Petitioner further argues that her daughter should not be penalized by this regulation because respondent failed to notify her that her daughter was in danger of failing. Respondent contends that its standards for student participation in extracurricular activities are reasonable and that petitioner has failed to meet her burden of establishing the facts upon which she seeks relief. The appeal must be dismissed as moot. As the first quarter has ended, the matter is moot. Even if the appeal were not dismissed on procedural grounds, it would be dismissed on the merits.
Petitioner claims that the regulation is unfair because it has a varying impact on students.
Petitioner argues that it is unfair that students who do not participate in a sport in a quarter after having failed two courses are not penalized, while students who happen to participate are penalized. I don't find this argument persuasive. The regulation precludes all students who fail two courses in a quarter from participating in any extra-curricula activity, including clubs, organizations and theater, as well as athletics. It has uniform application to all middle and high school students in respondent's district. The regulation cannot be viewed as unfair because a student may choose not to participate in extra-curricular activities in a particular quarter.