South Dakota Administrative Rules Title 24 - EDUCATION
South Dakota Administrative Rules Title 24
Education
Overview
Title 24 of the South Dakota Administrative Rules governs the policies, standards, and procedures relating to public education in South Dakota. It sets out rules concerning school governance, teacher certification, student rights, curriculum standards, funding, and disciplinary procedures.
Key Functions and Powers Under Title 24
School Governance and Administration: Establishes rules for school boards, administrative procedures, and operational policies.
Teacher Certification and Professional Standards: Sets requirements for teacher licensing, qualifications, and conduct.
Student Rights and Discipline: Defines standards for student conduct, disciplinary procedures, and protections.
Curriculum and Academic Standards: Prescribes curriculum frameworks, testing, and educational goals.
Funding and Accountability: Governs distribution of state funding and reporting requirements for schools.
Relevant Legal and Constitutional Principles
Education regulation under Title 24 implicates constitutional guarantees, administrative law doctrines, and judicial review principles.
1. State Authority Over Education and Police Power
States have broad authority under their police power to regulate education to promote the welfare and safety of children and society.
This includes setting standards for curriculum, teacher qualifications, and school discipline.
Case Law:
Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925): Recognized the state’s broad but not unlimited power to regulate education.
Goss v. Lopez (1975): Held that students have constitutional due process rights in disciplinary actions.
2. Due Process in Educational Settings
Students facing suspension, expulsion, or other significant disciplinary actions are entitled to due process protections.
Due process generally requires:
Notice of the charges or reasons for discipline.
An opportunity to be heard before an impartial decision-maker.
A fair and reasoned decision.
Case Law:
Goss v. Lopez (1975): Requires notice and some form of hearing before suspension.
Mathews v. Eldridge (1976): Provides the balancing test to tailor due process requirements.
3. Teacher Certification and Employment Protections
Teachers are entitled to procedural protections in licensing and termination actions.
Denial or revocation of teaching licenses must follow due process.
Case Law:
Board of Regents v. Roth (1972): Requires procedural due process before deprivation of property or liberty interests, such as employment or professional licenses.
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill (1985): Public employees with property interests in employment are entitled to pre-termination hearing.
4. Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions
Courts review educational administrative actions for:
Compliance with delegated statutory authority.
Adherence to procedural due process.
Substantial evidence supporting decisions.
Absence of arbitrary or capricious conduct.
Case Law:
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass’n v. State Farm (1983): Agency decisions must be reasoned and supported by evidence.
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC (1984): Courts defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous regulations.
Application to South Dakota Education Rules
The South Dakota Department of Education must follow fair procedures in teacher certification, student discipline, and school administration.
For example, a student facing suspension must receive timely notice and a hearing opportunity.
Teachers challenged for license revocation or disciplinary measures have rights to due process.
Courts will uphold administrative decisions if they are lawful, procedurally sound, and supported by evidence.
Summary
South Dakota Administrative Rules Title 24 governs education policy, standards, and procedures across the state.
It reflects the state’s broad authority to regulate education within constitutional limits.
Students and teachers have due process protections in disciplinary and licensing matters.
Courts balance deference to educational authorities with protection of individual rights.
Landmark cases like Pierce, Goss, Mathews, Roth, Loudermill, Motor Vehicle Manufacturers, and Chevron guide the constitutional and administrative review of education regulations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments