Termination of student legal relationship
The student legal relationship may only be terminated in the instances
regulated and in the manner prescribed in the Act on Public Education(2).
If a school fails to comply with such safeguarding provisions, it will
lead to the infringement of educational rights in all instances.
| A parent requested our
position in the case of their child. The teachers penalised misbehaving
students with black dots. The parent was told in the school that
after five more black dots, they would have to transfer the child
to another school. We informed the parent that, pursuant to legislation,
the student legal relationship of their child might not be terminated
this way.
(K-OJOG-631/2001)
Pursuant to legislation, the student legal relationship of students
beyond the mandatory school age ceases if they are absent from more
than 30 lessons without excuse. In a previous section on absences,
we have already demonstrated that the condition of the termination
of a student legal relationship is the school meeting its notification
obligation. If it fails to do so, the termination of the legal relationship
infringes educational rights. (K-OJOG-196/2001, K-OJOG-269/2001,
K-OJOG-254/2001 ) |
It followed from the applications received by our Office that a situation
may once in a while arise where a student is unable to meet the - academic
or other - requirements of the school, and so the teachers advise that
they continue their studies in another institution. If the parent accepts
the school's arguments, then they may decide to find another school for
their child. If, however, the parent decides to discard this option, then
the school may not terminate the student legal relationship one-sidedly.
It happens quite frequently that the principal of the school advises the
parents of misbehaving students to find another school for their child.
The infringement of educational rights may be demonstrated if the free
will of the parent might not prevail in the course of decision-making
but the school uses pressure in one way or another. The most frequent
form of this pressure is when the head of institution decoys the parent
into terminating the student legal relationship by threatening the parent
with the use of disciplinary measures against the child and by ultimately
terminating the legal relationship in the course of disciplinary proceedings.
Principals usually succeed in removing students with behavioural problems
by convincing the parent that it would be more advantageous for their
child if the child's progress had not been hindered by the use of disciplinary
measures or by the imposing of disciplinary penalties.
| A parent contacting our
Office was warned on several occasions because of the behavioural
problems of his child. At the end of the academic year, the principal
told the parent to find a new school for the pupil in accordance
with the decision of the teaching staff. During our investigation,
the student was enrolled in another institution, from where he did
not wish to return. We notified the principal that they must proceed
in compliance with legislation when terminating a student's legal
relationship in the future. (K-OJOG-391/2001) |
Parents protested against the way their children were expelled in several
other cases.
[K-OJOG-17/2001, K- OJOG-31/2001, K-OJOG-137/2001, K-OJOG-153/2001, K-OJOG-456/2001,
K-OJOG-572/2001] Expulsion, although having no legally binding force,
may exert substantial influence on a parent since the positions of the
parent and the principal acting for the school are quite different. In
such instances, parents have no bargaining position since they want the
best for their child and do not want their child to be forced to study
in a hostile environment. Parents seemingly exercise the right of free
choice of school as a result of a similar notice from the school when
they take their child to another institution, whereas in reality, they
are under pressure because they feel that there is no other option. By
this solution, the school takes the case out of the legally regulated
proceedings, preventing the case to proceed in a legally strictly bound
order. Thus students are deprived of the safeguards linked to the use
of disciplinary measures or to the conduct of disciplinary proceedings.
It is our position that expulsion combined with the use of pressure must
not occur in public educational institutions. The options set forth in
legislation are available to the schools to sanction the behaviour of
students in breach of their obligations (e.g. disciplinary proceedings),
if the school finds them justified, it may exercise these options. Expulsion,
however, may not be used even in such instances. If similar conduct by
principals arose in the course of our proceedings, it established the
correctness of the Sinvestigation of the matter. Problems were mostly
caused by the fact that such notice by the principal was often advocated
in private, thus rendering the burden of proof difficult. Parents often
contacted our Office only when, after submitting to the pressure by the
principal, they had already transferred their children to another school
wishing that their children continue their studies in an institution other
than the institution acting illegally.
(2) Any departing from these provisions of the Act
on Public Education is only allowed in case of institutions operated by
entities other than local governments and state agencies.
|
previous 
