|
|
|
|
"I think it's ridiculous that they would deny me an education because of my hair," says Kisteesha Lanegan, a sophomore who can't attend Whitefish High School until she gets rid of her dreadlocks.
Karen Nichols/ Daily Inter Lake
|
Posted on 09/25/2002 4:46:22 PM PDT by ItsBacon
Local
Hairstyle keeps girl out of Whitefish High School
By Nancy Kimball
The Daily Inter Lake
|
|
|
|
"I think it's ridiculous that they would deny me an education because of my hair," says Kisteesha Lanegan, a sophomore who can't attend Whitefish High School until she gets rid of her dreadlocks.
Karen Nichols/ Daily Inter Lake
|
Kisteesha Lanegan says she simply was tired of her long, straight hair, so decided to try dreadlocks.
Whitefish Superintendent Jerry House says the sophomore knew the rule and made her choice, so officials had no option but to ask her to leave school until she got rid of the "outlandish" hairstyle.
"It's not really my hair," the 15-year-old Lanegan said from her home last week on a day when her peers were in class at Whitefish High School. "It's just the principle of the matter. They're trying to mold me into a person that I'm not. My hair is totally irrelevant to education at the school."
House said the school wants to maintain its high standards.
"We're here for education. That's our paramount duty," he said. "We're not here as a fashion store or fashion occasion. If you want to dress in an outlandish way in your own time, that's your business. That's not our business."
Lanegan, a C and D student who admits she does not particularly enjoy school but still wants to return, says she's as good as expelled.
The school sees it another way.
"She was asked to go home and change her hair on opening day of school this year," House said. "She is welcome back any time when she changes her hair. She's chosen not to come back. We say, as a student she left campus, went home and chose not to return."
Today, two weeks past the 10-day absence limit that automatically drops a student from public school rolls, Lanegan officially is "not currently enrolled" at Whitefish High School.
While Kisteesha Lanegan's remaining high school career may come down to an issue of semantics, the underlying issues pit individual freedom of expression against a public school's right to set rules to accomplish its goals.
It started a year ago, a couple of weeks before the first day of her freshman year.
"I just thought it would be a cool thing to do," said Lanegan, who has been in Whitefish schools since third grade. "I was tired of how my hair had been forever, straight and highlighted, and if I'd kept it that way I'd have to curl it every day."
So she started twisting and rubbing segments of her hair until, two months later, it was matted enough for the dreadlocks to hold their form.
Teachers would ask her how she accomplished the look, she said, but none objected to the style.
None, at least, until two weeks before the end of the year. That's when she was called into Assistant Principal Kent Paulson's office.
"He told me ‘I have two things to talk to you about,’" she said. "‘One of them is that you can't wear your hat in the building.’" She wore a wool snow cap to school, and he had indeed told her to remove it several times.
"‘The second thing is dreadlocks,’" Paulson told her. "He told me I had to alter my hair in some way so it wasn't dreadlocked. I told him the only way I can do that is to cut my hair off, and he said, ‘I guess that's what you're going to have to do, then.’"
She asked Paulson why she had not been told earlier while it was still possible to remove the dreadlocks without shaving her head. They had been overlooked, he replied.
"How could he ask me to remove my cap and not notice my hair? Obviously, he had been paying some attention to me," she said.
Paulson also said another student's mother had seen Lanegan at prom last spring and reminded Paulson that her own son complied when told not to wear dreadlocks.
"I asked Mr. Paulson, ‘Why, what's the reasoning behind making me cut my dreadlocks?’" Lanegan said. "He told me it was an abnormality in that no one else had dreads and I couldn't. I said, ‘No one else wants to dread their hair.’ I also made the point that I'm still in school and I'm still learning. It doesn't have anything to do with school. How is this affecting it?"
House said the school is trying to prevent the potential ridicule, bullying and attention being drawn to a student with outlandish hair.
"We have standards, we have expectations," the superintendent said. "We're not singling out any one student. You set standards, you set your expectations for people to meet them and you do it for a reason. Our reason is that we're a learning institution, we're not a fashion school.
"We want all children when they come here to have the opportunity to learn with no distractions."
He also said Lanegan had enough time to comply with the policy.
