any person to pay
protection or otherwise intimidating or threatening any person; inciting other students to
set with physical violence upon any other person.
(o) Being involved in a public school fraternity, sorority, or secret society, including
participating as a member or pledge, or soliciting another person to become a pledge or
member of a public school fraternity, sorority, or secret society.
(p) Possessing of any razor or knife with a blade length of less than 2 ½ inches..
(q) Lighting or possession of fireworks or other objects.
(r) Repeated violations of possession, smoking, or use of tobacco. (“Repeated” meaning
multiple violations).
(s) Physically aggressive behavior such as, but not limited to, pushing, scuffling, or fighting
which is not defined as assault.
Page 8
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 8 of 17
(t) The use of chemical stink/smoke bombs, or any other pyrotechnic device.
(u) Possessing ammunition
(v) Student’s presence on campus may temporarily be deemed a threat to the safety of the
student body or campus in general.
(w) Off-campus conduct for which removal would have been required but of which the
principal or other appropriate administrator does not have knowledge before the first
anniversary of the date the conduct occurred.
(x) The student:
i. has received deferred prosecution under section 53.03, Family Code, for conduct
defined as a felony offense in Title 5, Penal Code; or
ii. has been found by a court or jury to have engaged in delinquent conduct under
section 54.03, Family Code, for conduct defined as a felony offense in Title 5, Penal
Code; and
iii. the Board or the Board’s designee has determined that the student’s presence in the
regular classroom:
(a) threatens the safety of other students or teachers;
(b) will be detrimental to the educational process; or
(c) is not in the best interests of the District’s students. Any decision of the Board or
the Board’s designee under this subsection is final and may not be appealed. In
addition, the Board or its designee may order placement in accordance with this
provision regardless of:
i. the date on which the student’s conduct occurred;
ii the location at which the conduct occurred;
iii. whether the conduct occurred while the student was enrolled in the District; or
iv. whether the student has successfully completed any court disposition
requirements imposed in connection with the conduct. Furthermore, the
Board may, under state law, order placement for such a student for any period
considered necessary by the Board or the Board’s designee (i.e., the one-year
maximum placement does not apply). However, a student placed in a
disciplinary AEP for this reason will be accorded the periodic reviews applicable
to all disciplinary AEP placements.
(y) Bullying, harassment, or making hit lists.
Furthermore, the Board may, under state law, order placement for any period considered
necessary by the Board or the Board’s designee (i.e., the one-year maximum placement does
not apply). However, a student placed in a disciplinary AEP for this reason will be accorded the
periodic reviews applicable to all disciplinary AEP placements.
2. A student may be removed from class and placed in a disciplinary AEP based on conduct
occurring off campus and while the student is not in attendance at a school-sponsored or
school-related activity if the Superintendent or the Superintendent's designee has a
reasonable belief that the student has engaged in conduct defined as a felony offense other
than those defined in Title 5, Penal Code; and the continued presence of the student in the
regular classroom threatens the safety of the other students or teachers or will be detrimental
to the educational process.
3. Behaviors Resulting in Mandatory Disciplinary AEP Assignment
†
(a) A student shall be removed from class and placed in a disciplinary AEP if the student
engages in conduct involving a public school that contains the elements of the offense of
false alarm or report under Section 42.06, Penal Code, or terroristic threat under Section
22.07, Penal Code.
(b) A student shall be removed from class and placed in a disciplinary AEP if the student
commits the following on or within 300 feet of school property, as measured from any
point on the school's real property boundary line, or while attending a school-sponsored or
school-related activity on or off of school property.
(1) Engages in conduct punishable as a felony.
(2) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of assault under section 22.01(a) (1) of
the Penal Code (i.e., intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causing bodily injury to
another).
(3) Sells, gives, or delivers to another person or possesses, uses, or is under the influence
of:
Page 9
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 9 of 17
(i) Marijuana or a controlled substance, as defined by Chapter 481 of the Health and
Safety Code or by 21 USC Section 801 et seq. in an amount not punishable as a
felony offense.
(ii) A dangerous drug, as defined by Chapter 483, Health and Safety Code, in an
amount not punishable as a felony offense.
(4) Sells, gives, or delivers to another person an alcoholic beverage; commits a serious
act or offense while under the influence of alcohol; or possesses, uses, or is under the
influence of an alcoholic beverage, if the conduct is not punishable as a felony.
(5) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of an offense relating to an abusable
volatile chemical, under Sections 485.031 through 485.034, Health and Safety Code.
(6) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of the offense of public lewdness under
Section 21.07, Penal Code, or indecent exposure under Section 21.08, Penal Code.
(7) Possession of any razor or knife with a blade length of 2-1/2 to 5-1/2 inches.
(8) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of the offense of graffiti under Section
28.08, Penal Code, if the conduct involves a marking made on a school or to school
property.
†
Removal to a disciplinary AEP is not required if the student is expelled for the same
conduct for which removal would be required.
(c) A student shall be removed from class and placed in a disciplinary AEP as provided by
Section 37.008 based on conduct occurring off-campus and while the student is not in
attendance at a school-sponsored or school-related activity if:
•
The student receives deferred prosecution (voluntary contract) under Section 53.03 of
the Family Code for conduct defined as a felony offense in Title 5 of the Penal Code.
•
A court or jury finds that the student has engaged in delinquent conduct under Section
54.03 of the Penal Code for conduct defined as a felony offense in Title 5 of the Penal
Code; or
•
The Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee has a reasonable belief that the
student has engaged in conduct defined as a felony offense in Title 5 of the Penal
Code. Title 5 offenses are defined as crimes against a person.
(d) A student shall be removed from class and placed in a disciplinary AEP if the student
engages in conduct that contains the elements of the offense of retaliation against any
school employee, regardless of where the conduct occurs, unless such conduct is defined
as an expellable offense. (Note: Certain retaliatory conduct constitutes an expellable
offense, as explained in the Expulsion section of this Student Code of Conduct.)
4. Length of Assignment to a Disciplinary AEP
The period of placement in a disciplinary AEP may not exceed one year unless, after a review,
the District determines that the student is a threat to the safety of other students or to District
employees, or extended placement is in the best interest of the student.
(a) Students-Age Six Through Grade Five:
The length of the assignment to a disciplinary AEP for a student age six through grade five
will be determined by the principal based upon the seriousness of the offense, the
disciplinary record of the student, the student’s age, the student’s attitude whether the
student acted in self-defense, and the impact of the offense on the school environment.
Below are the guidelines for length of assignment:
Description
Length of Assignment
Minimal
10 days
