Assignment 2: Application—Case Study and Legal Analysis
Effective administrators should be able to read and gain a basic understanding of case law. They should be able to recognize legal issues and filter through sources of law to identify the potential legal issues and create adequate solutions.
The purpose of this assignment is to provide you an opportunity to explore the potential legal issues common to postsecondary and higher education and work through the laws that may provide a basis for prevention and solution.
Click here to read the case studies.
Prepare a 9- to 10-page paper based on the three sections.
Section 1: Case Study 1
Does the law constrain the president in her decision making on this tenure application? How?
What steps should the president take next? Why?
What are the major legal and policy considerations that should guide the ultimate decision in this case?
Section 2: Case Study 2
How will you respond to the faculty members' challenge of the university travel restriction policy? Substantiate your answer with resources and legal citations.
You may consider the following factors while answering the Section 1 and Section 2 questions:
Is there a faculty handbook or travel policy (or another institutional document) that might help lay out the process?
What are the facts laid out in the scenario? What, if any, facts can be assumed?
What facts do you wish you had before responding to the question? Who is the keeper of the said information?
Are there cases similar to this case, which that can be utilized to review the facts at hand? What are the other responsibilities of an academic dean related to overseas travel and research? How might those responsibilities be connected to the case at hand?
Section 3: Legal Analysis: Academic Freedom
Urofsky v. Gilmore (2001) is discussed in your textbook, pp. 282–287. The various opinions issued by the en banc court in Urofsky provide an instructive debate and an interesting array of viewpoints on academic freedom and professors' First Amendment free speech rights.
Respond to the following:
Compare the various opinions.
Identify opinions or parts of opinions that present the soundest reasoning.
Identify opinions or parts of opinions that present the most perceptive analysis.
You may consider the following factors while answering the Section 3 questions:
When reading a court decision, it is important to remember that judges can participate in more than one aspect of the decision. Judges can agree in part and join in a dissenting opinion for a different legal issue.
At times, this can confuse the reader about the ultimate decision of the court.
Read carefully. It may even help to keep a running tally of the judges and those issues that they agree and disagree with.
Directions for Case Study Analysis
In addition to responding to the questions and factors to consider within the case studies and legal analysis, it is important to prepare your responses by outlining the facts in the following manner.
In your case study analysis, first divide your paper into five separate sections: viewpoints, areas of law, judgment, administrative options, and implementation plan. Then, clearly address each of the sections of your paper as follows:
Viewpoints: Present the situation from the points of view of both the plaintiff and the defendant.
Areas of Law: Identify the areas of law that apply to the issue and write detailed explanations of the areas of law, including definitions of terms. This is also the section in which you identify applicable case law (if any) and explain the case rulings.
Judgment: State how you would rule on the case if you were the judge. Give a rationale for your ruling, applying the information from the section on areas of law.
Administrative Options: Discuss, from a higher and postsecondary point of view, three to five options that could be considered to avoid this kind of litigation in the future. At least one option must address the legal issue that triggered the lawsuit.
Implementation Plan: Select one of the administrative options and briefly describe a plan to implement or explain the impact on your setting.
Urofsky v. Gilmore, 216 F.3d 401 (4th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 (2001).
By Sunday, July 12, 2015, save your paper as M2_A2_Lastname_Firstname.doc and submit it to the M2: Assignment 2 Dropbox.
Assignment 2 Grading Criteria
Submitted a logically formatted professional presentation covering the assignment requirements.
Included all citations in APA format.
Wrote in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrated ethical scholarship in the accurate representation and attribution of sources; displayed accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.