Do You Have the Right to be an Advocate?
By: Julie Underwood
Where do teachers freedom of speech rights that are protected under the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution start, and where do they stop? This is what Underwood is trying to tease out in her article by highlighting past precedent and current events that have molded the court’s opinion in matters of a teacher’s right to free speech. She makes the distinction that teachers do indeed have the right to free speech outside of the classroom, and that the school district cannot infringe upon that right unless comments made by teachers in the public square harm the school or the district itself. It is when teachers are inside the classroom that their rights to freedom of speech come under scrutiny and criticism by the school when that speech is deemed inappropriate for the curriculum or a disruption to the school’s ability to operate efficiently or inhibit the teacher’s ability to perform his or her job.
Underwood does advocate that teachers use their freedom of speech rights whenever possible (in public and on their own time), and in fact encourages teachers to do so. She states that teachers are more knowledgeable about issues that pertain to schools and education, they do have the constitutional right to free speech (in the correct setting) and that they are modeling the proper behavior of a citizen voicing his or her right to participate in an active democracy.
Underwood describes the precedent and track record of teachers that has been set for being actively involved in the political process in regards to education. Whether it’s fiscal issues, contract issues, library services, class size or standardized tests, teachers know best and should be relied on to give their opinions to the general public.
She also makes the distinction between public and private schools in regards to public opinion. The constitutional rights of public employers are protected, but those of private employers are not. She makes the point that school teachers who serve on the school board are in a conflict of interest and should have to choose between the two positions.
Ultimately she states that, “The district’s or state’s ability to regulate employee speech while in school or at school sponsored activities can be thought of as part of the district’s ability to control what goes on in the classroom.” The school needs to ensure that teachers are not disrupting the school process nor are then indoctrinating students. The school must protect their own interests in instruction and political neutrality. By all means, teachers should not use school resources or school time to advance political agendas (i.e. printing copies of campaign fliers or campaign speeches during school time). One salient quote in regards to this matter was eloquently stated by NYC School Chancellor Joel Klein when he stated:
“When teachers wear political paraphernalia in schools, they may improperly influence children and impinge on the rights of students to learn in an environment free of partisan political influence… Partisan political activity by staff in the presence of students…sends the message that the view expressed carries the support of the school system”
She concludes by stating, “…Public educators are in the best position to influence public policy about public education. Ignoring this opportunity is a mistake.”
The key word here is public – I feel that a teacher should always exercise their right to free speech and ensure that their voices are heard in regards to important educational matters. I believe that teachers should model proper democratic behavior of an active participant of a democracy. In regards to curriculum and instruction in the classroom, I believe that teachers walk a fine line when discussing topics that are controversial or sensitive in nature. I tend believe that teachers should be able to describe their own views when asked by students, in order for them to understand rationale and logic that came to those views. Teachers should by no means use their position to judge students and affect their grades because of their views. I believe that as humans we seek the truth – and the truth hurts sometimes. I believe that teachers should support students and their efforts to seek that truth while engaging in debate and discussion that understands both sides of the story.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Should a principal or other school authority be able to silence other forms of student speech? If so, under what conditions? How does speech by an individual student differ from speech by the school newspaper?…
- 709 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
In the case of Bethel School District v. Fraser a lot happened. In my understanding there was a school event in which students gave speeches. The one student gave a speech with language unaccepted in the school, and got suspended, and was not allowed to be voted in for the election. The Father got angry and believed that his sons amendment rights were being violated. He felt like his sons first amendment right of freedom of speech was being withheld from him, along with his fourteenth amendment right. The case first went to a general court and it could not be agreed upon, so in tern it went to the Supreme Court because it could not be agreed upon in the lower court system and was to controversial. The court case was taken extremely seriously because it could change school rights, as they were known.…
- 902 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Parties involved: John F. Tinker and Mary Beth Tinker, minors, by their father and next friend, Leonard Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt, minor, by his father and next friend, William Eckhardt v. The Des Moines Independent Community School District…
- 411 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
However, this protection is not without limits. There is still a professional duty to protect confidentiality and not cause disruption to the operation of a school. Basically, teachers do not have carte blanche freedom of speech if it can be proven to be or create a substantial disturbance within the school community. Because Pickering was able to show the court that he thought his statements were true, I believe there seemed to be a lack of malice on his part. The Board of Education asserted at every level of the court system that his statements were unjustified, and damaged the reputations of its members (Essex, 2012). I agree with the decision and think the case lacked the evidence that his words even if untrue or unfounded really affected students and school as a…
- 726 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Schools may regulate student speech that results in a material and substantial disruption within the school. Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 509, 513 (1969). Garner Vo-Tech must show either that there was an actual disruption within the school or that officials reasonably anticipated a material and substantial disruption was likely to occur. Alternatively, the Court could expand the exception found in Morse that waives the disruption requirement and include speech that calls for the bullying and harassment of a specific student. Morse v. Fredrick, 551 U.S. 393, 407 (2007).…