Normal
30 days
Maximum
Remainder of the semester*
*Unless the offense occurs in the last six weeks of a semester, in which case the student
may be assigned to disciplinary AEP until the end of the following semester.
(b) Students in Grades Six through Twelve:
Assignments to a disciplinary AEP will vary depending upon the seriousness of the offense,
the disciplinary record of the student, and/or the age of the student, the attitude of the
Page 10
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 10 of 17
student, whether the student acted in self-defense, and the impact of the offense on the
school environment. The principal, in making the assignment, shall specify the length of
the assignment. Below are the guidelines for length of an assignment:
Description
Length of Assignment
Minimal
30 days
Normal
60 days
Maximum
Remainder of the year
5. Procedures for Removal to a Disciplinary AEP
The Board delegates to the principal the authority to remove a student to a disciplinary AEP.
The duration of a student’s placement in a disciplinary AEP will be determined by the principal
as outlined above in this Code.
Within three (3) school days of receiving the Disciplinary Referral Form, the assistant principal
will schedule a conference with the student’s parent, teacher, and the student. Until a hearing
can be held, the assistant principal may place a student in:
(a) Another appropriate classroom;
(b) In-School Suspension; and/or
(c) Suspension for a maximum of three (3) days.
At the conference, the student is entitled to written or oral notice of the reasons for the
removal, an explanation of the basis for the removal, and an opportunity to respond to the
reasons for the removal.
If, after conducting the conference, the assistant principal believes that the student has
engaged in conduct for which placement in a disciplinary AEP is an appropriate disciplinary
sanction, the assistant principal shall inform the student and the student’s parent(s) and issue
the order to place the student in a disciplinary AEP in accordance with the Student Code of
Conduct. A copy of the order shall be forwarded to the student and parent(s). If the period of
placement is inconsistent with the guidelines set forth above, the order must give notice of the
inconsistency. The decision of the assistant principal may be appealed to the principal by
submitting a written letter of appeal to the principal within two (2) working days of receipt of
the order of removal. The student shall report to the disciplinary AEP as scheduled while the
appeals process is conducted. The decision of the principal may be appealed to the
appropriate Assistant Superintendent by submitting a written letter of appeal to the assistant
superintendent within two (2) days of receipt of the order of removal. The decision of the
assistant superintendent is final and may not be appealed (see CCISD District Policy FOC
[Local])
Before a student may be placed in a disciplinary AEP for a period of time that extends beyond
the end of the school year in which the placement commences, the principal must determine
that:
(a) The student’s presence in the regular classroom or campus presents a danger of physical
harm to the students or others; or,
(b) The student has engaged in serious or persistent misbehavior that violates the Student
Code of Conduct.
If a student’s placement in the disciplinary AEP is scheduled to extend beyond the end of the
next grading period, the student’s parent(s)/guardian(s) shall receive notice of an opportunity
to participate in a proceeding before the appropriate assistant superintendent or assistant
superintendent designee as provided for under Board Policy FOC (Local), which may be found
in the Board Policy book located in each campus’ library and principal’s office, or on the
District web site. The assistant superintendent’s decision is final and may not be appealed.
6. Review of Placement
If a student’s placement in a disciplinary alternative education program is to extend beyond 60
days or the end of the next grading period, whichever is earlier, a student’s parent or guardian
is entitled to notice of and an opportunity to participate in a proceeding before the board of
trustees of the school district or the board’s designee, as provided by policy of the board of
trustees of the district. Any decision of the board or the board’s designee under this subsection
is final and may not be appealed.
Page 11
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 11 of 17
A student placed in a disciplinary AEP will be provided a review of the student’s status by the
principal or principal’s designee at intervals not to exceed 120 days. At the review, the
students or the student’s parent(s)/guardian(s) shall be given the opportunity to present
arguments for the student’s return to the regular classroom or campus. The student may not
be returned to the classroom of the teacher who removed the student without the removing
teacher’s consent, unless the Placement Review Committee determines that the removing
teacher’s class is the best or only alternative available.
If the student is a high school student, the Board’s designee and the student’s
parent(s)/guardian(s) must review the student’s progress toward meeting graduation
requirements and must establish a graduation plan for the student at the 120-day placement
review(s).
7. Restriction on Participation in Certain Activities/Services
A student placed in a disciplinary AEP may not participate in or attend any school-sponsored or
school-related extracurricular or co-curricular activities during the period of his/her placement.
A student in the disciplinary AEP will not be provided transportation unless he/she is identified
as a student with a disability who receives transportation pursuant to an individual education
plan as a designated related service.
8. Consideration of Criminal Charges/Prosecution
In determining whether there is a reasonable belief that a student has engaged in conduct
defined as a felony offense, the Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee may consider all
available information, including information furnished under Article 15.27 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
On receipt of notice from a prosecuting attorney or juvenile court pursuant to Article 15.27(g)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure advising that a student has been found not guilty or that
prosecution of the student’s case was refused for lack of prosecutorial merit or insufficient
evidence, the Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee shall review the student’s
placement in the disciplinary AEP. The student may not be returned to the regular class
pending review. The Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee shall schedule a review of
the student’s disciplinary AEP placement with the student’s parent/guardian not later than the
third class day after receiving notice pursuant to Article 15.27(g) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
After reviewing the notice and receiving information from the student’s parent/guardian, the
Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee may continue the student’s placement if there is
reason to believe the presence of the student in the regular classroom threatens the safety of
other students or teachers.
The student or student’s parent/guardian may appeal the Superintendent’s decision to
continue a student’s disciplinary AEP placement to the Board. The student may not be
returned to the regular classroom pending the Board appeal.
At the next regularly scheduled meeting, the Board shall review the notice from the
prosecuting attorney or juvenile court that the prosecutor has dismissed the charges or that
the student has been found not guilty. The Board shall also receive information from the
student, the student’s parent/guardian, and the Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee.
The Board may affirm or reverse the decision made by the Superintendent or Superintendent’s
designee concerning the student’s continued placement.
The Board shall make record of the proceedings. If the Board affirms the decision of the
Superintendent or Superintendent’s designee, the Board shall inform the student and the
