A Day Of Silence Case Summary
This is a case study analysis on “A Day of Silence, a Day of Truth, and a Lawsuit” by Bonnie C. Fusarelli and Lucy E. Eaton (2011). This case study explores freedom of speech and freedom of religion in public schools. Simon County High School is the only high school in the rural area dependent on agriculture. The highly conservative population is around 60,000 people, of whom 18% live in poverty. The school’s 600 students are 60% White, 30% African American, and 11% Hispanic.
This case revolves around two consecutive events at Simon County High School. The first, A Day of Silence, was held by student members of the national Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to bring awareness to the discrimination and harassment faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) students. The second event, a Day of Truth, was held the following day. A Day of Truth was created by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) in response to the Day of Silence, to be able to present an opposing viewpoint to homosexuality. Unlike the previous students, Blake had not asked for permission to hold his demonstration and was causing disruptions in the hallways. As a result, Ms. Howard assigned him to in-school suspension.
The ADF, a Christian legal group, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the county’s board of education, the superintendent, and …show more content…
Ms. Howard on Blake’s behalf, claiming that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was wrongfully punished for expressing his religious beliefs. The ADF also brought the case to the media’s attention, which brought public outrage from the conservative community. Eventually, the school district allowed Blake to wear his t-shirt for freedom of speech, but they denied him the ability to pass out his cards which they felt had religious connotations.
The exploratory questions presented by this case are: Was Blake’s freedom of speech violated by asking him to remove his t-shirt and in not allowing him to distribute his cards? Did the principal discriminate by allowing the LGBT group to hold their demonstration and not Blake? And should religious viewpoints expressed by a student be allowed in a public school?
Summary of the Case The case revolves around two consecutive events at Simon County High School.
The first, A Day of Silence, was held by student members of the national GLSEN to bring awareness to the discrimination and harassment faced by LGBT students. The students had gained approval from Principal Howard after she had educated herself on the group and the event. During the Day of Silence, the students did not speak during non-instructional times and passed out cards that explained the demonstration to any student that asked for one. The problem arose, when another student, Blake, decided to participate in the Day of Truth the following
day.
The Day of Truth was created by the ADF in response to the Day of Silence. The ADF was promoting an opposing viewpoint to homosexuality. Unlike the previous students, Blake had not asked for permission to hold the demonstration, he was pushing his cards onto people who did not want them and he was yelling in the hallways, thus causing disruptions. As a result, Ms. Howard asked him to remove his shirt, which stated “Day of Truth”, and told him he could not distribute his Day of Truth cards because he was not allowed to distribute religious materials in school. Blake, instead, turned his shirt inside out. Later he was seen wearing his shirt the right side out and forcing his cards onto other students. Ms. Howard gave him in-school suspension for five days for insubordination. The superintendent stood by Ms. Howard’s decision.
The ADF, a Christian legal group, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the county’s board of education, the superintendent, and Ms. Howard on Blake’s behalf. They claimed that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was wrongfully punished for expressing his religious beliefs. They believed his freedom of speech was violated when he was asked not to wear his t-shirt and to pass out the cards. While the case was in progress, a federal judge prohibited the district from censoring Blake’s flyer, and Blake’s attorneys went to the newspapers with the story. The newspaper presented an image of Blake as a religious honor student. In addition, both the principal’s and the superintendent’s addresses and phone numbers were posted on the internet causing them to receive threatening messages.
