Opinions of Secondary School Students on the Effects of Disciplinary Regulations and Practices on the Freedom of Thought and Expression

Abstract

Disciplinary rules are necessary for students to benefit
from education and training activities without any problems or
shortcomings in the school environment. Governed by regulation in
Turkey, these rules prescribe such penalties as reprimand, short-term
suspension, changing of schools, or exclusion from formal education
institutions. Conversely, various national and international legal
arrangements define children‟s fundamental rights and freedoms.
Students below the age of 18 are also entitled to fundamental rights and
freedoms by reason of such legal arrangements. One of these
arrangements recognises the freedom of thought and expression. The
children's/students' freedom of thought and expression within the school
environment, as well as the limitations thereof, are of a disputed nature.
In light of such disputes, the problem addressed by the present study
concerns the evaluation of the effects of disciplinary regulations and
practices on students‟ freedom of thought and expression in line with
students‟ own opinions

Keywords

• student rights, disciplinary regulations, freedom of thought, freedom of expression

References

1. Avenarius H. (2001). Einführung in das schulrecht [Introduction to school law]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
2. Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, Grundgesetz, GG, 23 May., 1949, art.5. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf
3. Best student status in Danger (2014, 18 June) Hürriyet. Retrieved June 19, 2014 from http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/26627592.asp
4. Bezanson P. B. (1995). Institutional Speech, Iwo Law Review, 80, 735-824.
5. Brighouse H. (2002). What Rights (if any) Do Children Have?, In D. Archard and C. M. Macleod (Eds) The moral and political status of children (pp. 31-52). Oxford University Press: Oxford.
6. Constitution of the Republich of Turkey, 1982, no. 2708, P.2, C.2, art.25, 26. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from http://global.tbmm.gov.tr/docs/constitution_en.pdf
7. Erdoğan M. (2007). İfade Özgürlüğü ve Sınırları [Freedom of Thoughts and Limitations]. T. Bora (Eds), İfade özgürlüğü ilkeler ve Türkiye [Freedom of thoughts: principles and Turkey].İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
8. European Convention on Human Right, 4 Dec., 1950. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf

9. Etzioni A. (2004). On Protecting Children From Speech, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 79(3), 3-53.
10. Good news for Işıtan Önder (2014, 17 July) Cumhuriyet. Retrieved July 18, 2014 from http://www.cumhuriyet.com.tr/haber/turkiye/95301/Okul_birinciligi_eli nden_alinan_Isitan_Onder_e_iyi_haber.html
11. Gökçe O. (2006). İçerik analizi kuramsal ve pratik bilgiler [Content analysis: theoritical and pratical information]. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
12. Houten V. R., Hall R.V. (1983). The measurement of behaviour: behaviour modification, USA.
13. Imber M., Geel T. V. (2005). A Teacher’s guide to education law. Roudledge: United States of America.
14. Kaboğlu İ.Ö. (2000). Düşünce özgürlüğü [Freedom of thoughts] K. Tankuter (eds), İnsan hakları [Human rights]. İstanbul: YKY Yayınları.
15. Kümbetoğlu B. (2005). Sosyolojide ve antropolojide niteliksel yöntem ve araştırma [Qualitative method and research in sociology and anthropology] Ankara: Bağlam Yayıncılık.
16. Landwehr, A. (2000). A Student‟s Right to Freedom of Speech in Light of Henerey v. City of St. Charles School District, Journal of Law and Education, 29, 393- 397.
17. Lobel H.C., Heckel H., Avenarius H. (2000). Schulrechtskunde [Information of Right to Education]. Neuwied: Luchterhand.
18. Macleod C. M. (2004). A Liberal Theory of Freedom of Expression For Children, Chicago-Kent Law Review, 79 (3), 55-82.
19. Miles M. B., Huberman A. M. (1994). Qualitative data anaylsis, USA:Sage Publications.
20. Punch K. F. (2005). Sosyal araştırmalara giriş, nicel ve nitel yaklaşımlar[Introduction to social researches, quantitative and qualitative approaches] (Translated by D. Bayrak, H.B. Arslan, Z. Akyüz), Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.
21. Regulation of Secondary Education Institutions, published in official journal on 07.09.2013, no. 28758, art. 164. Retrieved April 21, 2014 from http://mevzuat.meb.gov.tr/html/ortaogrkurumyon_0/ortaogrkuryon_1.ht ml
22. Reward and Discipline Regulation, published in official journal on 19.01.2007, no. 26408, http://mebk12.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/16/01/964259/dosyalar/201 3_03/08023339_odulvedisiplinyonetmeligi.pdf 21, 2014 from
23. Richter I. (1990). West Germany, Switzerland and Austria, In I. Birch, I. Richter (Eds.), Comparative School Law (p.119-139).
24. Sondurak (2014). Retrieved from http://www.sondurakhaber.com/haber-10000- ogrenci-disiplin-yonetmeliginde-yapilan-degisikliklerin-yurutmesi- durduruldu.html
25. Student Discipline Regulation for Higher Education Institutions, published in official journal on 18.08.2012, no. 28388. Retrieved April 21, 2014 from http://www.yok.gov.tr/web/guest/icerik//journal_content/56_INSTAN CE_rEHF8BIsfYRx/10279/17960
26. Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
27. Teziç E. (1990). Türkiye‟de siyasal düşünce ve örgütlenme özgürlüğü [Freedom of political thoughts and organization in Turkey]. Anayasa Yargısı Dergisi, 7, 29- 46.
28. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
29. United Nations (1948/2009). Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/inde
30. United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 Nov., 1989. Retrieved April 20, 2014 from http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx
31. Ümit Atılgan E. (2007). Mekandan imkana: çocuk suçluluğunun habitusu ceza ehliyeti ilişkisi [From urban to opportunity: the habitus of juvenile delinquency]. Ankara: Ankara Barosu.
32. Yıldırım A., Şimşek H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nicel araştırma yöntemleri [Methods of Quantitative Research in Social Sciences].Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
33. Orta öğretim Öğrencilerinin Disiplin Düzenleme ve Uygulamalarının Düşünce ve İfade Özgürlüğüne Etkisi Hakkındaki Görüşleri Atıf:
34. Taşkın P. (2014). Opinions of Secondary School Students on the Effects of
35. Disciplinary Regulations and Practices on the Freedom of Thought and
36. Expression. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 57, 51-72 http://dx.doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2014.57.5