student’s parent/guardian of the right to appeal to the Commissioner of Education. The
student may not be returned to the regular classroom pending an appeal to the Commissioner.
9.
Additional Misconduct
Page 12
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 12 of 17
If, during the term of placement, a student engages in additional conduct for which placement
in a disciplinary AEP or expulsion is required or permitted, additional proceedings may be
conducted regarding that conduct and the principal or Board, as appropriate, may enter an
additional order as a result of those proceedings.
10. Continuation of Placement
If a student enrolling in CCISD has been placed in a disciplinary AEP by another Texas school
district, a Texas open-enrollment charter school, or an out-of-state school district, CCISD may
continue the placement if the prior school provides CCISD with a copy of the placement order,
and in the case of an out-of state school district, that district placed the student in a
disciplinary AEP for reasons that would also be reasons for such placement in CCISD. If an
out-of-state District ordered placement for a period that exceeds one year, CCISD shall reduce
the period of placement so that the aggregate period of removal does not exceed one year
unless, after a review, the District determines that the student is a threat to the safety of
other students or to District employees or extended placement is in the best interest of the
student.
11. Continuation of Course Work
The District is required to provide in its disciplinary AEP courses necessary to fulfill a student’s
high school graduation requirements. The District shall offer a student removed to a
disciplinary alternative education program an opportunity to complete coursework necessary
to fulfill the student’s graduation requirements through any method available, including a
correspondence course, distance learning, or summer school, free of charge.
Students enrolled in AA, Pre-AP or AP courses will be serviced at the regular level while
assigned to Clear Path Alternative School. Upon return to their home campus, students will
have a choice of remaining in the AA, Pre-AP or AP classes or be placed in a regular level
instruction class. (see Regulation FOC)
Students enrolled in elective courses will have those courses serviced through work assigned
from their home campus teacher while enrolled in Clear Path Alternative School. The home
campus teacher will be responsible for packaging assignments, projects, exams, etc., for a
student assigned to CPAS and send it to CPAS. Staff at CPAS will monitor the work, projects,
exam, etc., and return the work product to the home campus for their evaluation and
assignment of grade. (see Regulation FOC)
12. Notice to Educators
A principal shall inform each educator who has responsibility for or is under the direction and
supervision of an educator who has responsibility for, the instruction of a student who has
engaged in any violation listed in Texas Education Code 37.006 of the student’s misconduct.
Each educator shall keep this information confidential.
* Note: Removal to a disciplinary AEP is not required if the student is expelled for the same
conduct for which removal would be required.
D. Expulsion from School
Disciplinary action resulting in expulsion from school with the exception of mandatory expulsion
offenses, will be correlated to the seriousness of the offense, the student’s age and grade level,
the frequency of misconduct, the student’s attitude, the effect of the misconduct on the school
environment, whether the student acted in self-defense, intent or lack of intent at the time the
student engaged in the conduct, a student’s disciplinary history, or a disability that substantially
impairs the student’s capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of the student’s conduct.
1. Discretionary Expulsion
(a) A student may be expelled if the student engages in conduct involving a public school that
contains the elements of the offense of false alarm or report under Section 42.06, Penal
Code, or terroristic threat under Section 22.07, Penal Code.
(b) A student may be expelled if the student while on or within 300 feet of school property, as
measured from any point on the school’s real property boundary line, or while attending a
school-sponsored or school-related activity on or off school property:
Page 13
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 13 of 17
(1) Sells, gives, or delivers to another person or possesses, uses, or is under the
influence of:
i.
Any amount of marijuana, or a controlled substance as defined by Chapter
481, Health and Safety Code, or by 21 USC Section 801etseq .
ii.
Any amount of a dangerous drug, as defined by Chapter 483, Health and
Safety Code, or by 21 USC Section 801etseq, in an amount not punishable as
a felony offense.
iii.
Any amount of an alcoholic beverage, as defined by Section 1.04, Alcoholic
Beverage Code.
(2) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of an offense relating to an
abusable volatile chemical under Sections 485.031 through 485.034, Health and
Safety Code;
(3) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of an offense under Section 22.01
(a) (1). Penal Code against a school district employee or volunteer as defined by
Section 22.053, Education Code;
(4) Engages in conduct that contains the elements of an offense of deadly conduct
under Section 22.05. Penal Code.
(c) A student may be expelled if subject to Section 37.007(d) of the Education Code, while
within 300 feet of school property, as measured from any point on the school’s real
property boundary line, or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity on
or off school property the student engages in conduct specified in Section 2(a)-(c)(under
“Mandatory Expulsion,” below,) or possesses a firearm, as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 921.
(d) A student may be expelled if the student engages in conduct that contains the elements of
assault under Section 22.01(a)(1), Penal Code, against a school district employee or a
volunteer, regardless of whether the conduct occurs on or off of school property or while
attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity on or off of school property. A
volunteer is defined as a person who provides services to the school district without
compensation, either on the premises of the district or at a school-sponsored or school-
related activity, on or off school property.
(e) A student may be expelled if the student, while placed in an AEP for disciplinary reasons,
continues to engage in serious or persistent misbehavior that violates the district's Student
Code of Conduct. The District defines “persistent” to be two (2) or more violations of the
Student Code of Conduct in general or repeated occurrences of the same violation.
Serious offenses include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Vandalism
(2) Robbery or theft
(3) Extortion, coercion, or blackmail
(4) Aggressive, disruptive action or group demonstration that substantially disrupts or
materially interferes with school activities
(5) Hazing
(6) Insubordination
(7) Profanity, vulgar language, or obscene gestures directed toward teachers or other
school employees
(8) Fighting, committing physical abuse, or threatening physical abuse
(9) Possession or distribution of pornographic materials
(10)
Leaving school grounds without permission
(11)
Making or assisting in making threats, including threats against individuals and
bomb threats
(12)
Sexual harassment of a student or District employee
(13)
Possession of or conspiring to possess any explosive or explosive device
(14)
Falsification of records, passes, or other school-related documents, including
electronic documents
(15)
Refusal to accept discipline management techniques proposed by the teacher
or principal
(16)
Gang-related activity
(17)
Engaging in conduct that is punishable as criminal mischief, if felony offense
(18)
Repeated truancy
(19)
Single event of truancy if student commits a misdemeanor or felony offense
while truant
(20)
Inhalant infractions
(21)
Possession of any knife or prohibited weapon
Page 14
