STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION
MR. AND MRS. DOE, on behalf of their son STUDENT B. DOE v. JOHNSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
RIDE Case No. 18-056A
DECISION AND ORDER
Held: School Committee’s decision to deny student’s appeal of decision prohibiting him from participating in high school graduation ceremonies was neither discriminatory nor unfair, even though two other such appeals had been granted, since it was based upon the Committee’s reasonable conclusion that student’s excessive absences and tardiness evidenced a comparative lack of effort.
I. FACTS AND ARGUMENTS
The following facts and arguments were deduced from documents and testimony offered at a June 8, 2018 hearing before the undersigned Hearing Officer.[1] Testimony was offered by Mr. and Mrs. Doe, B. Doe, and B. Doe’s Educational Advocate, as well as by the High School Principal and the Johnston Superintendent; and Johnston was represented by counsel.
1. B. Doe is an eighteen-year old Senior at Johnston Senior High School (the “High School”) who failed to obtain a passing grade in a course entitled “Math Topics,” and who was thus one credit shy of the amount of credits needed to receive a high school diploma.
2. As a result, B. Doe – who has been diagnosed with attention deficit activity disorder and who has a plan under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504”), see Petitioners’ Exs. 1 - 3 – was denied permission to participate in the High School graduation ceremonies scheduled for the evening of June 7.
3. The High School Student & Parent/Guardian Handbook for 2017-2018 (the “Handbook”) provides that all students must successfully complete 23 credits in order to graduate, which must include four credits in mathematics. See id. at 6-7. And significantly, the Handbook makes clear that “Seniors that have not secured sufficient course credit for graduation will not be allowed to participate in graduation practice/ceremony.” See id. at 7 (emphasis added).
4. While acknowledging that he was not entitled to receive a diploma, B. Doe appealed the decision not to allow him to participate in the graduation ceremonies to the Johnston School Committee (the “School Committee”).
5. On June 7, 2018, the School Committee denied the appeal while at the same time granting similar appeals filed by two other seniors at the High School who also were one credit shy of the amount necessary to graduate.
6. According to the draft minutes of the School Committee meeting, the Committee, by a vote of two to two, effectively denied B. Doe’s appeal based upon the excessive number of times he was absent and/or tardy and what two of the members perceived as a comparative lack of effort.
7. According to the official record of the High School, as of May 18, 2018, B. Doe had amassed a total of 49 unexcused absences during his senior year, and was tardy on 38 separate occasions. See Respondent’s Ex. 1 at 5. In addition, B. Doe failed to show up for any of his final examinations other than the examination in “Math Topics,” which as noted, he did not pass.
8. B. Doe and his Educational Advocate argued that his difficult family situation and need to work excused his bad attendance and should have been taken into account by the School Committee.
9. In addition, Mr. and Mrs. Doe claimed that they were not notified that B. Doe likely would not graduate until June 4, 2018. However, documents introduced by the High School Principal evidenced that official written notice was provided to Mr. and Mrs. Doe by the High School on February 7, 2018 and then again on March 29, 2018. See Respondent’s Exs. 2 and 3.
10. Mr. and Mrs. Doe also claimed that the High School did not comply with B. Doe’s Section 504 plan, although the claim was vigorously denied by the High School Principal.
11. Finally, although they did not make the claim before the School Committee, Mr. and Mrs. Doe argued that B. Doe had been the victim of discrimination based upon his disability, race and color.
II. DISCUSSION
1. Relevant Law
A student in Rhode Island is not entitled to a high school diploma unless he or she has successfully completed the coursework mandated by his or her school district and “at least one performance-based diploma assessment.” See Regulations of the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education - Secondary Design: Middle and High School Learning Environments and the Rhode Island Diploma System (effective July 1, 2017) (the “State Regs.”) at § 6.3 (A) and (B). And the coursework must, at a minimum, include successful completion of “at least twenty courses,” four of which must be in mathematics. See id. at § 6.3 (emphasis added).
As noted, in Johnston, a total of 23 credits must be obtained, four of which must be in mathematics. In addition, the Johnston School Committee adopted a policy effective as of January 12, 2016, which mandated that “any student who fails one core subject may not be promoted unless that subject is passed in summer school,” and the policy makes clear that math is considered a “core subject.” Id.
