Dodd, Victoria J. (2003). Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century

	Dodd, Victoria J. (2003). Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century. Durham, N. C.: Carolina Academic Press. Pp. lxix + 333 ISBN 0-89089-055-2 Reviewed by Elizabeth T. Lugg Illinois State University August 7, 2003 In the treatise Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century, Victoria Dodd has attempted, as have so many lawyer/authors before her, to write an instructive education law text, which can be used in boardrooms and classrooms across the United States. In many respects, Ms Dodd has succeed in this endeavor. Unfortunately, this work, like so many of its predecessors, suffers from the need for absolute timeliness which affects most law-related textbooks. In addition, the other major weakness is inherent in the format chosen by Ms Dodd for her publication, as stated on the back cover of the book that “[t]he goal of the volume is to concisely summarize the law in a given area, suggest trends and issues of concern, and provide practical advice to meet important legal and policy challenges.” [emphasis added]. Both the sources chosen and the advice given provide more of a forum for Ms Dodd to express her legal opinions rather than engage in an learned discussion of the situation and the options available to those education lawyers, administrators, school board members, and teachers to whom this treatise is directed. Turning first to the positive aspects of Ms Dodd’s work, Practical Education law for the Twenty-First Century does indeed provide a concise summary of the extremely broad field of education law. The treatise starts with an introduction to education law including a summary of everything from the history of public education to competency testing to legal research tools and accepted scholarly journals. The work then continues to cover the wide range of law which falls under the umbrella of “education law” including organization of public schools, school finance, fundamental right to an education, residency requirements, mandatory fees, home schooling and other forms of school choice, torts, athletics, and labor relations. All of these topics are arranged in a manner very similar to legal codes using chapters and sections (i.e., Chapter 5 Residency Requirements and Mandatory Fees and Expenses, Section 5.12 Textbook fees). While an attorney would be very comfortable with this format, it does leave one to wonder why an author who is aiming for an audience primarily of lay people such as administrators, school board members, and teachers. It is precisely this inconsistency between the professed purpose and target audience of the treatise on one side, and the contents and organizational format on the other which is perhaps one of the greatest weaknesses of this work. But there are other weaknesses as well. Turning to the first chapter, which deals with an introduction to American education law, the very first reference is to another very popular school law textbook. This is odd at best. The chapter seems to improve as Ms Dodd goes on to talk about the three major sources for education law and important education law publications, but then another rather odd footnote. On page 8 of her text, Ms Dodd states “American public education has traditionally had as its lodestar the preparation of citizens able to participate in American democracy.” She then cites in footnote 18 a secondary source, the landmark case of Brown v Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954), to support this statement rather than going to the actual words of Thomas Jefferson as would be expected of a legal scholar. At other times, Ms Dodd referenced the New York Times (page 14, footnote 66), the Wall Street Journal (page 14, footnote 67), the Chronicle of Higher Education (page 15, footnote 75), and other education law textbooks (page 168, footnote 39). While this may appear to be overly critical and most likely would never be noticed by a lay person reading this treatise, for another legal scholar reading Ms Dodd’s work it throws up red flags as to the caliber and thoroughness of the research throughout the rest of the publication. While on the topic of citations, Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century labors under the burden of all legal publications, which attempt to go beyond legal theory and United States Supreme Court precedence. Specifically, it is the question of which lower courts to cite. Because the judicial system in the United States is split into 50 different state judicial systems, and numerous districts and circuit courts at the federal level, with not all have binding precedent over the others, it is often hard to make a statement concerning the law that is universally applicable. This becomes even more difficult in the area of education law because the majority of laws covering public education are entirely state specific. For example, in Illinois compulsory education starts at age seven. In Iowa, just across the Mississippi River, compulsory education starts at age six. That just takes into account two of 50 states on one issue. Ms Dodd did make a very admirable attempt to draw in both statutory and common law from a variety of states including California, Texas, Arizona, Illinois, Ohio, and New York. Even this effort, however, was compromised by the Achilles Heel of this treatise--inconsistency. While numerous states were brought into the discussion, the topics on which Ms Dodd chose to focus were, more often than not, extremely state specific will little or any universal applicability. For example, Chapter Three and its 20 subsections deal with the topic of school finance. Specific topics covered include establishing the tax levy, property tax delinquency and foreclosure, and procedures for issuing bonds. While these are indeed viable areas of school law with which school attorneys deal on a regular basis, they are all governed by state statutes which are not applicable across state lines and definitely not worth 46 pages out of approximately 310. The same could be said about large portions of the 67 pages included in Chapter 9 "Athletics" and Chapter 10 "Labor Relations." Given the January 2002 decision of the Illinois Supreme Court in Arteman v Clinton Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 90701, SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS, 198 Ill. 2d 475; 763 N.E.2d 756 (2002) regarding sovereign immunity of schools under Illinois State law, Section 9.08 Liability for Student Injuries During Physical Education Class is in essence inapplicable. Individuals in South Carolina, a "meet and confer" state, would have little use for the 35 pages of Chapter 10. The use of approximately one-third of the book to discuss state specific legal issues is