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 14 of 17
(22)
Possession, use, or distribution of alcohol, marijuana, or any controlled
substance
(23)
Other situation that because of circumstances is deemed serious by the
administrator.
(f) A student who engages in conduct that contains the elements of the offense of criminal
mischief under Section 28.03, Penal Code, may be expelled at the district's discretion if
the conduct is punishable as a felony. The student shall be referred to the authorized
officer of the juvenile court regardless of whether the student is expelled.
(g) A student may be expelled if the student engages in conduct against another student that
contains the elements of aggravated assault, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault,
murder, capital murder, or criminal attempt to commit murder or capital murder, or
aggravated robbery, without regard to whether the conduct occurs on or off school
property or while attending a school-sponsored or school related activity on or off of
school property.
(h) A CCISD student who engages in conduct for which expulsion is required (see below) may
be expelled from CCISD if the student engages in such conduct on school property of
another Texas school district or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related
activity of a school in another Texas school district.
2. Mandatory Expellable Offenses
A student must be expelled for any of the following offenses if committed on school property
or while attending a school-sponsored or school-related activity on or off school property:
(a) A firearm violation, as defined by federal law or state law.
Firearm under federal law includes:
(1) Any weapon (including a starter gun), which will or is designed to, or which may
readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.
(2) The frame or receiver of any such weapon.
(3) Any firearm muffler or firearm weapon.
(4) Any destructive device, such as any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas bomb, or
grenade.
(b) Use, exhibition, or possession of the following, under the Texas Penal Code or Board
policy:
(1) A firearm.
(2) Any knife with a blade length longer than 5-1/2 inches.
(3) The use or threat to use any knife as a weapon or possession and threat to use any
knife as a weapon regardless of blade length.
(4) A club. “Club” means an instrument that is specially designed, made, or adapted for
the purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death by striking a person with the
instrument.
(5) A prohibited weapon, including an explosive weapon; a machine gun; a short-barrel
firearm; a firearm silencer; a switchblade knife; knuckles; armor-piercing ammunition;
a chemical dispensing device; or a zip gun.
(c) Behavior containing the elements of the following under the Texas Penal Code when the
conduct occurs on school property, or while attending school-sponsored or school-related
activities:
(1) Aggravated assault, sexual assault, or aggravated sexual assault.
(2) Arson.
(3) Murder, capital murder, or criminal attempt to commit murder.
(4) Indecency with a child.
(5) Aggravated kidnapping.
(6) Behavior related to an alcohol or drug offense that could be punishable as a felony
under the Texas Health and Safety Code.
(7) Aggravated robbery under section 29.03, Penal Code.
(8) Manslaughter under Section 19.04, Penal Code.
(9) Criminally negligent homicide, under Section 19.05, Penal Code.
(d) A student must be expelled if the student engages in any of the offenses identified in
Section 2(a)-(c), above, against any employee or volunteer in retaliation for or as a result
of the person’s employment or association with a school district, without regard to
whether the conduct occurs on or off of school property or while attending a school-
sponsored or school-related activity on or off of school property.
Page 15
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 15 of 17
3. Expulsion Procedure and Appeal
(a) Authority – The Board of Trustees delegates the authority to expel students to the
Superintendent of Schools.
(b) Written Notice – The parent(s)/guardian(s) of a student accused of committing an
expellable offense shall be advised in writing of the alleged offense and the recommended
disciplinary action.
(c) Informal Conference – A student accused of committing an expellable offense is entitled to
participate in an informal conference with the principal or the principal’s designee and the
student’s parent(s)/guardian(s). Unless otherwise agreed by the principal and the
student’s parent(s)/guardian(s), such conference shall be conducted no later than three
(3) school days after the principal or principal’s designee is first advised of the alleged
offense(s). The student’s parent(s) or guardian(s) shall be advised in writing of the date
and time of the meeting.
The purpose of the conference is to informally review the circumstances and evidence
upon which the recommendation for expulsion is based. A student’s parent(s)/guardian(s)
may elect to waive the right to participate in a conference. Additionally, if the student’s
parent(s)/guardian(s) fails to attend a conference after reasonable attempts have been
made to notify the parent/guardian of the date and time of the meeting, the principal or
principals designee may proceed in the absence of the student, parent/guardian, and/or
other adult representing the student.
At the conclusion of the informal conference, the principal or principal’s designee shall
inform, in writing, the student and the student’s parent/guardian or other adult
representative of the outcome of the conference. A copy of such written notice shall also
be forwarded to the Superintendent of Schools.
(d) Appeal – A student’s parent/guardian may appeal a recommendation for expulsion to the
Superintendent of Schools by submitting a written request for a hearing to the
Superintendent’s office within three (3) school days of receipt of the recommendation.
Failure to request an appeal within the designated time will result in the Superintendent’s
acceptance of the recommendation for expulsion. Upon acceptance of the
recommendation, the Superintendent of Schools shall issue an Order of Expulsion. If the
period of expulsion is inconsistent with the guidelines herein, the order must give notice of
the inconsistency.
Pending the outcome of the hearing process described below, the principal or principal’s
designee may place the student in: (1) another appropriate classroom; (2) in-school
suspension; (3) out-of-school suspension for a maximum of three (3) days; (4) an
alternative education program; and/or (5) any combination of the foregoing.
Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the Superintendent shall convene an impartial
evidentiary hearing to consider the proposed expulsion. The Superintendent may elect, at
his/her option, to refer the matter to a hearing officer or a panel consisting of three (3)
administrators designated to act on the Superintendent’s behalf. In the event a hearing
officer panel is appointed, he/she the panel members shall prepare a written
recommendation to the Superintendent based upon the evidence presented at the hearing.
A student appealing a recommendation for expulsion is entitled to receive procedural due
process as required by the federal and state constitutions. Procedural rights include:
(i) The right to be represented by legal counsel or an adult who is not a District
employee, unless the District employee is the student’s parent/guardian.
(ii) Prior notice of potential witnesses for the District.
(iii) An opportunity to testify and present evidence and witnesses in the student’s
defense.
(iv) An opportunity to question the District’s witnesses.
Expulsion hearings shall be recorded in some manner, either by a court reporter or audio
recording.
Page 16
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 16 of 17
Following the conclusion of the hearing described above, the Superintendent shall advise
the student’s parent(s)/guardian(s) of his/her decision with respect to the proposed
expulsion. The Superintendent shall expressly advise the parent(s)/guardian(s) or the
reasons and basis for his/her decision.