Framework for Analysis In Essex’s School Law and the Public Schools, two cases were mentioned that are relevant to this case: Tinker v. Des Moines and Blackwell v. Issaquena (2012). In the Tinker case the Supreme Court ruled that students’ first amendment right includes freedom of speech in a public school, as long as it is not disruptive to the education process. In this case, students participated in a peaceful demonstration opposing the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands. In the Blackwell case, a principal banned wearing political buttons when students were talking loudly in the hallways when they were supposed to be in class, and were trying to pin political buttons on other students who did not share their views. In this case, student expression was limited, on the grounds that they caused a disturbance. Similar to the Tinker case, Blake was expressing his first amendment rights. However, he was also causing a disturbance in the hallways and trying to push his beliefs on other students by forcing his handout into their hands – such as in the Blackwell case. Blake’s lawyers cannot claim the principal showed discrimination by allowing the LGBT demonstration but not Blake’s. The difference between the two demonstrations is that the LGBT group was raising awareness, while Blake was trying to force religious change. Blake’s card read, “It’s time for an honest conversation about homosexuality. There’s freedom to change if you want to” (Fusarelli, 2011). One of the underlying issues that Ms. Howard and her faculty need to address, following these two opposing demonstrations, is why did the LGBT group feel like they were silenced and not a welcome part of the school’s climate. According to Gloria Filax in Books’ Invisible Children, “Queer youth are often invisible in schools, and when they are visible this is most often under the gaze of people who embody heteronormative and homophobic discourses” (2007, p. 214). In addition, there is a higher rate of successful suicide in youth because they are faced with exclusion both inside and out of the school. “When queer youth are “out” or outed, they disturb the social order that overwhelmingly denies their existence” (Books, 2007, p. 215). Goals, Challenges, Potential Outcomes, and Consequences Where the principal went wrong was thinking that in allowing the Day of Truth to occur, she believed that would be viewed as the school’s endorsement of religion. This would not be the case, as it was not presented to her beforehand, it was not scheduled by the school and it was not supported by any school faculty or staff. The trouble that occurred was not with the Day of Truth itself, but how the disruptive the student was in forcing the information onto other students. In order to build a sense of community within the school Ms. Howard is going to have to reshape the school culture (Daresh, 2010). She will need to talk to faulty members in small groups to be able to allow them to express their viewpoints regarding the LGBT group. To become a more culturally proficient school, Ms. Howard needs to assess all the cultures represented in her school and find a way to value diversity, have her teachers teach tolerance (Lindsey, 2009). School district needs to set policies on procedures students need to go through to have a demonstration. Set the tone for the expectations. Or do not allow any to begin with. Leadership Lessons The Leadership lessons that I take away from this case is that a district policy needs to be written on procedures for students to go through in order to hold a school demonstration. If a policy would have been in place the school What the principal needs to do is look at what caused this situation in the first place. She should be asking herself why the LGBT students felt the need to hold their demonstration in the first place. According to the Florida Department of Education’s (FLDOE) Florida Principal Leadership Standards (2011) Standard 5, the principal needs to “maintain a safe, respectful and inclusive student-centered learning environment” and “recognizes and uses diversity as an asset in the development and implementation of procedures and practices that motivate all students and improve student learning.” In order to achieve a culturally proficient school climate, Ms. Howard needs to start with her teachers. Teachers are the support group for students. If students are made to feel welcome in every classroom and feel free to let their personality shine, then they will feel welcome and heard in the school. Teachers also need to admonish any discriminatory or hate talk and teach acceptance and tolerance. In order for this to occur, all faculty and staff members would need professional development on the LGBT students, their culture, and the challenges that they face on a daily basis. At the same time, Ms. Howard needs to open up the lines of communication between her staff and between teachers and students. According to Glanz in Operational Leadership a principal needs to develop good listening skills in which assertion messages are utilized to show the speaker that their message is valued and avoid barriers to communication. If LGBT students feel as if they are not valued, they will not share their concerns and emotions. The same goes for teachers. I will need to be prepared that some of my teachers, may not agree with the LGBT lifestyle and may not want to support those children. But, it will be my job to have open communication with those teachers so that they can voice their concerns and yet be open to working towards the betterment of all students to the success of the school climate. How would I approach this case?
Reflective Conclusion
When I am principal of my own school I am going to ensure that every group of students feels that they have a voice on campus. In my classroom now, I teach acceptance of differing viewpoints and tolerance towards others. In my own school I will hold professional development for my teachers to show them how to integrate these valuable lessons into their curriculum and daily activities. It is our responsibility to teach students not just the curriculum but how to be a good person as well.
The challenge with this case is how much do you allow students free speech. I understand that a student’s first amendment right does not stop when they enter school. However, if their speech is hate speech and is against having a welcoming student learning environment and goes against the goal of having a culturally proficient school, then I do not feel it should be allowed. At the same time, I do not feel punishment is the right choice, because it will not change the behavior. The student voicing the hate speech needs to be provided some education on the effects the speech is making on other students and the school climate. Even if the student does not agree or willing to change opinions, at least there was an effort made to teach tolerance and acceptance.
