The Three Faces of Power: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Legitimization of School Authority’s Parental, Police, and Pedagogic Roles

Abstract

In its decisions New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) and Vernonia v. Acton (1995), the U.S. Supreme Court legitimated the actions and policies of school authorities. In doing so, it also defined and legitimated the following three roles of school authorities: agent-of-state, custodial, and tutelary. Hence, the role of school authorities and the nature of their relationship with students has become a vacillating one. This article explores the trichotomous roles cited in these U.S. Supreme Court decisions. It also examines that although school authorities claim, in their professional judgment, to be acting in the best interest of the students, they are reproducing and reinforcing the asymmetrical power relationships in schools and society. Finally, this article addresses ethical ramifications of, what those concerned with social justice designate as, the systemic violence that may be wrought by school authorities enacting their trichotomous roles.

Examining Administrators’ Disciplinary Philosophies

“…Research has shown there are several theoretical frameworks and correlating disciplinary models that examine teacher influence on classroom management and discipline; however, there are far fewer identifying administrator disciplinary philosophy and management (Baker, 2005; Beyda Lorie & Lee, 2007; Celikten, 2001; Sokal, Smith, & Mowat, 2003; Zuckerman, 2007). This lag in administrative understanding is substantial as school authorities are often charged with several roles regarding students, including agent of state, custodial, and tutelary (Ehrensal, 2003; Marks & Nance, 2007). To fulfill these roles, school administrators must establish a safe educational environment and make final decisions regarding student behavior (Celikten, 2001; Glanz, 2004).…”