(e) Board Review – A student’s parent(s)/guardian(s) may appeal the decision of the
Superintendent to the Board of Trustees by submitting a written request to the
Superintendent within two (2) school days of receipt of the decision. The Superintendent
shall provide the parent(s)/guardian(s) with written notice of the date, time, and place of
the Board’s review within five (5) school days of the receipt of the appeal request.
The Board’s review shall be based on the record developed before the Superintendent
and/or hearing officer below. The Board may, at its discretion, elect to hear brief oral
presentations of no longer than five (5) minutes each from the Superintendent or
Superintendent’s designee and the student or the student’s parent/guardian or other adult
representative. The Board’s review shall be conducted in closed session.
The Board may uphold or reverse the Superintendent’s decision. If the Board upholds the
expulsion decision, the Board shall direct the Superintendent to issue an Expulsion Order
within three (3) school days.
A student may appeal an adverse expulsion decision to state district court in accordance
with the provisions of the Texas Education Code.
4. Sanctions
Expelled students are prohibited from being on school grounds or attending school-related
extracurricular activities during the period of expulsion.
No District academic credit will be earned for work missed during the period of expulsion
unless the student is enrolled in a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP). All
expelled students will be referred to the JJAEP in the county in which they reside.
5. Length of Expulsion From School
If the expulsion occurs after the first six weeks of school, the student will be expelled for the
remainder of the fall semester and the entire spring semester. If the expulsion occurs after
the fourth six weeks of school, the student will be expelled for the remainder of the spring
semester and the entire fall semester of the following school year. The period of expulsion
may not exceed one year unless, after a review, the District determines that the student is a
threat to safety of other students or to District employees or extended placement is in the best
interest of the student.
State and federal laws require a student to be expelled from the regular classroom for a period
of at least one calendar year for bringing a firearm, as defined by federal law, to school.
However, the Superintendent may modify the length of the expulsion on a case-by-case basis.
The District may provide educational services to the expelled student in a JJAEP.
An expelled student may be readmitted on the recommendation of the Placement Review
Committee of the District while the student is completing any court disposition requirements
the court imposes. The student may not be returned to the teacher's class where the offense
occurred without the teacher's consent.
After the student has successfully completed any court disposition requirements the court
imposes, including conditions of a deferred prosecution ordered by the court or such
conditions required by the prosecutor or probation department, the District may not refuse to
admit the student if the student meets the requirements for admission. However, the District
may place the student in a disciplinary AEP.
6. Additional Misconduct During Expulsion
Page 17
CCISD Student Code of Conduct
Revised April 2006
Page 17 of 17
If, during the term of expulsion, a student engages in additional conduct for which placement
in a disciplinary AEP or expulsion is required or permitted, additional proceedings may be
conducted regarding that conduct, and the principal or Board, as appropriate, may enter an
additional order as a result of those proceedings.
E. Emergency Procedures
1. Emergency Removal to Disciplinary AEP
The principal or principal’s designee may immediately remove a student to a disciplinary AEP
for behavior that is so unruly, disruptive, or abusive that the teacher cannot communicate with
the class. The reason for removal must be a reason for which placement in a disciplinary AEP
may be made on a nonemergency basis. Within a reasonable time after the emergency
placement, but not later than the 10
th
day after the date of the placement, the student shall
be accorded the same due process applicable to nonemergency disciplinary AEP placements.
2. Emergency Expulsion from School
In an emergency, the principal or principal’s designee may immediately order the expulsion
when people or property are in imminent harm if the principal or principal’s designee
reasonably believe that such action is necessary to protect persons or property from imminent
harm.
When an emergency expulsion occurs, the student will be given oral notice of the reason for
the action. The reason must be a reason for which expulsion may be made on a
nonemergency basis. Within a reasonable amount of time after the emergency expulsion, but
not later than the 10
th
day after the day of the expulsion, the student will be given appropriate
due process. The due process is the same, as outlined in this code, as for a student facing
expulsion. If emergency expulsion involves a student with disabilities who receives special
education services, the term of the student’s emergency expulsion is subject to the
requirements of federal law and regulations and must be consistent with the consequences
that would apply to a student without a disability.
F. Placement in a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP)
State law requires the Harris County and Galveston County Juvenile Boards to develop a juvenile
justice alternative education program, which provides educational services to certain students who
have been expelled.
The Board of Trustees will enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the county juvenile
board outlining the juvenile board’s responsibilities concerning the establishment and operation of
the JJAEP and conditions on payments from the District to the juvenile board. An agreement
between the school District and the county must provide for an expelled student to immediately
attend the JJAEP from the date of expulsion. Students who are not eligible for admission in the
JJAEP must be provided an educational program by the District.
G. Continuation of Disciplinary Placement/Withdrawals
If a student withdraws from CCISD before an order for placement in a disciplinary AEP or
expulsion is entered, the principal may complete the proceedings and enter an order. If the
student subsequently enrolls in CCISD during the same or subsequent school year, the district
may enforce the order at that time, except for any period of the placement or expulsion that has
been served by the student on enrollment in another district that honored the order. If CCISD
enrolls the student, the principal shall inform each educator who has responsibility for, or is under
the direction or supervision of an educator who has responsibility for, the instruction of a student
who has engaged in conduct for which removal is required by Texas Education Code Section
37.006 of the student’s misconduct. Each educator shall keep this information confidential. If the
principal or Board fails to enter an order after the student withdraws, the next district in which the
student enrolls may complete the proceedings and enter an order.
Page 18
Clear Creek ISD
FM
084910
(EXHIBIT A)
Clear Creek Independent School District
Policy FM Regulation
Extracurricular Student Activities Code of Conduct
Student/Parent Signature Form
Academic School Year:
_______________________________
_______________________________
Full Name
School
____________________________________________________________________
Home Address
______________________________
_______________________________
Home Phone Number
Current Grade
I have received and accept the CCISD Student/Parent Handbook, Extracurricular Rules of
Conduct, and _______________ organization’s rules/constitution. I have reviewed and
accept these handbooks and rules. I agree to follow these guidelines and expectations.
_______________________________
_______________________________
Student’s Signature
Parent’s Signature
_______________________________
_______________________________
Date
Date