even more puzzling when you realize that Ms Dodd chose to leave out information about desegregation and special education. One could rationalize the choice given the purpose stated on the back cover of the book that this treatise is to: “suggest trends and issues of concern, and provide practical advice to meet important legal and policy challenges . . . This highly readable text makes this book extremely accessible and useful for a non-legal audience, as well as for a legally trained leader . . . easy-to-use reference tool for problem-solving.” Perhaps Ms Dodd did not feel that desegregation, unlike school finance or athletics, was a current issue of concern, but what about affirmative action? Would that not be easier for the lay person to understand if he or she understood the history behind such actions? Of more importance, given the self-stated purpose for this publication, is why the IDEA and special education in general were excluded from the contents of a “treatise covering the real-life issues that confront education lawyers, administrators, school board members, and teachers on a daily basis.” How can a book be titled “Practical Education Law” with no chapter on special education? One does not need to have much contact with the target audience of this treatise to realize that special education, along with the federal legislation No Child Left Behind are two of the most immediate issues in the minds of public educators today. The inconsistency, which plagues this work, is shown again in the coverage of federal legislative initiatives and discussion of four pivotal United States Supreme Court cases, which were handed down in the summer of 2002. In Chapter One, Section 1.08 dealing with federal legislation and development of standards, the Bush administration education (or many would say anti-education) initiative No Child Left Behind is not mentioned. On page 14 there is one sentence, “Current President George W. Bush has also emphasized standardized tests in his education proposals.” The reader is then instructed, via citation, to see a law review article written by Ms Dodd. The first question that is raised is how likely is it that a lay person (e.g., board member) would have easy access to law reviews? The second question is how likely is it, even if the lay person could find the law review, that the lay person could understand the argument presented therein without further background information, information which unfortunately is not provided by Ms Dodd. There is no significant discussion of categorical aid nor of the ability or inability of the federal government under the terms of the United States Constitution to interfere with state education laws in relation to No Child Left Behind. Perhaps even more egregious is the amount of time spent by Ms Dodd in reviewing the facts, decision, and ultimate impact of four very key United States Supreme Court cases decided in the summer of 2002 which dealt with vouchers, FERPA, and student drug testing. It is understandable that these decision came down at a place on the publication timeline that an addendum was the only way with which they could be handled. Unfortunately, the addendum which Ms Dodd chose to include to cover four decisions was only one page and seven and one-half lines. It appears to be, both in length and in content, an afterthought indicative of the majority of the scholarship in Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century. Writing a legal text or handbook is always hard work, regardless of the target audience. The task becomes especially difficult when the topic is school law not only because of the breadth of legal issues included under that topic, but because of the wide range of experience and knowledge, or lack thereof, of the target audience. Looking at Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century, everything seems to be there. The author, Victoria J. Dodd, has an impressive resume. She is a seasoned academic; a law professor who has published in the area of education law. The concept for the treatise is solid. It was designed to be a summary of education law that could be used as either a reference or a jumping off spot for further research for lawyers, educators, and graduate students. Unfortunately, inconsistency appears to be the downfall of this 2003 publication. There are inconsistencies in the rigor of the research. References include both scholarly and popular sources, the latter being questionable in a publication being billed as a legal reference. Also considering the wide target audience, the statutory based organization of the treatise is inconsistent with being an easy and familiar format for all to use. The topics, which were chosen for inclusion, are inconsistent with the concept of practical education law. Athletics, an education law topic specific to each individual state, was included and yet a chapter on special education was not. There are inconsistencies with timeliness. Practical Education law for the Twenty-First Century is a 2003 publication and yet the federal No Child Left Behind legislation, as well as several 2002 United States Supreme Court cases are either not mentioned or are briefly discussed in an addendum as a seeming afterthought. Perhaps these inconsistencies were a consequence of the broad target audience. Perhaps, in an attempt to please everyone she has pleased no one. In my opinion as a practicing school attorney who currently is an associate professor of education law, teaching masters and doctoral students, I could not use this book in my graduate level classes. For my masters’ students the book is not broad enough and for my doctoral students it is too practical. In the same light, however, I could not recommend it to administrators in the field because the topics covered are largely state specific but the information included is not state specific enough. Unfortunately, given her stated purpose for the treatise, Ms Dodd is competing with state school board associations, state teachers’ unions, and state administrators associations, all of whom provide their members with a great deal of legal information. In the end, inconsistency was the hobgoblin of Practical Education Law for the Twenty-First Century. About the Reviewer Elizabeth T. Lugg, J.D., Ph.D. is an associate professor at Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois. She received her law degree from the University of Iowa College of Law and her doctorate in educational administration from the University of Iowa. She is a member in good standing of the Iowa State Bar, where she has practiced law in some capacity since 1983. Dr. Lugg is an active member of the Education Law Association. Dr. Lugg also holds membership in the Iowa State Bar Association, and the American Education Research Association.