"Last spring, we allowed her to stay in school so she didn't have to shave her head," he said. "We didn't want to embarrass the child." At that time, he talked with her mother, PeTina Lanegan, to let her know Kisteesha would have to get rid of the dreadlocks before August.
"She thanked me and said certainly they could do something over the summer," House said. Later, PeTina Lanegan contacted House and board chair Linda Maetzold, who both told her the dreadlocks would have to go.
"What kind of bothered me about it is she knew this was the policy last year and had all summer to work with it. She knew it and didn't change it," House said.
Lanegan does not claim to be a star student but doesn't think she's a problem child, either.
In fifth and sixth grades, she said, she was the class clown who irritated teachers but drew no suspensions.
In eighth grade, she got her tongue pierced. Administrators told her it was against school policy and asked her to remove the barbell in her tongue. She had checked the handbook previously and found no specific prohibition on tongue piercing, so refused. The next day, she was put into two weeks of in-school suspension. A few days before suspension was over, she and her mother met with House and Kisteesha was released.
"My attitude really wasn't very good," Lanegan said. "I was offensive, I got really frustrated. But now everything's fine.
"I don't demand respect from teachers and administrators. I just pretty much go to class. I regularly attend class, but I did run up against the maximum absence limit at the end of last year."
She thought about Paulson's directive during the summer, and decided "if I cut my hair off I would be totally conforming to these totally ridiculous rules," and returned to school this fall with a full head of dreads.
Eight minutes into first period, she was called to Principal Dorothy Schmautz's office and soon left campus for home.
"I think it's ridiculous that they would deny me an education because of my hair," she said.
Beth Brenneman, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Montana, tends to agree.
The Lanegans asked for the ACLU's help. In a letter to House, Brenneman cited the Montana Constitution's provision guaranteeing "equality of educational opportunity ... to each person of the state."
"This constitutional guarantee establishes a right to attend public school that the government cannot take away without an important or compelling reason to do so," she wrote.
After reviewing the handbook that the district mailed her, she focused on punishment outlined in the dress-code policy — ranging from a warning for first offense to one-day suspension for fourth offense.
"The school policy does not lend itself very well to some sort of status offense," she told the Inter Lake. "It never lists expulsion."
However, the ACLU litigation committee decided last week not to take on the case.
"Our decision to take or not take cases is based almost entirely on our resources," Brenneman said. She's the only attorney for the ACLU in Montana, and already has a full plate.
"It's an open question on whether the Constitution allows schools to dictate policy on appearance," she said. "There's not enough case law.
"Equality of educational opportunity is guaranteed to every person by the Montana Constitution. That is not in the U.S. Constitution. They have to have a good reason to deprive her of that access. Is her hair sufficient reason to deprive her?"
Whitefish school trustees revised the student handbook's dress code this summer.
A section that had read "Unnatural hair color and outlandish styles detract from the educational settings and will not be allowed," was altered to add "such as mohawks and dreadlocks" after "outlandish styles." The word "not" was changed to capital letters.
A copy of the revision was mailed to Lanegan shortly before school started Aug. 28.
"We really haven't added anything, with the exception of adding words to be specific," House said. "Were we targeting Kisteesha? Heck no. Were we targeting any other students? Heck no. We were not looking at any group, religious set, cultural set."
He cited the athletic training policy, also changed this summer, that now allows students to be near and to consume alcohol.
"A lot of our kids are waiters and waitresses in local restaurants," House said, "so being around that would be a problem to them.
"Also, some families have a tradition of having a glass of wine at Thanksgiving."
The next step for PeTina Lanegan is an appointment today with House. If they reach no solution, the case can be appealed to the Whitefish school board, then to County Superintendent Donna Maddux.
"We've talked to some lawyers," Kisteesha Lanegan said. "One of my mom's friends has a lawyer in Chicago, but that's expensive and we don't have much money to spend on a lawyer.
"I really don't know yet what to do at this point because we've tried so many things and they're all dead-ends. My mom is looking into home schooling now.
"I miss seeing all the people I used to see at school, and just having something to do and being there. I don't miss all the teachers and the system, but I do want to go back. I want them to say I can come back to school."
