Should These Girls Have Been Suspended From School For This?

[Michigan Girl]

HILARIOUS...

we were into baseball, playing golf, football, basketball, getting our hands on playboys... talking about girls more girls and playing pool or cards... and listening to infinity and evolution Journey... ROLIE era... oh and PONG...

the poll question... I dont think I have a correct answer here as I am no parent... (no kids) so my punishment would be, if I were a parent is this... to have them publicly apologize to the school for their behavior, do community service and be done with it... but it seems like now its all KNEE JERK reaction... cooler heads need to prevail here.

R

If there were not already a signed agreement/contract stipulating the required
conduct/behavior outside of school activities/events
when NOT in uniform, you really don't have a leg/arm. This is the PARENTS responsibility.
The school/board will have to work on adjusting the rules for future members/students!!!

IF I were a parent could I not enforce this punishment to the girls involved... or is that now too harsh of punishment???

Heck yeah...you're the parent!! They deserve much worse, but I guess you're nice!!

[Ehwmatt]

I don't think they should miss class either, Lu. I think counseling and an apology (which implies their non compliance) is a fair trade off for a lesser 'sentence'. Extra curricular participants are routinely held to a higher standard of behavior. It goes with the territory. Comply or don't be included. quite simply, really.

Yep, right on.

[DrFU]

You know, maybe I should be reading my school code of conducts I sign more closely I just take for granted that my kids never broke any codes!!

Yeppers ...

Littleton, CO:

"Participation in Littleton Public Schools athletic programs is a privilege. With this privilege come certain responsibilities since student athletes represent Littleton Public Schools in the classroom, in the hallways, in the athletic arena, and in the community. The Athletic Code of Conduct is in effect 365 days of the year, 24 hours a day, and 7 days per week."

Scottsdale, AZ:

"In addition to the requirements and consequences set forth in the SUSD Student Code of Conduct and the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) regulations, all student athletes are responsible for adhering to the following training rules listed below. These rules apply on or off campus during the season of sport."

Springfield, OH:

"This Athletic Code of Conduct will be in continuous effect from the date that the student athlete
and his/her parent(s) guardian(s) sign it and for the remainder of their athletic career. The code is in effect
during season and out of season, during school and out of school."

You get the idea ...

[Michigan Girl]

You know, maybe I should be reading my school code of conducts I sign more closely I just take for granted that my kids never broke any codes!!

Yeppers ...

Littleton, CO:

"Participation in Littleton Public Schools athletic programs is a privilege. With this privilege come certain responsibilities since student athletes represent Littleton Public Schools in the classroom, in the hallways, in the athletic arena, and in the community. The Athletic Code of Conduct is in effect 365 days of the year, 24 hours a day, and 7 days per week."

Scottsdale, AZ:

"In addition to the requirements and consequences set forth in the SUSD Student Code of Conduct and the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) regulations, all student athletes are responsible for adhering to the following training rules listed below. These rules apply on or off campus during the season of sport."

Springfield, OH:

"This Athletic Code of Conduct will be in continuous effect from the date that the student athlete
and his/her parent(s) guardian(s) sign it and for the remainder of their athletic career. The code is in effect
during season and out of season, during school and out of school."

You get the idea ...

Good code...straight to the point...no questions!!!
We have NOTHING like this or let me say, we have never signed anything like this!!

*edit* our COC reads nothing about off season!!

[lights1961]

You know, maybe I should be reading my school code of conducts I sign more closely I just take for granted that my kids never broke any codes!!

Yeppers ...

Littleton, CO:

"Participation in Littleton Public Schools athletic programs is a privilege. With this privilege come certain responsibilities since student athletes represent Littleton Public Schools in the classroom, in the hallways, in the athletic arena, and in the community. The Athletic Code of Conduct is in effect 365 days of the year, 24 hours a day, and 7 days per week."

Scottsdale, AZ:

"In addition to the requirements and consequences set forth in the SUSD Student Code of Conduct and the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) regulations, all student athletes are responsible for adhering to the following training rules listed below. These rules apply on or off campus during the season of sport."

Springfield, OH:

"This Athletic Code of Conduct will be in continuous effect from the date that the student athlete
and his/her parent(s) guardian(s) sign it and for the remainder of their athletic career. The code is in effect
during season and out of season, during school and out of school."

You get the idea ...

THIS MAKES SENSE... would it not be good to have ths school codes for everyone and not just ATHLETES??? that part I NEVER understood...and that one is another chalk up because Iam not a parent...

