1. Do you believe the Board of Education violated Mrs. Pettit's right to privacy? Were they justified in sacking her?
I believe that the State Board of Education dishonored Mrs. Pettit's rights to privacy. This is because she used to attend a private club in Los Angeles during her free time away from professional duties. The club was private and only, members were allowed in the club, and because Mrs. Pettits and the husband were members, they permitted. Although Mrs. Pettit enjoyed nonconventional sexual lifestyles such as wife swapping and performing fellatio, it was during her private time and also in a secret place outside the school setting. Also, she was an elementary school teacher whose student could not access such a place due to their age and so none of her pupils could get any information about her private life. The mandate of the Board of Education is to oversee and regulate educational practices as well as reviewing teachers' professional conduct in school. It does not have the right to be involved in Mrs. Pettit's private life because it did not relate with her teaching practice.
Moreover, the Board of Education was unjustified to fire Mrs. Pettit since her actions never interfered with or violated the school rules. The Supreme Court of California reversed the decision of the board to sack Mrs. Pettit for some general homosexual conduct. Similarly, the Supreme Court stated that no evidence was presented to show that Mrs. Petti constituted any unprofessional conduct or immoral conduct. Furthermore, the Board of Education did not present clear evidence to prove that Mrs. Pettit was unfit to continue teaching. Hence, the State Board of Education violated her rights to privacy by associating her private life to her teaching profession. As a result, it was not justified to fire Mrs. Pettit (Scholz, 1979).
Additionally, the California Board of Education failed to get any reason to criticize the professional services of Mrs. Pettit as a teacher. This means that she never neglected her professional duties and responsibilities. Thus, her private life never interfered with her professional performance and conduct. Also, the evaluation of her school principals was positive indicating that her competence was pleasing.
2. Was her behavior immoral or unprofessional? Do you believe she was unsuitable to teach?
Mrs. Pettit's conduct can be described as immoral but not unprofessional. She was one time detained and accused with oral copulation because during that time her behavior contravened the California Penal Code. She pleaded guilty of outraging public decency and was fined. Besides, Mrs. Pettit and her husband liked participating in nonconventional sexual behaviors like "wife swapping" which makes her immoral. Also, at the age of forty-eight years, Mrs. Pettit joined a private club in California that endorsed diverse sexual activities. During their time, sexual liberation was a hot topic and considered immoral by the society. As a teacher and a public figure, who many children looked up to her as their role model, Mrs. Pettit needed to be morally upright.
On the other hand, Mrs. Pettit's behavior cannot be termed as unprofessional. This is because she used to go to the private club after completing her professional duties. Thus, her private activities did not affect her professional responsibilities. Also, Mrs. Pettit did not publicize her immoral acts as she used to act in a very private place that her students could not manage to see her actions. Moreover, her records indicate that she was a dedicated teacher who always impressed principals. As a teacher of children with intellectual disabilities, it requires one to be devoted, patient, and skilled and Mrs. Pettit managed to teach for more than thirteen years. Mrs. Pettit's competence was never questioned, even though her work was so challenging and difficult. Therefore, Mrs. Pettit upheld her professional conduct and was suitable to teach children with intellectual disabilities.
3. If teachers have a decent performance in the classroom, should they also be held accountable to a higher moral standard outside the classroom?
Teachers should not be held accountable for their moral behaviors outside the classroom unless it interferes with their performance inside the classroom. The expertise of teachers is not related to their private lifestyles, if it has nothing to do with their professional tasks. For instance, it is evident that Mrs. Pettit was not morally upright because of her sexual liberation behaviors in the private club. However, her professional competence was never questioned at any given time of her teaching career. In spite of her immoral behavior, Mrs. Pettit performed stunningly in her teaching profession. She managed to withstand various types of challenges and difficulties in the workplace handling children with intellectual disabilities. Mrs. Pettit also remained dedicated even if he work rarely brought the financial rewards and prestige it deserved. The hard work and dedication she offered during her teaching profession were not influenced by her immoral behaviors outside the classroom. As a result, teachers with good performance in school and other professional roles should not be held accountable for their moral issues outside the classroom (Danielson, 2011).
4. Analyze five (5) behaviors you believe would show unprofessional or immoral conduct for a teacher.
Like any other profession, teaching has codes of professional conduct that guide their behaviors during their career. There are numerous behaviors that would be viewed as immoral or unprofessional conduct for a teacher. First, it is unprofessional for a teacher to use abusive or unsuitable language in a classroom setting or to gossip about other people. The use of vulgar and rude language in teaching is prohibited in all professional ethical codes. Second, it is also immoral and unprofessional to dress indecently by wearing clothes that are showing too much skin and too tight. Teachers are obliged to dress in a manner that commands respect from the students and the society as well. Third, it is immoral and unprofessional for a teacher to initiate any sexual or romantic relationship with a student or another teacher of the same school. Fourth, assisting students to cheat in exams and other class assignments or in a way try to doctor results so that a certain student can seem to have passed, indicating that the teacher is unprofessional and unfit to teach. Lastly, teachers are not supposed to abuse drugs in school as it is unprofessional because it can directly affect the teacher's performance. A teacher is supposed to be a role model to the students and involved in drugs can send a wrong signal to the students (Danielson, 2011).
References
Danielson, C. (2011). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. ASCD.
Scholz, J. L. B. (1979). Comment: Out of the Closet, Out of a Job: Due Process in Teacher Disqualification. Hastings Const. LQ, 6, 663.