This case revolves around two consecutive events at Simon County High School. The first, A Day of Silence, was held by student members of the national Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) to bring awareness to the discrimination and harassment faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) students. The second event, a Day of Truth, was held the following day. A Day of Truth was created by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) in response to the Day of Silence, to be able to present an opposing viewpoint to homosexuality. Unlike the previous students, Blake had not asked for permission to hold his demonstration and was causing disruptions in the hallways. As a result, Ms. Howard assigned him to in-school suspension.
The ADF, a Christian legal group, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the county’s board of education, the superintendent, and …show more content…
Ms. Howard on Blake’s behalf, claiming that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was wrongfully punished for expressing his religious beliefs. The ADF also brought the case to the media’s attention, which brought public outrage from the conservative community. Eventually, the school district allowed Blake to wear his t-shirt for freedom of speech, but they denied him the ability to pass out his cards which they felt had religious connotations.
The exploratory questions presented by this case are: Was Blake’s freedom of speech violated by asking him to remove his t-shirt and in not allowing him to distribute his cards? Did the principal discriminate by allowing the LGBT group to hold their demonstration and not Blake? And should religious viewpoints expressed by a student be allowed in a public school?
Summary of the Case The case revolves around two consecutive events at Simon County High School.
The first, A Day of Silence, was held by student members of the national GLSEN to bring awareness to the discrimination and harassment faced by LGBT students. The students had gained approval from Principal Howard after she had educated herself on the group and the event. During the Day of Silence, the students did not speak during non-instructional times and passed out cards that explained the demonstration to any student that asked for one. The problem arose, when another student, Blake, decided to participate in the Day of Truth the following
day.
The Day of Truth was created by the ADF in response to the Day of Silence. The ADF was promoting an opposing viewpoint to homosexuality. Unlike the previous students, Blake had not asked for permission to hold the demonstration, he was pushing his cards onto people who did not want them and he was yelling in the hallways, thus causing disruptions. As a result, Ms. Howard asked him to remove his shirt, which stated “Day of Truth”, and told him he could not distribute his Day of Truth cards because he was not allowed to distribute religious materials in school. Blake, instead, turned his shirt inside out. Later he was seen wearing his shirt the right side out and forcing his cards onto other students. Ms. Howard gave him in-school suspension for five days for insubordination. The superintendent stood by Ms. Howard’s decision.
The ADF, a Christian legal group, filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the county’s board of education, the superintendent, and Ms. Howard on Blake’s behalf. They claimed that his First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when he was wrongfully punished for expressing his religious beliefs. They believed his freedom of speech was violated when he was asked not to wear his t-shirt and to pass out the cards. While the case was in progress, a federal judge prohibited the district from censoring Blake’s flyer, and Blake’s attorneys went to the newspapers with the story. The newspaper presented an image of Blake as a religious honor student. In addition, both the principal’s and the superintendent’s addresses and phone numbers were posted on the internet causing them to receive threatening messages.
