California School Requires Student Id Tags

Based on information in the attached article, Principal Earnie Graham uses a purely traditional managerial approach in running Brittan Elementary School in Sutter, California. He clearly defines his authority when he says that it is within his power to set rules that promote a positive school environment. In his opinion, identification badges will improve things in school, therefore the students will wear badges. This is an example of hierarchy.

Managerial Model - The traditional managerial approach views the implementation of i.d. tags as an efficient way to monitor kids. Attendance-taking is streamlined thereby eliminating a level of record keeping. The Principal also notes that the potential exists for school vandalism to be reduced, which reinforces economic concerns expressed by the managerial view. Less vandalism means less expense in repairing damage caused by vandals. Another concern with the managerial approach is effectiveness. Graham states in the article that i.d. tags will improve student safety. Having a way of monitoring students whereabouts is bound to provide an additional safety measure, whether it be a youngster purposely leaving campus or physically being taken without permission.

Graham indicates in the article that kids who boycott using the badges could be disciplined. This is another example of the traditional managerial model. Opposition to hierarchy is not permitted. So even if parents tell their children not to wear the badges, the child will suffer the consequences, not the parent. Insubordination is a behavior that will not be tolerated. The two, hierarchy and insubordination, go hand in hand and that's demonstrated in this article.

Legal Model

Some parents think the badges violate their children's privacy rights. Under the 4th Amendment, people have the Ð''right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, Ð'...'. However, how much privacy should a child have in grade school? Implementation of the badges is a protection, not a violation. They assist in determining the safe arrival of a student at school. They provide information throughout the day that a student is where s/he is supposed to be. The school has a responsibility to care for a child while in its custody. Name tags provide a level of security and assist with carrying out that responsibility.

The school is legally responsible for ensuring the safety of students while in their care. The primary purpose of the school is to educate children. If the principal's suggestion of id badges expedites attendance-taking, safety issues, and vandalism issues and maximizes the amount of time the school needs to perform its primary function, then no violation of rights has occurred. It isn't unreasonable for schools to know where young children are while in their care, custody and control.

Freedom & Liberty Ð'- While the Bill of Rights offers protection to citizens from the government, the school is attempting to protect the students. The end does justify the means. Wearing the tag will not physically harm any of the children and furthermore, it is less likely that a child will wander off (or worse be kidnapped) unnoticed. It would be worse if only a select few students, such as those with known behavioral problems, were required to wear the badges. If that were to occur, the special problems or issues that child has, would be advertised by the badge and that would be a violation of the student's right to privacy. The safety of many is more important than the rights of a few.

Other Alternatives

The New Public