SAFBG Home Page

Education Code and On-Campus Supervision
(The following is the entire text of an email dated November 30, 2005
from David Kopperud of the State Department of Education.)

SAFBG Interpretive Summary: Mr. Kopperud points to the importance of
on-campus supervision. Responsible adults are required as eyes-on
supervisors, and District personnel must be on campus.
----------------------------
November 30, 2005

Joan:
 
Your question about the Education Code and campus supervision has been
referred to me. The Education Code reinforces the duty of the teacher
and other school officials to follow the locally determined rules and
regulations for campus supervision, but case law has largely determined
the school district's responsibility in specific cases.
 
To a large extent, procedures related to campus supervision are under the
jurisdiction of the local governing board, but  court decisions should be
considered as well as the Education Code in adopting local policies and
administrative regulations.
 
Education Code Section 44805 requires teachers to "enforce... the rules
and regulations prescribed for schools" in their district. Education Code
Section 44807 states that teachers and administrators must exercise
reasonable control over students "to maintain proper and appropriate
conditions conducive to learning."
 
These Education Code responsibilities requiring "reasonable" control do
not answer your specific questions; however, the courts have been much
more detailed in interpreting the duty to supervise students.
 
In Daily v. Los Angeles Unified School District (1970), the duty of
supervision was interpreted not to "require 'round-the-clock' supervision
of school premises and is limited to school-related or encouraged
functions and to activities taking place during school hours."
 
In Castro v. Los Angeles Board of Education (1976), the principal is
required to provide playground supervision before and after school and
other scheduled breaks. The duty to supervise extends beyond the classroom
and is required at special school activities, athletic events, and school
field trips.
 
However, Education Code section 44808 exempts school personnel from
responsibility or liability for the safety or conduct of students off
school property unless school personnel are negligent, or the school has
sponsored an off-campus activity or provided transportation for student to
and from the premises. For example, if the school is negligent in failing
to provide a reasonably safe bus transportation system, then liability may
result. Once a student is on a school campus at the start of the school day,
school officials take the place of the parents and are responsible for
actively protecting the children under their charge. (Stuart Board of
Education (1911) 161 Cal. 210, 213;
People v. Curtiss (1931) 116 Cal.App.Supp. 771, 775.)
 
No court cases have specified that the student must be within the direct
eyesight of a District staff member, but adults must be present to properly
monitor students, prevent or correct harmful situations, or call for help
when a situation is beyond their control. Schools cannot escape liability
simply because specific dangers were unforeseen. Schools may be held liable
if danger can be anticipated and supervision is deemed necessary to avoid
that danger, but is not provided. (36 A.L.R.3d 330, 340).
 
Case law illustrates that administrators are also required to do more than
assign staff. In Ziegler v. Santa Cruz City High School District (1959) the
courts held that the principal has a duty to ensure that personnel are
actually on hand and supervising students.
 
In the case of Charnonnat v. San Francisco Unified School District, only
one teacher was assigned to supervise 150 elementary students in the
schoolyard. When a student's leg was broken in a fight, the jury's finding
of inadequate supervision was held to be justified.
 
Based on all this case law, I would be very careful with campus supervision
and transportation at any time of the school day. In Rodriguez v.Ingelwood
Unified School District, the Court of Appeal stated: "A special relationship
is formed between a school district and its students so as to impose an
affirmative duty on the district to take all reasonable steps to protect
its students."

I hope this is helpful. Please feel free to contact me again if you have
other questions about liability for campus supervision.
  
David Kopperud
Education Programs Consultant
California Department of Education
Counseling and Student Support Services
1430 N Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 327-5930
FAX (916) 323-6061
dkopperu@cde.ca.gov