As a general matter, the decision whether to allow non-graduating Seniors to participate in commencement exercises with their peers is a matter of state or local law or policy, and thus it is permissible to limit participation in commencement exercises to graduating seniors. See, e.g., Jane A. F. Doe v. Middletown School Committee, RIDE (June 20, 1995); see also Frank S. v. School Comm. of the Dennis-Yarmouth Reg’l Sch. Dist., 29 IDELR 707 (D. Mass. 1998). Moreover, Section 504 does not appear to prohibit blanket exclusion of all non-graduating seniors. See Central Kitsap (WA) Sch. Dist. No. 401, 352 IDELR 119 (OCR 1985). At the same time, it is illegal to discriminate against students covered under Section 504 when making decisions concerning graduation ceremonies, and any exclusion must be applied in an evenhanded manner. See 34 CFR 104.4.[2]
Finally, it should be noted that the State Regs. provide that: In the event that a student is in jeopardy of not earning a diploma, the LEA must maintain a record of multiple and timely individual notices to the student and his/her family that include:
a. Clear notification of the student’s academic status; and,
b. The opportunity to meet and discuss the student’s academic program, support, and planned interventions; and,
c. Regular updates of student performance and progress. Id. at § 6.3.7(A)(3). At the same time, the State Regs. make clear that while “failure to provide student and family notifications in the manner set forth in this Section may be addressed through locally managed appeals processes,” no such failure “shall not be presumed to result in the awarding of a diploma.” Id. at (B).
2. It was Within the School Committee’s Legal Discretion to Deny
B. Doe’s Appeal, and Adequate Advance Notice was Provided
In all cases where the Commissioner has reversed a school committee decision to enforce a policy prohibiting students not receiving a diploma from participating in high school graduation exercises, there was a specific finding that the school district had been at fault. See, e.g., Richard L. v. Johnston School Department, RIDE (June 12, 2001) and Michael L. v. Johnston School Department, RIDE (June 13, 2001) (district had inadequate grounds to refuse students’ request to drop college chemistry); Gerald S. v. North Kingstown School Committee, RIDE (June 16, 2000) (district improperly denied request to undertake an internship); J. Doe v. North Kingstown School Department, RIDE No. 0011-11 (June 10, 2011) (district failed to provided required advance notice). And while the Commissioner has held that allowing a student with a disability to participate in graduation ceremonies may be proper when the student has challenged the school’s decision that she is ineligible to receive a diploma, see Student A.D. Doe v. A Rhode Island School Committee, RIDE (June 16, 2006), he also has made clear that the mere fact that a student is entitled to a Section 504 plan does not automatically entitled him to participate. See In the Matter of J.S., RIDE (June 9, 2000).[3]
Here, the evidence does not support the conclusion that Johnston was at fault. Indeed, the evidence establishes that Johnston provided the required advance notice, and there is no evidence that its failure to make an exception to its long-standing policy was in any way discriminatory or unfair. Rather, the evidence supports the conclusion that the School Committee’s decision to deny B. Does’ appeal was based upon evidence of his excessive absences from school and tardiness, which was reasonable.
III. ORDER
For all the above reasons, it is hereby ORDERED:
1. The January 7, 2018 decision of the Johnston School Committee is affirmed; and
2. The appeal of Mr. and Mrs. Doe on behalf of Student B. Doe is hereby denied and dismissed.
Footnotes
[1] Because the request for a hearing was made the morning of the hearing, it was impossible to obtain the services of a state-approved court reporter, and thus there was no stenographic record of the proceeding.
[2] Although the Handbook includes a section entitled “Modification and Rights for Students with Disabilities,” which includes both Students identified as disabled under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (the “IDEA”), as well as those covered under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504”), none of the language addresses the right to attend graduation ceremonies.
[3] Indeed, courts and IDEA hearing officers have consistently held that students do not have a protected property right in attending a graduation ceremony, reasoning that the ceremony is only "symbolic of education's end result" and is not a prerequisite to the student's receipt of a diploma. See, e.g., City of Boston v. Bureau of Special Educ. Appeals, 37 IDELR 256 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2002) (pointing out that while the student had a right to a meaningful opportunity to earn a diploma, he enjoyed no equivalent right to receive his diploma at a graduation ceremony); and In re: Student with a Disability, 115 LRP 24735 (SEA IL 05/15/15) ("Although I agree... that the Student's participation in the graduation ceremony would be desirable and beneficial, there is no basis upon which to conclude that the Student's participation in the... commencement ceremony is part of his FAPE or his educational placement and it is not mentioned in any of his IEPs.").
ANTHONY F. COTTONE, ESQ.,
as Hearing Officer for the Commissioner
KEN WAGNER, Ph.D.,
Commissioner
Dated: June 8, 2017