- 1706 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Des Moines court case was written by Justice Abe Fortas. Its contents contribute to the ideas of those who believe certain kinds of speech should not be prohibited within an educational setting. In this majority opinion statement, Justice Abe Fortas reveals that there is an “absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate [students’] speech” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District by Justice Abe Fortas par. 9). Because of this absence of reason, students should be allowed to express their opinions and views on topics of their choice. Justice Abe Fortas justifies his statement by referencing another court case that says “school officials cannot suppress ‘expressions of feelings with which they do not wish to contend’ Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749” (par. 9).…
- 840 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
Some argue that hate speech should be used outside of campus and away from students who might be offended, but in classrooms learning about hate speech is a place to start discussing it. Harvard is an example where speech codes would not benefit students in their education where students who want to become “young lawyers also need education in the habit of equanimity in the face of hostility; in the skill of mustering social pressure to fight those battles of which law is inapt or too expensive; indecency and courage to speak up on behalf of those who are being treated rudely” (Volokh). Being able to stand up and protect others can be taught in classrooms, but if speech codes disallow students to contend their discussions, the experience and education would be lost which would rather than support education, demolish it. Also, the ability to problem solve in a tense situation can be very important for students working their way into lawyers who normally deal with hostile language and social…
- 923 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
In my opinion, The freedom of speech is protected by the first amendment. I agree with the prosecutioner in the case of Texas v. Johnson by stating that Johnson’s right to freedom of speech in the first amendment was violated. Even though the state law was violated, the law was unconstitutional by violating the first amendment.…
- 410 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
continues to explain that Texas Tech bans students to a freedom of speech zone which is only a gazebo that can hold no more than forty people. If a student would like to engage in any type of freedom of speech activities outside of this zone, then they must have approval six days before the activity (504). The fact that students are not permitted to speak their mind freely outside of the gazebo without permission is saddening. Higher authorities are limiting the thoughts of not only students, but also all people because of the fear that they will insult someone or they will speak out against their rules. Freedom of speech should not be limited to a certain zone with only a certain amount of students to hear it because the founding fathers did not intend for it be like this. They came from a country where they were not permitted to have their own opinion; therefore, they wanted the United States to allow freedom of speech whenever and wherever. Limiting speech is limiting diversity, knowledge, and opinion; moreover, censorship is not allowing the country to grow. Rampell continues to state “Crippling the delivery of unpopular views is a terrible lesson to send to impressionable minds and future leaders at Wesleyan and…
- 1269 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
Freedom of speech issues are constantly in the media today. There are plenty of incidents where people’s constitutional rights were met with great and unnecessary force. The First Amendment in the Constitution of the United States of America guarantees the freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, press, and the right to petition the government. These freedoms are impeded when their freedoms are met with retort. When free speech is not allowed in the public sector, honesty is no longer accepted. This, in turn, sets the precedent of honesty as being looked down upon and considered rude. Why should someone’s opinions be punished because they don’t go along with what is standard or declared acceptable by others. By infringing on the freedom of someone’s speech, it is the same as punishing them for being who they are. Freedom of speech should not be obstructed or met with retort by the…
- 1868 Words
- 8 Pages
Better Essays -
Many people can protest as much as they want but it must not disturb the state of calm in the state. Limits to rights defuses any potential harm that can happen although there is criticism indeed. There are many types of speeches each can be allowed with limited aspects in a school the rules are simple behave and do not cause a disturbance. In the Tinker V. Des Moines cases a group of kids wore the armbands that was controversial to some member of the faculty. The students accused the school of infringing their 1st Amendment rights. The students were simply stating their own opinion for themselves although it may have disrupted student it did not stop the educational process. The rights of students is very limited punishments are announced…
- 196 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
The first amendment: freedom of speech is violated with censorship. In the ALA Library Bill of Rights, parents, and only parents, have the right to prohibit or control what their children read. Freedom of expression and of opinion is for everyone, not just for the people that the majority thinks are right. In 1953, Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas said, “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could easily defeat us,”(Quotations: First Amendment, Censorship…). This shows that even the government can see the harmful effects of book banning. Furthermore, “the school alone has the final say in what books are appropriate for the children under its care to read,…
- 357 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
An estimated 60 million students will attend school in 2017 according to the Department of Education. While many students will not know their rights while attending elementary or high school, student’s constitutional rights do not disappear when they walk through the doors of any place of education.…
- 517 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The landmark case of Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District set the precedent for the free speech rights of both students and teachers. Students at a public school in Des Moines, Iowa were suspended after organizing a silent protest to publicize their objections to the Vietnam War. After suing the school district for violating their children's right to free speech, John and Mary Beth Tinker found themselves before the United States Supreme Court, where it was concluded that students' free rights should be protected. Justice Abe Fortas claimed that the lack of facts to adequately “forecast substantial disruption of, or material interference with, school activities” on school grounds made it unconstitutional to deny the student’s “right of expression of opinion” (Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 1969). It is clear that the civil liberties of students need to be taken seriously while they are in school. This also extends to the right of teachers while on school grounds. Because of Tinker v. Des Moines, both students and teachers are now able to freely express their first amendment rights as long as they do not cause a disturbance to the school. This case brought awareness to school districts limiting students’ rights, and continues to affect decisions…
- 1535 Words
- 7 Pages
Good Essays -
A federal judge denied an injunction Monday aimed at blocking the implementation of Texas’ campus carry law, which permits people to carry concealed guns in public university buildings.…
- 457 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays