Standard 6.8

Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

Standard:

2(h)3.- to make decisions within an ethical context

 

Field Experience:

6.8 Review the Alabama Educator Code of Ethics and the Alabama Code of Ethics for Public Officials. Discuss with the mentor the role of ethics in decision-making. Review five decisions by the Alabama Ethics Commission related to school administrators. *

Narrative Explanation:

Ethics Commissions Reviews were completed as a part of EDL 595 coursework.  Several advisory opinion cases were reviewed on the Alabama Ethics Commission website related to schools, teachers, and administrators.  During the EDL 595 course, one of the reviews was presented in class.

3 Ethics Commission Review papers were verbally approved as artifacts by Dr. Hajzus (professor at the University of Montevallo) on February 3, 2015 as evidence of meeting standard 6.8.

rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content

Ethics Commission Review Critique #1

AH Student

University of Montevallo

EDL 595, Spring 20**

February 1, 20**

 

  1. What was the title and topic of the case under review?
    • Advisory Opinion No. 2006-14 where as the principal and assistant principal of Case1 Elementary School were in question of whether or not they could accept a free 3-day, 2-night trip for the highest sales of coupon books in the district from a district-wide fundraiser.  The competition was open to all students, teachers, and employees in the district and was being offered by the ABC County Schools Board of Education on behalf of the ABC County Educational Foundation.
  2. Which standards(s) of the code of ethics applied to this case?
    • Standard 7: Remunerative Conduct applied to this case; specifically the “use of office for personal gain”.
  3. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most glaring or important facts in this case?
    • One of the most important facts is that the identified administrators, Ms. D and Ms. H were not involved in the actual sales of the coupon books and therefore were not selling on their own for personal gain.  Ms. D has been the school coordinator of this fundraiser for 8 years and her only duties are to distribute the books to teachers for the students and to receipt the money.  She was not selling the books herself for personal gain.  The second most important fact was that the trip was available to all schools, teachers, coordinators, and students.  The winning of the trip was not limited only to their school or a certain set of schools so everyone had an equal opportunity to win the trip.
  4. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important points of analysis in this case?
    • The most important point in analysis the case was understanding the Section 36-25-2(a).  This was cited in the opinion and clearly states, “No public official or public employee shall use or cause to be used his or her official position or office to obtain personal gain for himself or herself, or family member of the public employee” which is what makes accepting the trip questionable.
  5. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important conclusions in this case?
    • One of the most important conclusions was the comparison to a similar situation that happened in DEF City Schools where the ruling was they were able to accept the trip because it was available to all.  This is the same in the case as all schools and its members had an equal opportunity at winning the trip.
  6. What was the final vote in this case?
    • The final vote was 5-0 in favor that the principal and assistant principal were allowed to accept the trip because all schools had an equal opportunity to win it.
  7. Did you agree or disagree with the final vote and why?
    • I agree with the final vote.  Since all schools were a part of the fundraiser and it was done through the schools, every school had an equal opportunity.  All schools received the materials and were to implement it at the building-level however they determined. 
  8. What did you learn from this activity and how will you apply it in the future?
    • I learned that it is important to be verycautious of what I accept, even if it is winning something.  When looking at Section 36-25-5(a) cited in the opinion, it was very clear that this could have been a conflict of interest and looked like using office for personal gain.  I must be aware of everything I accept and decline.

Ethics Commission Review Critique #2

AH Student

University of Montevallo

EDL 595, Spring 20**

February 1, 20**

 

  1. What was the title and topic of the case under review?
    • Advisory Opinion No. 98-01 where the Superintendent is questioning if it is okay to hire a principal’s daughter at an elementary school to teach music part time or as contracted for one day a week.
  2. Which standards(s) of the code of ethics applied to this case?
    • Standard 7: Remunerative Conduct
    • Alabama Ethics Law: Section 36-25-1(23), 35-25-1(11), 36-25-5(a)
  3. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most glaring or important facts in this case?
    • The most glaring fact in the case was that, according to the Alabama Ethics Law, Section 36-25-1(11) states that the definition of a family member is the spouse or a dependent.  Since the principal’s daughter is married, she is no longer considered a dependent of the principal and therefore does not fall under the definition of a family member according to that section.
  4. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important points of analysis in this case?
    • The first important point in the case was that the principal was not trying to use his position of power to help her gain employment.  Several of the teachers have requested to have her employed to teach music at their school.
  5. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important conclusions in this case?
    • The most important conclusion in this case was that it is the opinion of the advisory board that the superintendent can hire Mrs. S as the music teacher because she does not fall into the category of a family member based on section 36-25-1(11) because she is not a dependent of the principal. 
  6. What was the final vote in this case?
    • The final vote in the case was 3-2 in favor of allowing the superintendent to hire Mrs. S as the music teacher at the elementary school where Mr. P, her father, was employed as the principal. 
  7. Did you agree or disagree with the final vote and why?
    • I agree with the final vote because it did not seem as though Mr. P (the principal) or the superintendent were trying to use their office for personal gain.  According to the Alabama Ethics Law, she does not constitute as a family member since she is not a dependent but more importantly, the teachers of the school were seeking her out.  The teachers at the elementary school wanted her to be employed there so this was beyond Mr. P or him suggesting her employment.
  8. What did you learn from this activity and how will you apply it in the future?

The final vote in this case does not necessarily sit well with me even though I agree with it.  Because it was a near tie, it tells me that there are strong arguments for both sides of hiring her and not hiring her.  As a future administrator, I must be very careful of who I employ when they are related to someone else in the system.  One thing that I learned from this is what constitutes as a family member.  Prior to this, I assumed a family member meant anyone immediate or extended, regardless of dependency, but this has cleared up who is viewed as a family member in the eyes of the ethics law related to this.

 

Ethics Commission Review Critique #3

AH Student

University of Montevallo

EDL 595, Spring 20**

February 1, 20**

 

  1. What was the title and topic of the case under review?
    • Advisory Opinion No. 97-87 where a principal of a school also serves as a board member of a local bank and wants to transfer his school’s accounting to that bank.
  2. Which standards(s) of the code of ethics applied to this case?
    • Standard 6: Public Funds and Property
    • Alabama Ethics Law: Section 36-25-2(24), 36-25-1(2), 36-25-1(8), 36-25-5(a)
  3. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most glaring or important facts in this case?
    • The most glaring fact in this case is that the principal is on the board of directors for the bank that he wants to transfer the school’s finances to.
  4. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important points of analysis in this case?
    • One of the most important points in analyzing the case is to note the differences in the two cases mention in the opinion from 1996.  One of the cases, AO No. 96-78, resulted in a decision allowing the principal to use a bank, if they were the highest bidder, even though he served on the board of directors.  Just a little over two weeks later, a similar case was voted that a superintendent could not use a bank where he served on the board of directors.  This is important to know because while a decision might uphold in one case, it may not be the same a few weeks later.
  5. In your opinion, what were the 1-2 most important conclusions in this case?
    • One of the most important conclusions with this case is that it would be violation for the principal to use the bank where he serves on the board of directors.  In addition, if he were to use that bank, he cannot have any involvement including transactions, voting, influencing, or participating in discussions about the funds from the school.
  6. What was the final vote in this case?
    • 5-0 in favor of the principal not being allowed to transfer the handling of his school’s accounts to a local bank where he is a member of the board.
  7. Did you agree or disagree with the final vote and why?
    • I am 100% in agreement with the decision of the advisory board.  Without having even read the entire document yet, upfront, it made me feel uncomfortable and very questionable.  One of the fastest ways for anyone in education, especially an administrator, to get themselves in trouble is to start messing with finances. It looks extremely suspicious that the principal wants to move the funds to the bank where he is a member of the board, even if he has no ill intentions.
  8. What did you learn from this activity and how will you apply it in the future?
    • From this activity, I learned that I need to be cautious in how I choose for my schools finances to be managed.  While this principal may not have any intention on acting unethically with the finances, it looks very suspect from the outside.  I never want to be in a position where someone is questioning how I am handling my finances because even if I don’t do something wrong, if someone at that bank does, it will be my job at stake.
rich_text    
Drag to rearrange sections
Rich Text Content
rich_text    

Page Comments