[bluejeangirl76]

Scottsdale, AZ:

"In addition to the requirements and consequences set forth in the SUSD Student Code of Conduct and the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) regulations, all student athletes are responsible for adhering to the following training rules listed below. These rules apply on or off campus during the season of sport."

And I can tell you first hand that Scottsdale is full of way-too-mature-for-their-age little ho-hos in training, so this is a good rule.

[Ehwmatt]

THIS MAKES SENSE... would it not be good to have ths school codes for everyone and not just ATHLETES??? that part I NEVER understood...and that one is another chalk up because Iam not a parent...

The idea is more eyes are on the athletes much more so than your average hum drum kid. It's a good policy. Speaking as a very recently graduated college athlete, it really helps reenforce the lessons you (should) be learning from participating in athletics.

[DrFU]

Good code...straight to the point...no questions!!!
We have NOTHING like this or let me say, we have never signed anything like this!!

Then your school board needs a smack up the side of the head ... no substitute for good, clear, widely communicated policy consistently enforced. Keeps the school off the front page and out of court. Guess I'll have to add message boards to that list next time we cover this in School Law class.

[StevePerryHair]

Good code...straight to the point...no questions!!!
We have NOTHING like this or let me say, we have never signed anything like this!!

Then your school board needs a smack up the side of the head ... no substitute for good, clear, widely communicated policy consistently enforced. Keeps the school off the front page and out of court. Guess I'll have to add message boards to that list next time we cover this in School Law class.

Orange County FL has a BOOK for it's code of conduct which could explain why I sign it without reading it

[DrFU]

THIS MAKES SENSE... would it not be good to have ths school codes for everyone and not just ATHLETES??? that part I NEVER understood...and that one is another chalk up because Iam not a parent...

There are general codes of conduct for all students (typically in the student handbook & parents have to sign saying they've read them). The athletic/extracurricular policies are in addition to the general ones. They can set higher standards because participation in the extracurricular stuff is voluntary. If you don't want to act right, you don't have to play (as Deb said earlier).

[JasonD]

You know, maybe I should be reading my school code of conducts I sign more closely I just take for granted that my kids never broke any codes!!

Yeppers ...

Littleton, CO:

"Participation in Littleton Public Schools athletic programs is a privilege. With this privilege come certain responsibilities since student athletes represent Littleton Public Schools in the classroom, in the hallways, in the athletic arena, and in the community. The Athletic Code of Conduct is in effect 365 days of the year, 24 hours a day, and 7 days per week."

Scottsdale, AZ:

"In addition to the requirements and consequences set forth in the SUSD Student Code of Conduct and the Arizona Interscholastic Association (AIA) regulations, all student athletes are responsible for adhering to the following training rules listed below. These rules apply on or off campus during the season of sport."

Springfield, OH:

"This Athletic Code of Conduct will be in continuous effect from the date that the student athlete
and his/her parent(s) guardian(s) sign it and for the remainder of their athletic career. The code is in effect
during season and out of season, during school and out of school."

You get the idea ...

Okay, maybe I've just lost focus b/c I seem to be confused. (Shut up, Steve.) Were the girls wearing their uniforms in the pics? If not then how can any Athletic Code of Conduct be applied? Not trying to start trouble here. Just trying to understand. Yes, it may be WRITTEN in the Code of Conduct that the students must act a certain way outside of school 24/7 but what gives the school the right to even impose that? My boss could say that by signing my employee personnel paperwork I agree to conduct myself in a certain way 24/7 when I'm not at work, but to me that would be null & void b/c my boss does not have a legal right to even "go there." Is this not America? The school doesn't own these students any more than my boss owns me. YES-- if the girls were wearing the school uniforms, then I would lean in the other direction, but I have to side with the girls on this one. That's my civil rights side talking. My DAD side talking says shame on those girls for acting inappropriately. They should be severely punished. Written letters of apologies all around. Privileges revoked. Luxuries taken away. Lock 'em in their bedrooms until their 40. Oh,.... and no dessert either!!!

[DrFU]

Okay, maybe I've just lost focus b/c I seem to be confused. (Shut up, Steve.) Were the girls wearing their uniforms in the pics? If not then how can any Athletic Code of Conduct be applied? Not trying to start trouble here. Just trying to understand. Yes, it may be WRITTEN in the Code of Conduct that the students must act a certain way outside of school 24/7 but what gives the school the right to even impose that? My boss could say that by signing my employee personnel paperwork I agree to conduct myself in a certain way 24/7 when I'm not at work, but to me that would be null & void b/c my boss does not have a legal right to even "go there." Is this not America? The school doesn't own these students any more than my boss owns me. YES-- if the girls were wearing the school uniforms, then I would lean in the other direction, but I have to side with the girls on this one. That's my civil rights side talking. My DAD side talking says shame on those girls for acting inappropriately. They should be severely punished. Written letters of apologies all around. Privileges revoked. Luxuries taken away. Lock 'em in their bedrooms until their 40. Oh,.... and no dessert either!!!

Fair question. The answer rests on the privilege vs. right issue. Attendance is regular class is basically a right since all states have some version of students being entitled to a "free, appropriate public eduction" in their laws (US constitution does not mention education, so it is a state-by-state thing). So, students have the right to go to school; however, this right can be removed for violations of laws and school rules if due process is followed. So even students in regular classes can be removed for off campus behavior if it is severe enough (consider: do you want the person arrested for rape or assult with a deadly weapon but out on bail sitting in sophomore English class next to your child?).

Extracurricular participation, on the other hand, is not something students are required to do; thus, it is considered a privilege rather than a right, and standards for removing privilege are different. Conduct off campus that creates controversy and conflict and reflects badly on the team or group and interfers with other students' participation in the privilege falls under these athletic codes of conduct, to which kids and parents have agreed in advance. So, you can, indeed, be kicked off the team for something you did someplace other than school even while not in uniform. Courts have consistently upheld this.

Lecture over ... off to happy hour.

[JasonD]

Okay, maybe I've just lost focus b/c I seem to be confused. (Shut up, Steve.) Were the girls wearing their uniforms in the pics? If not then how can any Athletic Code of Conduct be applied? Not trying to start trouble here. Just trying to understand. Yes, it may be WRITTEN in the Code of Conduct that the students must act a certain way outside of school 24/7 but what gives the school the right to even impose that? My boss could say that by signing my employee personnel paperwork I agree to conduct myself in a certain way 24/7 when I'm not at work, but to me that would be null & void b/c my boss does not have a legal right to even "go there." Is this not America? The school doesn't own these students any more than my boss owns me. YES-- if the girls were wearing the school uniforms, then I would lean in the other direction, but I have to side with the girls on this one. That's my civil rights side talking. My DAD side talking says shame on those girls for acting inappropriately. They should be severely punished. Written letters of apologies all around. Privileges revoked. Luxuries taken away. Lock 'em in their bedrooms until their 40. Oh,.... and no dessert either!!!

Fair question. The answer rests on the privilege vs. right issue. Attendance is regular class is basically a right since all states have some version of students being entitled to a "free, appropriate public eduction" in their laws (US constitution does not mention education, so it is a state-by-state thing). So, students have the right to go to school; however, this right can be removed for violations of laws and school rules if due process is followed. So even students in regular classes can be removed for off campus behavior if it is severe enough (consider: do you want the person arrested for rape or assult with a deadly weapon but out on bail sitting in sophomore English class next to your child?).

Extracurricular participation, on the other hand, is not something students are required to do; thus, it is considered a privilege rather than a right, and standards for removing privilege are different. Conduct off campus that creates controversy and conflict and reflects badly on the team or group and interfers with other students' participation in the privilege falls under these athletic codes of conduct, to which kids and parents have agreed in advance. So, you can, indeed, be kicked off the team for something you did someplace other than school even while not in uniform. Courts have consistently upheld this.

Lecture over ... off to happy hour.

Thank you a thousand times over for taking me seriously & for giving me a non-sarcastic, articulate & well-defined answer. The whole "privilege" versus "right" comparison makes perfect sense now & b/c there is a huge difference between suspension & expulsion, you have convinced me that my first assessment was in error. I agree. They should be punished.

[S2M]

According to Ayn Rand:

Observe, in this context, the intellectual precision of the Founding Fathers: they spoke of the right to the pursuit of happiness—not of the right to happiness. It means that a man has the right to take the actions he deems necessary to achieve his happiness; it does not mean that others must make him happy.

The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness means man’s right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own private, personal, individual happiness and to work for its achievement, so long as he respects the same right in others. It means that man cannot be forced to devote his life to the happiness of another man nor of any number of other men. It means that the collective cannot decide what is to be the purpose of a man’s existence nor prescribe his choice of happiness.

This is the ONLY right man is born with.....

Concerning Individual v. Collective Rights:

Since only an individual man can possess rights, the expression “individual rights” is a redundancy (which one has to use for purposes of clarification in today’s intellectual chaos). But the expression “collective rights” is a contradiction in terms.

[i]Any group or “collective,” large or small, is only a number of individuals. A group can have no rights other than the rights of its individual members.

A group, as such, has no rights. A man can neither acquire new rights by joining a group nor lose the rights which he does possess. The principle of individual rights is the only moral base of all groups or associations.

Any group that does not recognize this principle is not an association, but a gang or a mob . . . .

The notion of “collective rights” (the notion that rights belong to groups, not to individuals) means that “rights” belong to some men, but not to others—that some men have the “right” to dispose of others in any manner they please—and that the criterion of such privileged position consists of numerical superiority.[/i]

These girls have no rights....they have no extra rights because they belong to an extra-curricular group. Period.

[Rockindeano]

Okay, maybe I've just lost focus b/c I seem to be confused. (Shut up, Steve.) Were the girls wearing their uniforms in the pics? If not then how can any Athletic Code of Conduct be applied? Not trying to start trouble here. Just trying to understand. Yes, it may be WRITTEN in the Code of Conduct that the students must act a certain way outside of school 24/7 but what gives the school the right to even impose that? My boss could say that by signing my employee personnel paperwork I agree to conduct myself in a certain way 24/7 when I'm not at work, but to me that would be null & void b/c my boss does not have a legal right to even "go there." Is this not America? The school doesn't own these students any more than my boss owns me. YES-- if the girls were wearing the school uniforms, then I would lean in the other direction, but I have to side with the girls on this one. That's my civil rights side talking. My DAD side talking says shame on those girls for acting inappropriately. They should be severely punished. Written letters of apologies all around. Privileges revoked. Luxuries taken away. Lock 'em in their bedrooms until their 40. Oh,.... and no dessert either!!!

Fair question. The answer rests on the privilege vs. right issue. Attendance is regular class is basically a right since all states have some version of students being entitled to a "free, appropriate public eduction" in their laws (US constitution does not mention education, so it is a state-by-state thing). So, students have the right to go to school; however, this right can be removed for violations of laws and school rules if due process is followed. So even students in regular classes can be removed for off campus behavior if it is severe enough (consider: do you want the person arrested for rape or assult with a deadly weapon but out on bail sitting in sophomore English class next to your child?).

Extracurricular participation, on the other hand, is not something students are required to do; thus, it is considered a privilege rather than a right, and standards for removing privilege are different. Conduct off campus that creates controversy and conflict and reflects badly on the team or group and interfers with other students' participation in the privilege falls under these athletic codes of conduct, to which kids and parents have agreed in advance. So, you can, indeed, be kicked off the team for something you did someplace other than school even while not in uniform. Courts have consistently upheld this.

Lecture over ... off to happy hour.

Nice insight, but I want to know what you would do if you were the principal of this school?

[S2M]

If I were principal, I'd hire Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona as my VP......and start handing out the justice!!!!!!!

[bluejeangirl76]

If I were principal, I'd hire Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona as my VP......and start handing out the justice!!!!!!!

That guy is a psycho. Heavy handed law enforcement that I support, but he's still nuts.
And the crime rate in Maricopa County was a lot higher than it should have been with that guy at the helm.

Random: I saw him in a parking lot at Circuit City once.

[stevew2]

Okay, maybe I've just lost focus b/c I seem to be confused. (Shut up, Steve.) Were the girls wearing their uniforms in the pics? If not then how can any Athletic Code of Conduct be applied? Not trying to start trouble here. Just trying to understand. Yes, it may be WRITTEN in the Code of Conduct that the students must act a certain way outside of school 24/7 but what gives the school the right to even impose that? My boss could say that by signing my employee personnel paperwork I agree to conduct myself in a certain way 24/7 when I'm not at work, but to me that would be null & void b/c my boss does not have a legal right to even "go there." Is this not America? The school doesn't own these students any more than my boss owns me. YES-- if the girls were wearing the school uniforms, then I would lean in the other direction, but I have to side with the girls on this one. That's my civil rights side talking. My DAD side talking says shame on those girls for acting inappropriately. They should be severely punished. Written letters of apologies all around. Privileges revoked. Luxuries taken away. Lock 'em in their bedrooms until their 40. Oh,.... and no dessert either!!!

