Ethical Issues Journal

Ashley Russell
6/1/20

Entry #1
Issue:
In our District, at the elementary level we follow a clustering model for our students based
on academic “ratings” to help with our decision for making the next year’s classes. My
school in particular was involved in a study by students at Purdue University about the
benefits it has in schools. It was a five-year study that ended, and we still continue to follow
the model.

Facts:
 Teachers first rate students on a scale 1-5 based on observation and knowledge of
students (1=low in both reading and math, 2= low in one area, 3=average in both,
4=above average in one area, 5=above average in both reading and math).
 Data is used second to confirm/or change those number ratings
 A clustering form is used to group students within classes (High, Medium, Low)
 Within each class, certain numbers can’t be placed with others (in the high cluster a
5 cannot be placed with a 4 or 1 student)
 Special Education teachers first place students based on behaviors and available
support for grade level
 Teachers then place students into the form, making sure class numbers are about
the same and if any students should be moved due to not meshing well with certain
peers (all while keeping the correct number ratings for the student).

Question: Is it morally right to give students a rating and place them in classes based on
that rating?

Arguments:

For clustering students Against clustering

 Helps teachers with the amount of
differentiation they need
 The 4’s will be able to rise to become 5’s
 Clustering will help with limited support
for students with behavioral or academic
needs (they will be grouped together in
one classroom)
 The idea of using a clustering model is a
consequentialist view in that it is meant
to benefit students and teachers
 Some students are always placed with
the same peers throughout elementary
because they continue to be behind grade
level
 Parents are slowly figuring it out that
their child isn’t in the “high cluster”
 Teachers are labeled as having the “low
cluster” or “high cluster”
 Behavior needs/special education
students don’t always get placed solely
on their academic rating, may need to be
shifted around based on available
support for each room (placed between 2
of the 3 classes
Decision:
We are currently in the process of clustering out students for next year. At this time, I
personally don’t see us moving away from this model. My decision is against using the
model for most of the arguments listed above. I think there is a huge benefit from placing
above average students with peers who perform below grade level. They can rise to the
occasion and help with their learning. As a teacher who has been known to have the “lower
cluster” I feel I do just as much differentiation as I would if we just grouped kids randomly
and really only took into account separating behavior issues (peer problems).

Consequentialist or Non-consequentialist:
Consequentialist- the school’s decision to continue with using the clustering model would
fall under this. They believe clustering will benefit the most people, students and teachers
alike.

Non-consequentialist- Even though I have to continue to follow the clustering model, I feel
strongly against using it because I have seen that there is still a lot of differentiation needed
in my classes throughout the past years. I also fell it doesn’t seem right to give students a
number and say that some numbers cannot be placed with other numbers in the same
class.

Entry #2
Issue:
A second grade student, who had a special education referral in the process, was acting up
and disrupting the class almost daily. When he wasn’t getting what he wanted or didn’t
want to do the work it would lead to a tantrum that included yelling, screaming, kicking,
and throwing objects. These disruptions would lead to the behavior interventionist being
called to support the student. This behavior was affecting the learning environment of the
class and we needed to make a plan with his mom about next steps.

Facts:
 Student has daily behavior challenges
 Student has a twin brother with IEP
 Student moved to district one month into start of school year
 When the school has called home to mom she tends to blame school and get mad
that we aren’t doing anything
 When student talks to her on the phone she tells him to stop and turn it around, and
that is not like him
 Student’s mom has told behavior interventionist that she can’t keep getting called to
get the student (for extreme behavior) because she will get fired from job
 Student’s home life is unstable, mom not home a lot, relying on female roommate to
help with the kids
 The behavior interventionist and teacher came up with a behavior safety plan to
follow when instances occur.
 We set up a meeting with the student’s mom to discuss the plan and get her input.
She didn’t show up to behavior meeting to discuss a plan of action
  It is in his new behavior safety plan to call home first and then have her come to
school if behavior doesn’t improve or is a safety issue for the student.

Question: Should the student’s mom be notified of all the behavior challenges for the
student, even if it may make her lose her job?

Arguments:

Yes, the mom should be notified of all
behaviors
 The new behavior safety plan indicates a
call home as the first step
 It’s the mom’s right to know about the
student’s behavior
 The student is aware that mom will be
contacted if behavior continues
 Calling home is a way to document the
frequency of the behaviors so she can seek
outside help if needed
No, mom does not need to be notified each
time
 The mom could lose her job if interrupted
for multiple calls a day
 Notifying mom all the time could lead to
more severe consequences at home
 Not all behaviors are severe, and don’t need
to use safety plan for
 Many of student’s behaviors stem from
unstable home life and it may not make a
difference calling home

Decision:
Our team decision with those involved was that we would only call home in extreme cases
where the behavior safety plan had to be put in place. Since mom didn’t attend that
meeting, calling home was still seen as a problem to her so we wanted to limit the number
of calls we made. With the unstable structure at home, it was necessary to provide the
student with what he needed at school as much as possible. This helped with some days
and not others. The student never liked when we called home, sometimes made the
problems worse. The team of teachers working with the student put into place a special
education referral for the student and mom eventually signed it. That will allow the safety
plan to be implemented as part of an IEP in the future.

Consequentialist or Non-consequentialist:
Consequentialist- The decision was based on the student’s situation. With the home life
situation and the chance of costing mom her job with all the calls home, we found it not
necessary to communicate all behaviors, only those that needed the safety plan to be
followed. Even though we weren’t calling as often we still kept the lines of communication
open with mom so that she could be updated about behaviors at school, her right as a
parent.

Entry #3
Issue:
This year our school implemented a policy that states teachers could NOT take recess away
from students as a way of consequence for missing work or behavior in the classroom.
Before this change we could use as much or as little of their recess as we saw fit for the
logical consequence.
Facts:
 This change was told to us by the principle at meeting before school started
 Teachers were not sure if this new policy came from the district administration or
just our principal.
 Recess could not be taken from a student to make up work
 Recess could not be taken from a student as a consequence for misbehavior in the
classroom
 It could however, only be taken if the student’s behavior was a safety issue to
themselves or others

Question: Is it logical for teachers to take recess away as a consequence if students don’t
complete work or display negative behaviors in the classroom?

Arguments:

Yes, teachers should be able to use
recess time as a consequence
 It’s the only extra time the teacher and
student have to resolve or fix a conflict
 No other options for holding students
accountable for their behavior since we
can’t take away from lunch or Specials
 Students enjoy recess and will see it as
something they don’t want to do again,
as they don’t want to miss their recess
 It is only a few minutes (up to 5) that
they would miss
No, recess should not be taken away from
students
 Students need the time to get out their energy
 It’s their time for a break from learning
 Some students don’t enjoy recess and won’t
see it as a consequence
 It can make a behavior issue worse when
students hear they have to stay in

Decision:
Since teachers found that there are so many varying circumstances to determine whether it
is justified or not, the principal decided that if we only used a few minutes of their recess to
quickly reteach a behavior or finish a few problems that it was ok to do. We just couldn’t
hold them from their entire recess time.

Consequentialist or Non-consequentialist:
Consequentialist- For this issue I tend to take a consequentialist view for why we should be
able to use a little of their personal “recess” time to catch up on something they wasted
time refusing to do, or their behavior got in the way of. I believe in holding students
responsible for their actions and accountable for their work.
 Entry #4
Issue:
In our district we are encouraged to set out Facebook accounts to the most private and only
post socially acceptable pictures (from a teaching standpoint), taking into account who,
what, where the picture is taken. This also includes personal lifestyle, beliefs and values
that could be viewed as offensive or different from that of the district.

Facts:
 The district HR tells us multiple times at the beginning of the school year that if we
have social media accounts, we should set them as private as can be
 The District states that employees should be aware of who, what and where pictures
are taken before posting to social media
 We are told to go through our past photos (primarily college years) and delete any
that depict things like drinking, etc.
 Teachers are prohibited to friend students and parents of current students
 Disciplinary action can be taken if a complaint is made about a photo, statement or
beliefs posted on social media
 Many teachers use social media for personal use and as a form of family
communication for their classroom
 There are cases out there where school employees have been fired for posts
including a drink in their hand, political/religion post, etc.

Question: Is it morally ok for a teacher to have a social media account and be able to post
what they feel comfortable posting for others to see?

Arguments:

Yes, teachers should be able to post on social No, teachers should limit what they post on
media accounts social media accounts
 They should be allowed to have a personal  Parents and community members can see
life without fear of being judged the photos and report to school district
 It is a way to communicate with family and  One post could potentially cost them their
friends all over the world job
 It should be socially/morally ok to post  Even with profile set to private, a post can
about places they go, activities they partake be see through friends of friends, etc.
in, personal beliefs, etc., as long as it is seen
in a positive light (not offensive or negative)
 Some teachers use social media accounts as  Could be seen as favoritism if “friends” with
a way to communicate with families about parents of students in the district
what their child is doing in school

Decision:
I made the decision to keep my Facebook and Instagram accounts as a way to share with
my friends and family what I am up to. It is a way to stay in touch with those we don’t see
often. I have my social media accounts set to friends only and always keep in mind what I
post, knowing who may see it. I do however; uphold the district’s warning about accepting
friend requests from parents and only do so when their student is no longer in my class. I
had one parent that was also a co-worker at my school. I still waited until the end of the
year to allow her to see my profile.

Consequentialist or Non-consequentialist:
Non-consequentialist- No matter the “potential” consequences that could happen if a
picture, post or view point expressed is taken the wrong way, I think teachers having social
media accounts is their right. What we choose to post about our personal life is our
decision. It is up to the teacher to use their common sense when it comes to what content is
put out their, but they shouldn’t be judged or looked at if they post about a trip and they
have a drink in the picture.