Education state governments carry the education system

Education PolicyJasmine MatthewsDual GovernmentMr. SDecember 16, 2017 Education Policies of AmericaThe education system differs from to country to country.

Most countries have a similar education system. The federal government of many countries are typically in charge of the education. The United States has an education system is unlike that of many other countries. The United States has a unique educational system because most of the responsibility of education goes to the local and state governments.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Although the local and state governments carry the education system workload, the federal government does play a role. The federal government provides ten percent of the money of the education system budget. The United States has education policies which is common with other countries as well. The policies have grown and changed over time from court cases and just changes in views.Education policies have been around since the United States was inhabited by the Puritans from England. This long time created a wide variety of policies that has paved the way to how education is today. There are over one hundred education policies. The education policies in the United States ranges from issues of dress codes to bullying to anaphylaxis.

Policies such as anaphylaxis are in place to keep students safe in the school environment. Some policies that keep students safe are sexual harassment, racial harassment, and working with children. The working with children education policy sets a guideline to how much criminal record is allowed to be working with children. These policies were also created to set standards in the United States and to create a knowledgeable workforce.

This standard for learning helps prepare students for college and for future jobs and creates a nation-wide literacy level.There have been many issues with the educational policies and there still are many issues with the policies. A large portion of the issues of the education policies are issues that deal with race and religion. Cases that deal with race are a very common education policy issue. Racial segregation in schools played a large part in education policies. Due to the use of slaves in early American history, the changing of ways caused an uprising.

Although segregation is illegal, racial issues are still present in today’s society. Many cases have been about the amount of religion that is in schools that does not violate any rights. Religion has been an issue because the First Amendment clarifies that any United States citizen has the sole right to practice, or to not practice religion. Handicapped people have also had issues with current education because the schools did not always provide facilities or entries for the handicapped to easily access.

 One of the most important court cases dealing with education policies was Brown v. Board of Education (Stahl). This court case was important in the development of education policies. The court case was about segregated schools in America. This case was similar to the Plessy v.

Ferguson which was a case that established segregated schools as “separate, but equal.” In 1954, the Brown v. Board of Education ruled that schools that are segregated, especially by race, are unequal. Segregated schools violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Due to this violation, the court ordered an end to the segregation in schools (Stahl).The two court cases Engel  v. Vitale and Abington School District v. Schempp go hand in hand.

These cases occurred in 1962 and 1963, respectively. Engel v. Vitale was a court case that began because New York law required students to start the day with the pledge of allegiance and a prayer. A mother sued claiming that this prayer violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment (Stahl). The ruling proved that schools that required prayer was unconstitutional by violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Abington School District v. Schempp was a court case about the violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Although the two cases were very similar, this particular case dealt with the reading of the bible and prayer in public schools.

This practice was also found to be unconstitutional with an eight to one vote. Wisconsin v. Yoder occurred in 1972 and was a debate about the education policy that a student must attend school until sixteen years of age. The amish people believed that school was unnecessary and interferes with the Amish religion. Specifically, the children, Jonas Yoder, and  Wallace Miller, were raised by their parents under the Old Order Amish religion, which hold the belief that attending school past the eight graded, was not accepted into their religion.

The Supreme Court required special circumstances for this case because of its interference with Wisconsin’s attendance law, which required students to be in school until they were sixteen years of age, and the First Amendment, the right to freedom of religion (Stahl). The question to be thought during the case, in short, was whether this law violated the First Amendment by prosecuting the parent’s religious decision. In the majority opinion of the court, they established that the values of high school, was ,”in sharp conflict with the fundamental mode of life mandated by the Amish religion.” There was not enough supported benefits of an additional year to force them to attend school against their lifestyle. Another prominent example of contrasting views on secular matters arose in the Lemon v. Kurtzman case. The states that sparked the discussion were Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island who, around the same time, created laws to provide money for both aspects of secular and non-secular schools. In 1968, Pennsylvania gave funding for non-public, non-secular schools.

Two years later, Rhode Island increased teachers’ salaries by 15% to implement into their non-public educational funding. The citizens of their respective states, desired to reverse the decision, stemmed from the notion that it violated the First Amendment. The funding for non-public, non-secular schools, did not uphold the law separating church and state.