Fair question. The answer rests on the privilege vs. right issue. Attendance is regular class is basically a right since all states have some version of students being entitled to a "free, appropriate public eduction" in their laws (US constitution does not mention education, so it is a state-by-state thing). So, students have the right to go to school; however, this right can be removed for violations of laws and school rules if due process is followed. So even students in regular classes can be removed for off campus behavior if it is severe enough (consider: do you want the person arrested for rape or assult with a deadly weapon but out on bail sitting in sophomore English class next to your child?).

Extracurricular participation, on the other hand, is not something students are required to do; thus, it is considered a privilege rather than a right, and standards for removing privilege are different. Conduct off campus that creates controversy and conflict and reflects badly on the team or group and interfers with other students' participation in the privilege falls under these athletic codes of conduct, to which kids and parents have agreed in advance. So, you can, indeed, be kicked off the team for something you did someplace other than school even while not in uniform. Courts have consistently upheld this.

Lecture over ... off to happy hour.

Thank you a thousand times over for taking me seriously & for giving me a non-sarcastic, articulate & well-defined answer. The whole "privilege" versus "right" comparison makes perfect sense now & b/c there is a huge difference between suspension & expulsion, you have convinced me that my first assessment was in error. I agree. They should be punished.

I just want to see the pics,and not one of you squeezin 1 your one big teste

[parfait]

Geeeez! Who cares what some teens do on their own spare time? It's astoundingly hypocritical to kick anyone out because they were licking some lollipops. Sure, it's okay to be conservative, but there's a clear line between being conservative and a idiot.

They didn't do anything on the school property, and the last time I checked; myspace isn't the school's property. Instead of participating in expensive and time consuming law suits, the school should use the tax payers money to good use - like, you know... TEACH.

But hey, what do I know - there are even schools in the US teaching creationism (!)

[(Crazy)Dulce Lady]

Geeeez! Who cares what some teens do on their own spare time? It's astoundingly hypocritical to kick anyone out because they were licking some lollipops. Sure, it's okay to be conservative, but there's a clear line between being conservative and a idiot.

They didn't do anything on the school property, and the last time I checked; myspace isn't the school's property. Instead of participating in expensive and time consuming law suits, the school should use the tax payers money to good use - like, you know... TEACH.

But hey, what do I know - there are even schools in the US teaching creationism (!)

dude--we are teaching. classrooms have to be controlled in order for learning to happen. they suspended them from the activity--not classes. they signed it. they agreed to the terms. in uniform or not, they effed it up. they bad.

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL, so they aren't sending out hoochified images that could get them some "attention" from classmates that would result in pregnancy! then, they will miss school and have to drop out of band cuz they can't find a babysitter and totally screw up MY TRUMPET SECTION!!!!!!!!!

oh pardon......it boils me when teachers/schools are accused of not teaching--we have to teach AND parent these days. breathe breathe breathe.....

[Arianddu]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL, so they aren't sending out hoochified images that could get them some "attention" from classmates that would result in pregnancy! then, they will miss school and have to drop out of band cuz they can't find a babysitter and totally screw up MY TRUMPET SECTION!!!!!!!!!

Speaking from experience here, Deb? I've always wondered what goes on that in (adult) choirs if one soprano gets pregnant, half the rest of them seem to get pregnant within the year too.



(Maybe we should be handing out condoms with the sheet music? )

[(Crazy)Dulce Lady]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL, so they aren't sending out hoochified images that could get them some "attention" from classmates that would result in pregnancy! then, they will miss school and have to drop out of band cuz they can't find a babysitter and totally screw up MY TRUMPET SECTION!!!!!!!!!

Speaking from experience here, Deb? I've always wondered what goes on that in (adult) choirs if one soprano gets pregnant, half the rest of them seem to get pregnant within the year too.



(Maybe we should be handing out condoms with the sheet music? )

yup--totally from experience. grrr. Gosh, don't even say that! 2 preggos in one band is plenty. I'm worried about a couple of girls this year.......

heck, I can't even get one certain websites from the school computer! wake up, parents!!

[Michigan Girl]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL,

THIS^^^^ is exactly my point!!! Parentals, do your jobs!!!!

[StevePerryHair]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL,

THIS^^^^ is exactly my point!!! Parentals, do your jobs!!!! :wi
nk:

It's very hard when they know more than you and how to hide things on a pc!! When they are teenagers they have more alone time at home and you can't monitor 24/7. And then even if we do, they go to a friends whose parents may not. It's TOUGH in this technology generation!!!

[Michigan Girl]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL,

THIS^^^^ is exactly my point!!! Parentals, do your jobs!!!! :wi
nk:

It's very hard when they know more than you and how to hide things on a pc!! When they are teenagers they have more alone time at home and you can't monitor 24/7. And then even if we do, they go to a friends whose parents may not. It's TOUGH in this technology generation!!!

I know, girl!!
What they say is very true "It takes a village to raise a child"
To me this means SPIES...and lots of them!!!

[(Crazy)Dulce Lady]

[much more so than your average hum drum kid. .

what's that supposed to mean?? God don't make no average hum drum kids.

although, I do have a couple of below average hum drum beginner drummers. they could do well if they could focus, Daniel San.

oops...shoulda posted that in the ADHD thread. these little guys' pics are in the dictionary next to ADHD. I don't know how to help them but they ain't gettin it.

[(Crazy)Dulce Lady]

besides, if it's true that this is a parent issue instead of a school issue, then the parentals should monitor their internet activity, like WE do AT SCHOOL,

THIS^^^^ is exactly my point!!! Parentals, do your jobs!!!! :wi
nk:

It's very hard when they know more than you and how to hide things on a pc!! When they are teenagers they have more alone time at home and you can't monitor 24/7. And then even if we do, they go to a friends whose parents may not. It's TOUGH in this technology generation!!!

true dat. there is no easy answer for teachers or parentals. lots of finger pointing but no real, workable sloutions. I dunno.....

the tekkies at school have some kind of software and it blocks EVERYTHING!! even music publishing sites! Classifies them as entertainment.

[artist4perry]

I agree with Lula..........it is hard enough to give kids educational time these days over the trouble they get into IN school much less out...............but it depends on if they were sending them to kids at school.....what the whole story is......what kind of distraction did it cause etc........... Kids can do a lot of stuff on the computer parents haven't got a clue over. Let's face it, most parents were using typewriters at that age, and computers took up whole rooms.

As for what they did..........well...........Mom and Dad need to deal with that. Mine would have...............sitting would not have been an option...........much less a social life!

[DrFU]

Nice insight, but I want to know what you would do if you were the principal of this school?

It depends ... context is everything. First consideration is community mores ... in a cosmopolitian, liberal city such as Austin, something like this likely would be a non-event; 90 miles away in a small, Bible-belt town like Crawford (home to W and Ted Nugent ), parents and community members would probably be in an uproar. So, the question here is whether or not the incident actually is having a negative impact on the team and the controversy is interferring with the team discipline and morale.

Other considerations include what the code of conduct says (is off campus behavior specifically covered?), the discipline history of the kids involved (is this a second or third offense?), how other, similar events have been handled at this particular school (what punishment did the drunk-in-public star quarterback receive?), what the coach and athletic director want (they are the ones who make the original decision about such things; the principal is typically the first line of appeal), whether or not any of the kids involved are served through special education (federal guidelines kick in about due process), how the information about the pictures came to the attention of school authorities (was another student deliberately trying to get these girls in trouble or kicked off the team?), and so forth.

And ... if the girls are under 18, the pictoral "evidence" in this case is arguably considered child pornography, so everyone involved needs to be super careful about how it is handled and who has access.

[KenTheDude]

Nice insight, but I want to know what you would do if you were the principal of this school?

It depends ... context is everything. First consideration is community mores ... in a cosmopolitian, liberal city such as Austin, something like this likely would be a non-event; 90 miles away in a small, Bible-belt town like Crawford (home to W and Ted Nugent ), parents and community members would probably be in an uproar. So, the question here is whether or not the incident actually is having a negative impact on the team and the controversy is interferring with the team discipline and morale.

Other considerations include what the code of conduct says (is off campus behavior specifically covered?), the discipline history of the kids involved (is this a second or third offense?), how other, similar events have been handled at this particular school (what punishment did the drunk-in-public star quarterback receive?), what the coach and athletic director want (they are the ones who make the original decision about such things; the principal is typically the first line of appeal), whether or not any of the kids involved are served through special education (federal guidelines kick in about due process), how the information about the pictures came to the attention of school authorities (was another student deliberately trying to get these girls in trouble or kicked off the team?), and so forth.

And ... if the girls are under 18, the pictoral "evidence" in this case is arguably considered child pornography, so everyone involved needs to be super careful about how it is handled and who has access.

Blueskies?