The School Did Not Keep Its Promises or Was Deceptive


Volume 27, Number 2 © 2016 by ACSI. All rights reserved.


Published three times each year by Association of Christian Schools International PO Box 65130 Colorado Springs, CO 80962-5130 Website:www.acsi.org Phone: 719-528-6906


President Dan Egeler, EdD


Managing Editor Thomas J. Cathey, EdD Associate Editor Philip Scott, Esq Editors Chandler Birch John Conaway


Design Mike Riester Photos Thinkstock.com


ACSI Mission Statement ACSI exists to strengthen Christian schools and equip Christian educators worldwide as they prepare students academically and inspire students to become devoted followers of Jesus Christ.


ACSI Vision Statement ACSI will become a leading international organization that promotes Christian education and provides training and resources to Christian schools and Christian educators, resulting in


• schools that contribute to the public good through effective teaching and learning and that are biblically sound, academically rigorous, socially engaged, and culturally relevant and


• educators who embody a biblical worldview, engage in transformational teaching and discipling, and embrace personal and professional growth.


“ This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. [It has been provided to member schools with the understanding that ACSI] is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought.”


—From a Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a committee of the American Bar Association and a committee of publishers and associations.


Need More Copies of Legal/Legislative Update? You can send as many copies of Legal/ Legislative Update (LLU) as you like to your school’s employees and board members by downloading a PDF copy or by reading it online through our e-reader. To access current and back issues, go to ACSI ConNEXUS (my. acsi.org), look for the Publications tab at the top of the page, and select Legal/Legislative Update. The online e-reader will open, and from there you can access back issues and download PDF copies. Alternatively, you can visit the Legal Legislative group on ConNEXUS and download current and past issues from the Resources section. Additionally, links and websites referenced in LLU are hyperlinked in the digital versions, making those resources only a click away.


This often pops up with early voluntary withdrawals. The family is unhappy about aspects of the school or their child’s progress is not to their expectations. The argument here is that the school was the first to breach its promises, either by not providing what it contracted to provide in its education program or by failing to educate; consequently, parents do not have to pay tuition. Courts will generally not interfere in claims regarding the nature and content of an academic program (see Gupta v. New Britain General Hospital, 239 Conn. 574, 590-92). However, courts will look at academic programs if the claim is that the program itself failed in some fundamental way (such as not offering the required courses to obtain a diploma) or if specific contractual promises were not fulfilled (enrichment programs offered, student/teacher ratios, special needs licensing/programming). Mere dissatisfaction is not enough for the court to intervene when the school is providing an academic program, teachers, and facilities.


Takeaway: Courts usually will not want to review the curriculum and validity of an academic program. They realize they have no expertise here, and so general complaints that can be reasonably addressed are usually dismissed. The school may want to have general data (teacher qualifications, accreditation, testing scores, assessments, grades, etc.) regarding the school and perhaps the student.


Additionally, schools need to be careful in the promises made to parents. General statements about the quality of a school’s program are fine, but when a school makes promises about specific aspects, it must be able to deliver on them. If not, and the parents name those as the reasons they are leaving, then the school may need to refund tuition dollars.


Courts have been known to look at more than just the enrollment agreement and extend the school’s promises to things said in handbooks, catalogues, flyers/ advertising, brochures, newsletters, PTF/PTO newsletters, and websites. Things as simple as wording about specific program offerings have saved schools in the past. Shy away from using absolutes. For example, instead of stating, “The school will have tutors next year,” state, “The desire is to hire tutors for next year.”


Expulsion


When a school expels a student, it should do so in a reasonable manner with reasonable justification if the school wishes to keep or collect its tuition dollars. In Thomas Jefferson School v. Kapros, 729 S.W.2d 315 (Mo.App. E.D. 1987), the school dismissed a student for fighting in violation of its no fighting rule, and the parents claimed the school breached the contract by dismissing their student without just cause. The court found sufficient cause for the school’s actions based on three pieces of evidence presented. First, the enrollment agreement stated that “the school reserves the right to dismiss a student at any time if, in the judgment of the faculty, the student’s effort, progress, behavior, or influence is unsatisfactory” (Id., 729 S.W.2d 315, 317). Second, the student had signed the no-fighting policy, which stated dismissal was the punishment for violation. Third, there was a faculty-student hearing where three witnesses said the expelled student hit another student. The court seems to indicate the signed no-fighting policy would have been sufficient for just cause in dismissal.


Takeaway: The school should have a clause allowing for dismissing a student at any time for issues of academic progress, behavior, and violation of school standards. If the student is just not a good fit or the school is struggling to meet the student’s needs, then the school should not demand the parents pay the outstanding tuition, and should consider refunding prepayments on a prorated basis. If a student is dismissed for cause, then it needs to be a reasonable decision that can be backed up with written policy.


26 |


27.2


© 2016 by the Association of Christian Schools International


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24