Reporter Nancy Kimball may be reached at 758-4483 or by e-mail at nkimball@dailyinterlake.com
Districts vary in approaches to the issue
A focus on educational benefits guides decisions regarding student appearance in Kalispell, Columbia Falls and Bigfork high schools.
• "What we look at is that whatever the student is doing has got to be appropriate for school and school activities," said Flathead High School Principal Callie Langohr. School policy, she said, requires that student behavior and appearance not be disruptive, distracting, harmful or incompatible with the school mission.
"We really try to work with students. We want students to be in school and enjoy coming to Flathead High School," she said. "We develop relationships with them so things like this aren't an issue."
She would not be concerned about a student with dreadlocks, she said, adding that similar situations have "not really" surfaced at the high school.
"We try to head problems off, look at students as individuals and see where they are in life," she said. "We don't overreact or underreact. We don't put ourselves in a position where this would be an issue.
"We are pretty tolerant. We want students to attend Flathead High School. We want them to feel good about being in school here and (have them) get in here and get the job done."
• In Columbia Falls, the student handbook says personal appearance of students is respected provided it does not interfere with health and safety of the student or others, nor materially interfere with the educational process.
Common sense, self-respect and respect for others are the guideposts.
There is no district policy specifically governing hair. A high school administrator did not want to comment on whether dreadlocks would cause concern.
The administrator said current fashion trends have been the biggest block to students cooperating with the dress code.
Students who refuse to adhere to the rules of appearance get an in-school detention for one lunch period. Further infractions bring more detention.
• Bigfork High School's policy on hairstyles "is pretty vague and open," principal Thom Peck said, and takes a hands-off approach, "as long as it doesn't distract from the educational setting."
"If it were something different as far as dyed or colored hair, or the way it was shaved, or dreadlocks," he said, "if we felt it was becoming an issue as far as denying the student (benefits) from the educational process," the school would take action.
Students, he said, could get a hard time from their peers who teased, left notes or put something on the student's car, making them "feel uncomfortable so that they couldn't reach their full potential."
It's never happened in his experience, Peck said. This is his first year at Bigfork, but he has been an assistant principal and teacher in other districts.
Clothing, however, has been an issue. Because students usually go home and change or put on the T-shirt the school offers, Peck said, it's never gotten to the point of expulsion.
09/25/2002 Wednesday
No. Her only obligation is to abide by rules that ALL the other kids abide by. No special rights here. She's trying to create special rules for herself. It's this girl that needs to "feel better" about herself. Walking around like that is a clear sign of VERY low self esteem. It's a hideous hairdo.
"She can tell them she'll leave and they can do without the state aid they get for her attendance. There are those who decide that they really aren't that happy in the public schools anyway."
Other NORMAL homeschoolers should get the state aid public schools still receive even though they don't attend. I agree that ALL homeschoolers should get the alloted tax dollars for their kids.
I must respectfully disagree on you position regarding uniforms. We had a dress code at the private high school I attended, and it definitely made a difference. Instead of focusing on who was wearing what and who could afford the latest fashions, students distinguished themselves through academic, artistic, musical, or athletic excellence.
I can only speak from my experience, and the experience of the other friends I made from various private educational institutions, but having spent the first 9 years of my life in public education, private education (and, yes, the dress code accompanying it) was significantly better.
I'm confident it wasn't the *only* variable, but it was an important variable that helped comprise the difference. Your experience may have been dramatically different, and I respect your right to disagree.
I hate you and everything you represent. But I really, really miss you. Won't you admit you made a mistake and just TAKE ME BACK!!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!
Look at the pic and use your imagination. First the girl stands staight at attention and stiffens up. Then some big guy grabs her and uses her to mop the floor. When he's done he runs her head through a ringer (just the hair part) and stacks her in the corner to dry. The more floors done the better the hairdoo.
I found out how to make dreadlocks on the net. It is a wad of totally tangled knots. The "locks" have to be cut off to remove the style as there is no way to ever untangle them. The effect is easier to obtain with frizzy or kinky hair, but I saw a few straight haired blonds with locks, but not as thick.
Show me where this is happening. Of course, since you have no idea what goes on in a modern school, you can't. A good education, regardless of where it is obtained, frees the mind. Even if you have to wear a uniform and not curse at the teachers while obtaining it...
I am not seeking to take YOUR MONEY to enforce MY RULES upon your children.
