Legal Issues in Educational Technology: Implications for School Leaders

Educational Administration Quarterly

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 187-207

  Quinn, David M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

Legal aspects of educational technology; School law and technology

Indexed keywords

EID: 2342528470     PISSN: 0013161X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013161X03251152     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. American Library Association, Inc., et al. v. United States, et al., No. 01-CV-1303, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15920, at (E.D. Pa. July 26, 2001).
2. Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 122 S. Ct. 1700 (2002).
3. Axelson, M. (2001). Education as commodity. Electronic School, 2001. Available at www.electronic-school.com
4. Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
5. Beussink v. Woodland R-IV School District, 30 F. Supp. 2d 1175 (E.D. Mo. 1998).
6. Board of Education of Harford County v. Bauer, 33 IDELR 267 (D. Md. 2000).
7. Board of Education v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982).
8. Burlington Industries v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998).
9. Bushweller, K. (1999). Digital deception: The Internet makes cheating easier than ever. Electronic School, 1999. Available at www.electronic-school. com
10. Child Online Protection Act, 47 USCS § 231 (1998).
11. Children's Internet Protection Act, 20 USCS § 6301 (2000).
12. Communications Act, 47 USCS § 254 (1934).
13. Communications Decency Act, 47 USCS 230 (1996).
14. Conn, K. (2001). Protecting children from Internet harm (again): Will the children's Internet Protection Act survive judicial scrutiny? West's Education Law Reporter, 153, 469-494.
15. Conn, K., & Zirkel, P. A. (2000). Legal aspects of Internet accessibility and use in K-12 public schools: What do school districts need to know? West's Education Law Reporter, 146, 1-34.
16. Constant, B. A. (2000). The fair use doctrine: Just what is fair? Journal of Law & Education, 29(3), 385-394.
17. Copyright Act, 17 USCS § 101 et seq. (1976).
18. Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education, 526 U.S. 629 (1999).
19. Dunklee, D. R., & Snoop, R. J. (2002). The principal's quick reference guide to school law: Reducing liability, litigation, and other potential legal tangles. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
20. Education for All Handicapped Children Act, 20 USCS § 1400 et seq. (1975).
21. Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 20 USCS § 7801 (1965).
22. Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act,20 USCS § 1232g (1974).
23. Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968).
24. Guerard, E. (2001a), Digital copyright bill could be 9-11 casualty. eSchool News, 11, 1-4.
25. Guerard, E. (2001b). District's $50K "piracy" settlement spurs policy changes. eSchool News, 11, 1-3.
26. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
27. Hils, L. (2001). Zero tolerance for free speech. Journal of Law & Education, 30(2), 365-374.
28. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 USCS § 1401 (1990).
29. J.S. v. Bethlehem Area School District, 757 A.2d 412, 415 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2000).
30. Lovell v. Poway Unified School District, 90 F.3d 367 (9th Cir. 1996).
31. Martin v. Struthers, 319 U.S. 141, 146 (1943).
32. McMurtry, K. (2001). E-cheating: Combating a 21st century challenge. T.H.E. Journal, 11, 36-41.
33. Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).
34. New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 809 (1984).
35. Newell, C. G. (1999). The Internet school filtering act: The next possible challenge in the development of free speech and the Internet. Journal of Law & Education, 28(1), 129-139.
36. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709 (1987).
37. Ordover, E. J. (1994). Assistive technology for students with disabilities: Rights under federal law. Cambridge, MA: Center for Law and Education.
38. Reno v. ACLU, 520 U.S. 1113 (1997).
39. Sinrod, E. J., & Jolish, B. D. (1999). Controlling chaos: The emerging law of privacy and speech in cyberspace. Stanford Technology Law Review, 1, 1-18.
40. Slowinski, J. (2000). Becoming a technologically savvy administrator. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, 135.
41. Smith, S. J., & Jones, E. D. (1999). The obligation to provide assistive technology: Enhancing general curriculum access. Journal of Law & Education, 28(2), 247-263.
42. Standler, R. B. (2000). Plagiarism in colleges in USA. Retrieved February 23, 2002, from www.rbs2.com/plag.htm
43. Streshly, W. A., Walsh, J., & Frase, L. E. (2002). Avoiding legal hassles: What school administrators really need to know. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
44. Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act, Senate, 107th Congress, 1st Session (2001).
45. Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act, 29 USCS § 2201 et seq. (1988).
46. Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
47. Willard, N. (2000). Legal and ethical issues related to the use of the Internet in K-12 schools. B.Y.U. Education and Law Journal, 4, 225-263.
48. Wood, R. C. (2001). If school Web sites are not accessible to all students, lawsuits are inevitable. Your School and the Law, 31(7), 1-3.
49. Wood, R. C., & Buckman, D. T. (2002). School issues in the digital age. Legal Notes for Education, 15(9), 1-4.
50. Zirkel, P. A. (2001). A web of disruption. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(9), 717-718.