Money, Money Teen A Bean Land here is a prelude to your request......

When parents are so busy trying to "make it" and believe their child's teacher cares then when they realize everything they have to do is for naught, It is not worth trying to be good....... but must trust another to care for the very reason they are so busy trying to "make it" .

CCISD's, Shirley Duke and Breeding Principals allow the waste of time our children endure selective waste such as Ms.Feydo of Calk Elementary with payment for state law sanctioned "failure to educate" MOTTO~

The only reason these idiots were there openly admitted it, was for the money money, money, money,I love money" as the teacher said when requesting her students "lunch money" on the one day I went to school with my son.

Guess the free lunch kids were "outsourced" or "downsized" since they had no money?

Good, better to know bad news immediately!!

And those that are responsible for their children could care less, then intentionally force you to choose work or for the very care that is no longer provided.



And those that are responsible for our children could care less......"money, money, money,I love money" the teacher said when requesting any/all the students "lunch money" on the one day I went to school with my son. In a kindergarten's class, the teacher was most enthusiastic when collecting the kindergartens students by singing to them ....."money, money, money,I love money"~

If she paid attention to her class like she did to the class her child was in, which was more than 5 times in a 2 hour period.
I knew then she was not worth a dime of money she so loved from her students.

What a waste of penny's CCISD paid, what a waste of time for me, my son and those students and parents who trusted her with their children.

The only child she was concerned with was her own, oh and our students lunch money.

Teen Bean Land

Cause for concern gives also the factor that any policy perspective will always have to operate along the lines of defining social groups. It may come

ISEC 2005

Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress
International Special Education Conference
Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity?

1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland
home
about the conference
programme
registration
accommodation
contact
Equality of Opportunity as a Rationale for Inclusive Education

Dr. Christian Liesen
Institute for Special Education – University of Zurich, Switzerland
Hirschengraben 48, CH-8001 Zurich
liesen@isp.unizh.ch


This paper seeks to discuss whether the principle of equality of opportunity could serve as a rationale for inclusive education. The first section aims at positioning the topic within the inclusive education discourse, narrowing down the scope. The second section presents a brief analysis of the notion of ‘equality of opportunity’ as well as some of its implications, while the third section addresses the question of how we are to know whether opportunities are equal. The last section seeks to draw some conclusions with respect to inclusive education. – It should be pointed out that the paper is solely meant for discussion.

1. The case for inclusive education: reasons and rationales

Many arguments have been brought forward to strengthen the case for inclusive education. Yet it is not always easy to follow the lines of reasoning, and little reflection is needed to notice certain contradictions and ambiguities and a good deal of eclecticism in the literature. The crux is, as Alan Dyson observed, that

(i)nclusion is different from many other fields of inquiry in that it is premised on an answer rather than a question. That ‘answer’, of course, is that inclusive education is superior in one or other way to non-inclusive education. The strength in this position is that it enables a relatively young field to define and advance itself in the face of considerable hostility. (…) The danger, however, is that it becomes all too easy for thinking on inclusion to descend from analysis to polemic, and for certain values and beliefs to become ossified, ultimately to the detriment of those marginalized groups on whose interests the inclusion movement claims to act. ( Dyson, 1999, p. 43f. )

Dyson has suggested to distinguish between two different but intersecting dimensions of the inclusive education movement: One is primarily concerned with providing a rationale for inclusion, whereas the other concentrates on the realisation of inclusion. Each dimension can again be subdivided into different discourses as follows. A rationale for inclusive education is either sought with reference to rights and social justice or by rigorously questioning the efficacy of special education (while claiming the superiority of inclusive education). The realisation of inclusion is frequently discussed either with respect to the political struggle for the implementation of inclusive education, or it is concerned with what inclusive education looks like inpractice (cf. Dyson, 1999, pp. 38-43 ). It is safe to say that these two dimensions / four discourses deliver a felicitous depiction of the inclusion debate’s crucial building blocks.

This paper is concerned with adumbrating the question whether equality of opportunity could serve as a rationale for inclusive education. It belongs, hence, in the context of the rights and social justice discourse. Concededly, the most important (and most interesting) question would actually be how the different building blocks interrelate, or ought to interact, in order to achieve progress in the field. Dyson does offer some very sensible and perspicacious suggestions on this (cf. ibid., pp. 44-48). The line of reasoning chosen here, by contrast, will allow only for a few rather cautious remarks in the final part of the paper. Proposed is the idea of merging, in a way, ethical considerations and empirical research in order to substantiate the case for inclusive education. As a consequence, some fundamental policy issues will emerge, alongside certain difficulties inherent to the rhetoric of inclusion.

2. Equality of opportunity

Let us shed, as a first step, some light on the principle of equality of opportunity. Peter Westen (1990) has presented an illuminating formal analysis. He states that opportunity

designates both a single concept and a multiplicity of conceptions. Each opportunity is like every other in that all opportunities reflect a certain formal relationship among agents, obstacles, and goals; but each opportunity also differs from other opportunities in that each is a relationship among particular agents, particular obstacles, and particular goals. ( Westen, 1990 , p. 171, italics added)

This may seem simple enough. Nevertheless, an important point with respect to the rhetoric of opportunity is already implied here: When opportunities are stated as a reason for, say, political action, speakers often do not specify the particular agents, obstacles, and/or goals they have in mind. Such a speech may still meet with approval although the underlying conceptions of speaker and listener may turn out to be radically different on closer examination. Rhetorical difficulties like these should be kept in mind.

Equal opportunities do not lead to equal outcomes. On the contrary, equal opportunities lead to inequality. There is sense in which a strong commitment to equality of opportunity is incompatible with equality of outcomes, and a society that aims at equalising opportunity is very different from a society that aims at equalising outcomes. The reason is that

(a)n ‘opportunity’ to attain a goal is a chance to attain a goal, not necessarily a guarantee of attaining it. Insofar as people have opportunities that are less than guarantees of what they wish, some of them will inevitably attain goals that others fail to attain. To create equal opportunity, therefore, is virtually always to allow people ‘to become unequal by competing against [their] fellows.’ (Westen, 1990, p. 176f.)