That's Conservative. That's family values. That's Parental Rights.
And if you don't like it, all I ask is that you don't steal our money. Let the Parents of my Church keep their Tax Monies, and you can keep your Gubmint Skoolz.
But lemme guess -- you still want your Gubmint Skoolz, and you want US to pay for it... right?
Gosh, if I wanted to take YOUR MONEY to enforce MY RULES upon your children, I'd be some kind of John-Dewey Communist.
And I'm no Communist.
Are you really incapable of seeing that the statement,"do you think the inmates should run the system",is not a LITERAL statement? You know what I meant,of course the parents are not inmates. What a bunch of claptrap.
It's NOT Literal? Are you sure?
Try this on for size...
That's Communistic.
You claim to be a Calvinist?
Yes, and my Calvinism forces me to be an anti-Communist.
Yet you "feel" that because the public schools,which we all agree are cesspools of indoctrination,are wrong to have dress codes and enforce them?
Right, I agree that the Communistic Publik Skools are wrong to exist.
I don't want Communism to "work better". I want it to DIE.
You want Communism to "work better".
That's Communist.
Then you try to insult me by questioning my simple desire for the schools, flawed as they are, to have and enforce the rules that the LOCAL people have seen fit to write. You question my being conservative? What's the matter don't you believe in the LOCAL control of our schools? That's hardly a conservative or Calvinist view,so I guess you are just posing?
No, Local Communism is still Communism.
You think you are not a Communist because you support "Local Collectives"??
"Local Collectives" are the ORIGINAL DEFINITION of Communism, my red banner Comrade. The "Local Collectives" are termed, the SOVIETs. The Local Communist Collective is the very idea of "Soviet" Communism!!
I am firmly in favor of the idea of PARENTAL RIGHTS.
And I am firmly against the Communistic idea of the LOCAL SOVIET.
My original point stands,students shouldn't make the rules,they are CHILDREN,and whatever rules there are, should be applied equally to all students in the school. It is amazing to me that you are so hysterical about this trivial,inane,unimportant "event".
If PARENTS do not rule their Children's education, then the Local SOVIET rules the Children's education.
"Hysterical"?? YOU are the one who is appealing to the idea of the local collective SOVIET and trying to insidiously pass it off as being "Conservative!!"
Faugh upon that John-Dewey Marxism, my red-banner Comrade.
I guess you are the type of person who, while complaining about the "quality of education", would sue the school over any trivial objection you are able to gin up?
If it would cause the Local SOVIET Publik Skool to Die as it should, that's not a half bad idea.
But I'm afraid... good idea or not, I just couldn't bring myself around to the idea of taking Tax Dollars from my fellow-citizens by means of Lawsuit.
So, instead of Lawsuits, I'll merely continue to Vote for the abolition of the Local "education" Soviets.
If this entire thing is not a tempest in a teapot,I sure don't know what is! By the way I don't REALLY mean a hurricane inside of a piece of pottery,it's just a colloquial saying, not intended to be taken in a literal way. Should I use smaller, more simple words,for you?
Naw, these words will do just fine:
And if you don't like it, all I ask is that you don't steal our money. Let the Parents of my Church keep their Tax Monies, and you can keep your Gubmint Skoolz.
But lemme guess -- you still want your Gubmint Skoolz, and you want US to pay for it... right?
Those are small enough words for you to grasp, no?
Clue stick
The school board changed the rules just so they could expel her
Whitefish school trustees revised the student handbook's dress code this summer.
A section that had read "Unnatural hair color and outlandish styles detract from the educational settings and will not be allowed," was altered to add "such as mohawks and dreadlocks" after "outlandish styles." The word "not" was changed to capital letters.
A copy of the revision was mailed to Lanegan shortly before school started Aug. 28.
"We really haven't added anything, with the exception of adding words to be specific," House said. "Were we targeting Kisteesha? Heck no. Were we targeting any other students? Heck no. We were not looking at any group, religious set, cultural set."
Of course you probably believe House. He's in Authority, and would never lie to the rabble while enforcing the zero-tolerance for individuality policy.
Maybe, or they learn to buy what everyone else is buying, preparing themselves for life as the functional equivalent of livestock.
I fail to see the connection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.