Framework for Analysis In Essex’s School Law and the Public Schools, two cases were mentioned that are relevant to this case: Tinker v. Des Moines and Blackwell v. Issaquena (2012). In the Tinker case the Supreme Court ruled that students’ first amendment right includes freedom of speech in a public school, as long as it is not disruptive to the education process. In this case, students participated in a peaceful demonstration opposing the Vietnam War by wearing black armbands. In the Blackwell case, a principal banned wearing political buttons when students were talking loudly in the hallways when they were supposed to be in class, and were trying to pin political buttons on other students who did not share their views. In this case, student expression was limited, on the grounds that they caused a disturbance. Similar to the Tinker case, Blake was expressing his first amendment rights. However, he was also causing a disturbance in the hallways and trying to push his beliefs on other students by forcing his handout into their hands – such as in the Blackwell case. Blake’s lawyers cannot claim the principal showed discrimination by allowing the LGBT demonstration but not Blake’s. The difference between the two demonstrations is that the LGBT group was raising awareness, while Blake was trying to force religious change. Blake’s card read, “It’s time for an honest conversation about homosexuality. There’s freedom to change if you want to” (Fusarelli, 2011). One of the underlying issues that Ms. Howard and her faculty need to address, following these two opposing demonstrations, is why did the LGBT group feel like they were silenced and not a welcome part of the school’s climate. According to Gloria Filax in Books’ Invisible Children, “Queer youth are often invisible in schools, and when they are visible this is most often under the gaze of people who embody heteronormative and homophobic discourses” (2007, p. 214). In addition, there is a higher rate of successful suicide in youth because they are faced with exclusion both inside and out of the school. “When queer youth are “out” or outed, they disturb the social order that overwhelmingly denies their existence” (Books, 2007, p. 215). Goals, Challenges, Potential Outcomes, and Consequences Where the principal went wrong was thinking that in allowing the Day of Truth to occur, she believed that would be viewed as the school’s endorsement of religion. This would not be the case, as it was not presented to her beforehand, it was not scheduled by the school and it was not supported by any school faculty or staff. The trouble that occurred was not with the Day of Truth itself, but how the disruptive the student was in forcing the information onto other students. In order to build a sense of community within the school Ms. Howard is going to have to reshape the school culture (Daresh, 2010). She will need to talk to faulty members in small groups to be able to allow them to express their viewpoints regarding the LGBT group. To become a more culturally proficient school, Ms. Howard needs to assess all the cultures represented in her school and find a way to value diversity, have her teachers teach tolerance (Lindsey, 2009). School district needs to set policies on procedures students need to go through to have a demonstration. Set the tone for the expectations. Or do not allow any to begin with. Leadership Lessons The Leadership lessons that I take away from this case is that a district policy needs to be written on procedures for students to go through in order to hold a school demonstration. If a policy would have been in place the school What the principal needs to do is look at what caused this situation in the first place. She should be asking herself why the LGBT students felt the need to hold their demonstration in the first place. According to the Florida Department of Education’s (FLDOE) Florida Principal Leadership Standards (2011) Standard 5, the principal needs to “maintain a safe, respectful and inclusive student-centered learning environment” and “recognizes and uses diversity as an asset in the development and implementation of procedures and practices that motivate all students and improve student learning.” In order to achieve a culturally proficient school climate, Ms. Howard needs to start with her teachers. Teachers are the support group for students. If students are made to feel welcome in every classroom and feel free to let their personality shine, then they will feel welcome and heard in the school. Teachers also need to admonish any discriminatory or hate talk and teach acceptance and tolerance. In order for this to occur, all faculty and staff members would need professional development on the LGBT students, their culture, and the challenges that they face on a daily basis. At the same time, Ms. Howard needs to open up the lines of communication between her staff and between teachers and students. According to Glanz in Operational Leadership a principal needs to develop good listening skills in which assertion messages are utilized to show the speaker that their message is valued and avoid barriers to communication. If LGBT students feel as if they are not valued, they will not share their concerns and emotions. The same goes for teachers. I will need to be prepared that some of my teachers, may not agree with the LGBT lifestyle and may not want to support those children. But, it will be my job to have open communication with those teachers so that they can voice their concerns and yet be open to working towards the betterment of all students to the success of the school climate. How would I approach this case?
Reflective Conclusion
When I am principal of my own school I am going to ensure that every group of students feels that they have a voice on campus. In my classroom now, I teach acceptance of differing viewpoints and tolerance towards others. In my own school I will hold professional development for my teachers to show them how to integrate these valuable lessons into their curriculum and daily activities. It is our responsibility to teach students not just the curriculum but how to be a good person as well.
The challenge with this case is how much do you allow students free speech. I understand that a student’s first amendment right does not stop when they enter school. However, if their speech is hate speech and is against having a welcoming student learning environment and goes against the goal of having a culturally proficient school, then I do not feel it should be allowed. At the same time, I do not feel punishment is the right choice, because it will not change the behavior. The student voicing the hate speech needs to be provided some education on the effects the speech is making on other students and the school climate. Even if the student does not agree or willing to change opinions, at least there was an effort made to teach tolerance and acceptance.