That equality of opportunity leads to inequality has some deeper implications. It can be argued that opportunities express and deliver a certain kind of liberty or freedom which is essential for society and which can not be achieved otherwise. Equality of opportunity is indispensable. T.D. Campbell enunciates the point as follows:

An opportunity may be said to occur when an agent is in a situation in which he may choose whether or not to perform some effortful act which is considered to be desirable in itself or as means to the attainment of some goal which is considered to be desirable. An opportunity is thus a type of liberty or freedom for it involves the absence of prohibitions or obstacles limiting what agents may or can do or acquire. […] (A)n opportunity is something which the agent may or may not take advantage of depending on whether or not he chooses to do so. One of the points about describing a situation as an opportunity is that this indicates that the outcome of the situation depends in part on the choices made by the person who has the opportunity. Opportunities can always be missed or passed up, neglected or rejected. Of course I may be forced to have an opportunity (as when I was compelled to go to school) but it is not an opportunity which I am forced to have if the attainment of the desired goal does not depend to some extent on my choices, that is, for instance, if whether or not I become educated as distinct from go to school, does not depend to some extent on my own volitions. If education as such could be compelled then we would not speak of educational opportunity, at least not in those cases where it is compelled. ( Campbell, 1975, p. 51/54, italics added )

It is true, of course, that not all opportunities are of particular concern to us. People do not care for all kinds of opportunities; they care first and foremost for educational and occupational opportunities. A ‘fair’ or ‘equal’ distribution of opportunities is relevant and vital especially in these domains. What comes into play here, then, is that equality of opportunity must be seen as a matter of distributive justice. A just society will usually seek to equalise opportunities in the sense of distributing them fair an equal. It is worth noticing, however, that opportunities can not be created or distributed at will. Westen notes that

creating one opportunity may mean denying another. Thus, whenever a society creates an opportunity by removing an obstacle that affects people differentially, it denies people the opportunity to benefit from the differential. And, whenever a society creates an opportunity by removing human obstacles, it denies people the opportunity to exploit those obstacles. This does not mean that societies should refrain from creating opportunities. It means, rather, that … the significant question for opportunity is not ‘Whether opportunity?’ but ‘Which opportunities?’ (Westen, 1990, p. 171)

Consequently and in most cases, with equality of opportunity as a rationale for inclusive education, apparently interests will have to be balanced. The interests of those who are excluded from participating effectively in society – of which the education system forms an essential part – will have to be weighed against the interests of those who are successful within such a framework and ‘benefit from the given differential’. A society will therefore have to deliberate about equalising opportunities, which is, ultimately, a democratic process (belonging to the realisation dimension).

It should be emphasized, however, that when a mismatch between a person’s situation and what may be called the dominant cooperative framework of society occurs, the results may be devastating. Being excluded from participating in the most basic interactions and cooperation of society strongly calls for compensation and adjustment. On this basic level, the interest in inclusion will by and large outweigh the interests of those who may be deprived of being as successful as they could be otherwise. If people are denied basic opportunities in this sense, they will normally be in the position of making strong claims in the cause of justice. But the question of particular interest is then, of course, ‘How do we know they are denied these opportunities?’, or more general, ‘How do we know whether opportunities are equal or not?’, e.g. in an education system.

3. How do we know when opportunities are equal?

We have seen so far that we should focus our attention on educational and occupational opportunities; that opportunities secure individual liberty and freedom and lead, consequently, to inequalities; and that equality of opportunity is a matter of distributive justice and may result in strong claims of justice in at least some cases. But on what grounds is it legitimate to judge whether opportunities are equal or not? How do we assess and evaluate equality of opportunity, especially with respect to inclusive education?

There is a substantive answer to this question. Any inquiry into whether opportunities in a given society are equal or not – or within parts of a society, such as the education system – will have to start from ascertainable inequalities under the prevailing circumstances. These inequalities will have to be sufficiently and adequately described in a way that most people would agree is accurate. (We will look at an example in a moment.)

The crucial point to be addressed will be whether or not the portrayed inequalities indicate that the principle of equality of opportunity has been violated. Onora O’Neill (1977) has argued that two different positions suggest themselves. One may be called the ‘formal’ (or ‘liberal’) position. It stresses that inequalities are due to the fact that people may choose to or refrain from taking advantage of the opportunities at hand. The members of society may be extremely unequal in educational and occupational attainment, but if so, it must be the result of the varying capacities, volitions, and desires of those to whom the respective selection procedures are applied. Once the distributive and selective procedures are fair, there is nothing left to complain about. As O’Neill points out,

(s)uch an ‘equal-opportunity society’ would … not be characterized by equal incomes or equal property holdings or equal standards of living or of education. (…) Equal opportunity in the formal sense does not ensure equal success or equal health or equal status, but only the fair application of the rules governing the pursuit of such goods. This is the equality of opportunity of … a society in which there are winners and losers, and in which winning appears often as merited by the winners and losing as deserved by the losers – for did they not all have equal opportunity to win? ( O'Neill, 1977 , p. 180)

The other position may be called the ‘substantive’ (or ‘egalitarian’) position. It stresses that inequalities must not indicate a disproportionate success of certain social groups in a society. Instead, all major social groups – but not all individuals – must fare equally well.

An equal-opportunity society on the substantive view is one in which the success rates of all major social groups are the same. (…) A strong commitment to substantive equality of opportunity demands that any under-representation of some group in some line of employment / income group / educational group be due solely to the unmanipulated choice of members of that group. (…) Substantively equal opportunity is achieved when the success rates of certain major social groups – such as the two sexes, various ethnic groups and perhaps various age groups – are equalized. It is not breached when there are large differences between the most- and least-successful members of these groups, provided that there are equally large differences between the most- and least-successful members of other major social groups. It is not true in a society which aims at substantively equal opportunities that all individuals have the same chance of any given type of success. For individuals are all members of many differently defined groups, and substantive equality of opportunity seeks only to equalize their chances qua members of certain major social groups; it seeks to eliminate inter-group differences, but not to alter intra-group ones. ( O'Neill, 1977 , p. 181-83)

This position is ready to acknowledge that people’s perspectives in life are not exclusively ascribable to a person’s capacities, volitions, and desires. As a matter of fact, there are disadvantages which are undeserved and beyond individual control, such as being disabled or of old age. The ‘substantive’ position is concerned with identifying adequate characteristics of major social groups to enable sound comparisons and call for compensation where needed.

To illustrate, a good example are some results from the PISA study (cf. www.pisa.oecd.org). The OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is an internationally standardised assessment that was jointly developed by the participating countries (30 OECD member states plus 13 associated countries in the first assessment in 2000; at least 58 countries will participate in the next assessment in 2006). PISA claims to assess “how far students near the end of compulsory education have acquired some of the knowledge and skills that are essential for full participation in society.” The idea is to give information about the capacities and the potential of education systems. Does an education system prepare students well?

