Self-Protection. Employees may use reasonable measures with a student, patron or other person as is necessary to protect him/her self from attack, physical or verbal abuse or injury, or to prevent damage to District or personal property.
Self-Protection. A teacher may, in accordance with the law, apply such amount of force as is reasonable and necessary for the purpose of self-defense.
Self-Protection. Employees may use reasonable measures with a student, patron or other person as is necessary to protect himself/herself from attack, physical or verbal abuse or injury, or to prevent damage to District or personal property. The District agrees to provide in-service during the year to assist the teachers’ with understanding the reasonable measures they can take to not create a liability or legal problem.
Self-Protection. Should an Employee determine that he/she needs to take measures to protect him/her self, a fellow Employee, a teacher, an administrator, or a student from attack, physical abuse or injury, or to prevent damage to District property such measures shall be reasonable.
Self-Protection. Employees may take reasonable and necessary action to protect themselves and others from immediate impending assault. Employees may use as much force as a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances would take to protect himself/ herself or another person from possible injury as permitted by District Board Policy, PED Regulations, and State law. Employees should:
1. Not restrain students if there is no threat of physical harm to self or others.
2. Allow students to leave the area rather than threaten to restrain, if no one is in immediate danger.
3. Ask for help from another adult by sending a student for assistance.
4. Never attempt to take a weapon from a student unless there is no other choice to protect self or others.
5. Be guided by reasonable and prudent action to protect self, students, and others when it is not possible to remove self or students from the area of danger, or otherwise de-escalate a situation.
Self-Protection. Employees may use reasonable measures with a student, patron, 766 or other person as is necessary to protect him/herself, his/her students or his/her 768 769 770 5. 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 6. 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 7. 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 8. 796 797 798 799 800 9. 801 802 803 804 805 colleagues from attack, physical or verbal abuse or injury, or to prevent damage to District or personal property.
Self-Protection. Employees, while acting within the scope of their duties as an employee of the La 7 Xxxxxx School District, may use reasonable measures with a student, patron or other person as is 8 necessary to protect him/herself from physical attack or injury. 10 The District shall provide applicable training for all employees to comply with this Section. 12 13 14 ARTICLE XIII 15 16 VOCATIONAL TRAINING 18 Section 13.1. 19 In the mutual interests of the District and Association, the District shall cause funds to be available which 20 may be used by employees subject to this Agreement for vocational improvement. The District shall fund 21 this program at a rate not to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00) per year. The employee requesting 22 funds for vocational improvement shall submit a written plan to a committee composed of one 23 administrator, one board member and two P.S.E. members which explains the proposed curriculum and 24 cost. The committee will make a written decision regarding the amount to be awarded and program 25 feasibility within ten (10) calendar days of proposed submission. This committee shall also be responsible 26 for operation of an apprenticeship program in the District.
Self-Protection. In a project the size of SELFMAN, it is not possible to provide a general solution to the security problem. That would be the subject of another project. Nevertheless, security is an essential concern that has to be considered. In SELFMAN, we will consider a simple threat model, in which only the nodes of the service architecture are considered trustworthy. We can extend this threat model with little effort for some parts, such as the structured overlay network, for which we already know how to protect against more aggressive threat models. We will measure the effectiveness of these objectives in three ways. First, by formal reasoning and proofs (e.g., proving correctness of the algorithms as part of the research results). Second, by using industrial usage scenarios and evaluating the qualitative effectiveness with these scenarios. Third, by using industrial trace data and generated traffic, and evaluating the quantitative effectiveness. An essential feature of self management is that it adds feedback loops throughout the system. A feedback loop consists of
(1) the detection of an anomaly, (2) the calculation of a correction, and (3) the application of the correction. These feedback loops exist within one level but can also cross levels. For example, the low level detects a network problem, a higher level is notified and decides to try another communication path, and the low level then implements that decision. The primitives for self management at a given level are of two kinds: detectors and actuators. Because of the feedback loops, it is important that the system behavior converges (no oscillatory, chaotic, or divergent behavior). One goal of the project is therefore to model formally the feedback loops, to confirm convergent behavior (possibly changing the design), and to validate the model with the system. The formal model of a computer system is generally highly nonlinear. It may be possible to exploit oscillatory or chaotic behavior to enhance certain characteristics of the system. We will explore this aspect of the feedback loops.
Self-Protection. The System shall be tolerant to the following conditions and not suffer immediate damage or accelerated long-term degradation. degree of optical isolation shall be provided at the output. • Sudden loss of Oscillator power and sudden activation of Oscillator, in particular if an alternative oscillator is used that is not integrated into the local control system. It is acceptable if the Pulse Shaping Unit shuts itself down if insufficient Oscillator input is detected and that it can only be restarted when Oscillator input is restored. • Changes in external trigger rate, dropped trigger pulses or total loss of external trigger. Again, it is acceptable for the Pulse Shaping Unit to shut down in such circumstances.