On March 3, 1971, the appellants for the latter state, acquired the case into The Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania. By June 28, 1971, the decision resulted in to a 8-1 vote establishing the Rhode Island legislation to be a misconduct against the First Amendment. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger ruled it guilty due to the excessive involvement between state and religion. The funding for Pennsylvania, violated the Establishment Clause, that prohibits the unavoidable intermingling of government in religious activities. Meanwhile Rhode Island’s jurisdiction, the supervision necessary for teachers to ensure no religious affiliation in educational topics, would deem it a relationship with religious and educational affairs, the opposite of what is wanted.

 A Supreme Court case that still has controversy today is the United States v. Alfonso D. López. This was a substantially important court case because this case dealt with limiting the ever growing power of Congress. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress had exceeded the powers of the Commerce Clause by prohibiting guns in school zones. The Gun-Free School Zone law was ruled unconstitutional by a 5-4 vote.

 Past Supreme Court decisions paved way for integrating diversity based not only on race, but on immigration status. In June 1982, the Plyler v. Doe court made an impactful decision on including undocumented citizens to a right of free, public education. Prior to the case, Texas ruled in 1975, that local school districts can deny enrollment for non-legal U.

S citizens. Another school district required those types of students to pay tuition. As a result, a group of Mexican-born students challenged the policy by conjuring a lawsuit. Brought against the Supreme Court, they judged the case on the basis that it violated the Fourteenth Amendment. This provision in the Constitution, known as the Equal Protection Clause, claimed that in order to withhold education from undocumented students, there must be substantial backing that it interferes with another of the state’s interests. The concluding ruling, was separated into two majority opinions. One being that it would deny them the, “possibility that they will contribute in even the smallest way to the progress of our Nation.” The other being that holding the parent’s actions and criminalizing their children goes against the, “fundamental conceptions of justice.

” Through a 5-4 vote, this ruling helped stop the exclusion of children and the problems it can cause, by taking away a productive mass of humans.Education policies evolved over time to create and protect the rights of students with disabilities. The Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist., Westchester v. Rowley, served as a clarification on those policies.

The Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 was subject for review on March 23, 1982. The school, Furnace Woods School, did not provide a sign language interpreter for their deaf student, Amy Rowley. The school believed she was well off without one, and an interpreter was not detrimental to her grades or learning.

The Act allows equal education for those handicapped, but in making accommodations. Thus, her family took the matter to the Court to see what they were given. Despite the district court agreeing she was entitled to a free interpreter, the Supreme Court proclaimed the Act gives the power to choose what is essential for the student in question.

Justice Byron R. added that Amy was given, “education equal to non-handicapped children.” This court case broadened the terms and knowledge of the education policies focused on those disabled.    Education will continue to face issues and complaints no matter how perfect education policies become. Views change with time and so will the education policies, as they have through the years. As more dangers arise, more school zone precautions will be taken to ensure the safety and protection of the children in the schools.

If the court cases had not occurred, the disabled, blacks, nonreligious, and the Amish would not have any rights in their education.     ReferenceBoard of Ed. of Hendrick Hudson Central School Dist., Westchester Cty. v.

Rowley. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1981/80-1002BOARD OF EDUCATION OF the HENDRICK HUDSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT BD.

OF ED., WESTCHESTER COUNTY, et al., Petitioners v. Amy ROWLEY, by her parents and natural guardians, Clifford and Nancy Rowley etc. (2016, October 24).

Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.law.cornell.

edu/supremecourt/text/458/176 McBride, A. (2017). The Supreme Court . The Future of the Court . Landmark Cases | PBS. online Thirteen.

org. Available at: https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/future/landmark_us.html Accessed 18 Dec. 2017.Moody, A. A.

(n.d.). The Education for All Handicapped Children Act: A Faltering Step Towards Integration. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from http://commons.

trincoll.edu/edreform/2012/05/the-education-for-all-handicapped-children-act-a-faltering-step-towards-integration/Wisconsin v. Yoder. (n.d.).

Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/family-law/family-law-keyed-to-weisberg/state-regulation-of-the-parent-child-relationship/wisconsin-v-yoder/{{meta.pageTitle}}. (n.

d.). Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.oyez.

org/cases/1971/70-11{{meta.pageTitle}}. (n.

d.). Retrieved December 18, 2017, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/89

x

Hi!
I'm Morris!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out