It is only recently that OECD has published some findings concerning equity and quality in the light of the PISA 2000 results. The report states that

(i)n sum, PISA 2000 results show that students in integrated education systems perform, on average, better than those in selective education systems, and that their educational performance is less dependent on their background. Many factors may be at play here. A higher average performance suggests that the more heterogeneous student groups or classes in integrated education systems could have a beneficial effect for the lower-performing students. Also, the flexibility offered by an integrated system may allow students to improve their performance while keeping their academic options open. ( OECD, 2005 , p. 89)

In the main findings section, the report reads:

A striking result was the advantage that comprehensive education systems appear to have in terms of student performance (quality). PISA 2000 results suggest that the performance of students enrolled in comprehensive education systems is less dependent on their socio-economic background. ( ibid., p. 94)

From the perspective of equality of opportunity, it is not so much the aspect of performance (‘quality’) that is of interest here but rather the aspect of uncoupling socio-economic background and performance (‘equity’). There are some countries – Germany is a sad example – in which the social background of a student has a very strong impact (‘predictive power’) on student performance. This means, to put the matter bluntly, that it is not a student’s capacity to perform that determines what he or she will achieve, but first and foremost his or her socio-economic background. The result is that students with a low social background are manifestly underrepresented on the higher levels of the education system.

The ‘liberal’ position has no option but to ascribe this situation to individual factors, say, motivation or ability. This is highly implausible, at least in the case of countries that have had to experience a rude awakening by PISA, such as Germany or Switzerland. ‘Substantive’ equality of opportunity, on the other hand, is precisely concerned with cases like these: Members of a major social group – i.e., students with a lower socio-economic background – are disadvantaged due to factors that are undeserved and beyond individual control, while other groups display disproportionate success. This does call for an equalisation of opportunities.



4. Equality of opportunity and inclusive education: some considerations

In the final part of this paper, I would like to draw some conclusions concerning equality of opportunity and inclusive education.

First, I think that equality of opportunity can serve as a rationale for inclusive education if and only if inclusion is understood in the sense of equity. This would mean to adopt the substantive view of equal opportunity, and will require to provide empirical evidence to show that a major social group of society is indeed undeservedly disadvantaged. It would also mean to suggest that some form of inclusive education is the right course of action to take.

Second, to provide a rationale for inclusive education is obviously very different from the realisation of inclusive education. It should be kept in mind that other interests will have to be allowed for as well and that there might be considerable opposition, even if the claims could compellingly be shown to be legitimate ones. This should not belie the fact, however, that being in the position to provide a rationale for inclusive education is very different from simply claiming that it is right. It is precisely because different and mutually incompatible interests are involved that arguments have to be provided (and there are some highly interesting contributions in this kind of spirit, for example Booth & Ainscow, 1998; Pijl, Meijer & Hegarty, 1997; Vitello & Mithaug, 1998 ).

Third, if this idea bears any validity at all, it has to be pointed out that the rhetoric of inclusion tends to disguise some fundamental points here, especially in relation to policy. For example, the rhetoric of ‘celebrating diversity’ tends to downplay the fact that different legitimate interests are involved and have to be balanced. Cause for concern gives also the factor that any policy perspective will always have to operate along the lines of defining social groups. It may come as a surprise that this is not only due to administrative reasons (cf. Dever, 1990 ) but is also demanded from an ethically informed perspective. There are no claims of distributive justice – and hence no rationale for inclusive education – without the construction of social groups. The talk of heterogeneity isn’t much help in these matters, the more so as it quite often blurs who is thought to be the target group of inclusion within the inclusive education discourse.

Fourth, it will be as unavoidable as it is fruitful to strive to merge ethical considerations and empirical research in some respect. The idea behind this is that an empirical basis is indispensable in order to substantiate claims, while at the same time ethical considerations are indispensable to provide a sensible interpretative framework for empirical findings and to draw sound conclusions. One main feature of these arguments, reasons and rationales is that they must be eligible to convince others on grounds they can not reasonably reject – to convincingly argue the case.

Fifth, there seems to be a broad consensus that inclusive education has to be conceptualised as a general education topic, not as another issue of special education. Equality of opportunity might help us to engross the implications of what this actually means. It might help us to see the big picture.

Sixth, it has to be pointed out that there is not one choice in these matters, but many. There is no unequivocal course of action to take. Dyson’s proposal to talk not of inclusion, but of inclusions, and to seek not a single form but a wide range of inclusive practice and organisation (1999, p. 46), deserves a good deal more of attention. Moreover, I think the field of special education should be very serious about Seamus Hegarty’s remark that inclusive education has to be about changing and modifying system in a way that preserves all its strengths (cf. Hegarty, 1998 , p. 156).

References

BOOTH T. & AINSCOW M. (eds.) (1998) From Them to Us. An International Study of Inclusion in Education. London: Routledge.

CAMPBELL T.D. (1975) Equality of Opportunity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 75, 51-68.

DEVER R.B. (1990) Defining Mental Retardation from an Instructional Perspective. Mental Retardation 28 (3), 147-53.

DYSON A. (1999) Inclusion and Inclusions: Theories and Discourses in Inclusive Education. IN Daniels H. & Garner P. (eds.) World Yearbook of Education 1999: Inclusive Education. London: Kogan, 36-53.

HEGARTY S. (1998) Challenges to Inclusive Education: A European Perspective. IN Vitello S. & Mithaug D.E. (eds.) Inclusive Schooling: National and International Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 151-65.

O'NEILL O. (1977) How Do We Know When Opportunities Are Equal? IN Vetterling-Braggin M., Elliston F.A. & English J. (eds.) Feminism and Philosophy. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield, 177-89.

OECD (2005) School Factors Related to Quality and Equity. Results from Pisa 2000. Paris: OECD.

PIJL S.J., MEIJER C. & HEGARTY S. (eds.) (1997) Inclusive Education: A Global Agenda. London: Routledge.

VITELLO S. & MITHAUG D.E. (eds.) (1998) Inclusive Schooling. National and International Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

WESTEN P. (1990) Speaking of Equality. An Analysis of the Rhetorical Force of Equality in Moral and Legal Discourse. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact
The University of Strathclyde Association of Directors of Education in Scotland NASEN Inclusive Technology Ltd Greater Glasgow & Clyde Valley Tourist Board Virtual Staff College