CLINICAL ANNUAL COMPETENCY PRACTICE
SOLUTION 2026 QUESTIONS WITH FULL
SOLUTION GRADED A+
◉ Goss v. Lopez (1975). Answer: the Supreme Court held that
education is a property right protected by the 14th Amendment.
Thus, schools may not:
1.Suspend or expel children without some sort of fair, impartial due
process procedures
2. Schools may not label children (mentally retarded or emotionally
disturbed - change of placement or label) without due process
◉ Wisconsin v. Constantineau. Answer: the courts have ruled that a
school may not label a child as "mentally retarded" or "emotionally
disturbed without due process, that is, without some sort of fair
decision-making procedure that includes parent notice of the
proposed classification and the right to an impartial hearing to
protest the classification
◉ Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002). Answer: law providing
vouchers to students to attend the public or private, including
parochial, schools of their choice
,Schools may provide tuition monies to parents and allow them to
use that aid to enroll their children in a private school of their
choosing, without regard to whether the school is religiously
affiliated.
◉ Landstrom v. Ilinois Department of Children and Family Services
(1990). Answer: "acting clearly within scope of their authority for
the betterment of those they serve". Must follow ethical and legal
guidlines when speaking to minors regarding suspected abuse and
investigation.
◉ Board of education of Hendrick Hudson School v. Rowley. Answer:
"Basic floor of opportunity", students are to be provided with
equal/adequate learning, but not necessarily best possible to
achieve "full potential"
IEP is not the "best possible" it is so the student can succeed. One
student should not get excessively more than another to excel
(unfair)
found in favor of the parents and noted that without the interpreter
Amy was not afforded the opportunity to achieve her full potential (-
more info p.134)
◉ New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985). Answer: Students have 4th
amendment right from search and seizure - reasonable suspision vs.
, probable; must be more than "hunch". the more invasive (closer to
the body) the search is, the more serious the reasons must be to
conduct search.
Students have the 4th amendment right to be free from
unreasonable search and seizure in schools. Schools must uphold
reasonable suspicion AND probable cause before conducting a
search. Also, there must be reasonable belief that the search WILL
produce evidence that the student violated school rules or
committed a crime. Search must be justified at its inception.
◉ Sterling v. Borough of Minersville (2000). Answer: Police officer
told young man he'd tell his family he was gay, young man
committed suicide and left note stating fear of family knowing.
Mother filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against the police.
The right to be frees from forced disclosure of sexual orientation;
"need to know"
Police Officers were not held liable for any wrongdoing in the initial
trial. Second trial was pending. Court noted " carefully gaurd one's
right to privacy against unwarranted government intrusion".
right of informational privacy - right to be free from forced
disclosure of sexual orientation. School employees are advised to
SOLUTION 2026 QUESTIONS WITH FULL
SOLUTION GRADED A+
◉ Goss v. Lopez (1975). Answer: the Supreme Court held that
education is a property right protected by the 14th Amendment.
Thus, schools may not:
1.Suspend or expel children without some sort of fair, impartial due
process procedures
2. Schools may not label children (mentally retarded or emotionally
disturbed - change of placement or label) without due process
◉ Wisconsin v. Constantineau. Answer: the courts have ruled that a
school may not label a child as "mentally retarded" or "emotionally
disturbed without due process, that is, without some sort of fair
decision-making procedure that includes parent notice of the
proposed classification and the right to an impartial hearing to
protest the classification
◉ Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002). Answer: law providing
vouchers to students to attend the public or private, including
parochial, schools of their choice
,Schools may provide tuition monies to parents and allow them to
use that aid to enroll their children in a private school of their
choosing, without regard to whether the school is religiously
affiliated.
◉ Landstrom v. Ilinois Department of Children and Family Services
(1990). Answer: "acting clearly within scope of their authority for
the betterment of those they serve". Must follow ethical and legal
guidlines when speaking to minors regarding suspected abuse and
investigation.
◉ Board of education of Hendrick Hudson School v. Rowley. Answer:
"Basic floor of opportunity", students are to be provided with
equal/adequate learning, but not necessarily best possible to
achieve "full potential"
IEP is not the "best possible" it is so the student can succeed. One
student should not get excessively more than another to excel
(unfair)
found in favor of the parents and noted that without the interpreter
Amy was not afforded the opportunity to achieve her full potential (-
more info p.134)
◉ New Jersey v. T.L.O (1985). Answer: Students have 4th
amendment right from search and seizure - reasonable suspision vs.
, probable; must be more than "hunch". the more invasive (closer to
the body) the search is, the more serious the reasons must be to
conduct search.
Students have the 4th amendment right to be free from
unreasonable search and seizure in schools. Schools must uphold
reasonable suspicion AND probable cause before conducting a
search. Also, there must be reasonable belief that the search WILL
produce evidence that the student violated school rules or
committed a crime. Search must be justified at its inception.
◉ Sterling v. Borough of Minersville (2000). Answer: Police officer
told young man he'd tell his family he was gay, young man
committed suicide and left note stating fear of family knowing.
Mother filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against the police.
The right to be frees from forced disclosure of sexual orientation;
"need to know"
Police Officers were not held liable for any wrongdoing in the initial
trial. Second trial was pending. Court noted " carefully gaurd one's
right to privacy against unwarranted government intrusion".
right of informational privacy - right to be free from forced
disclosure of sexual orientation. School employees are advised to
