Based on the religious scenario given in class, the principal is a mid-year hire in a high school situated in what appears to be a predominantly Christian, conservative community. Several facts have come to light regarding equal access and religious activities and actions occurring in the school. First the principal observed the English teacher, Mr. Wrighteous, prominently displaying the Bible on his desk. The teacher also incorporated and promoted religious teachings in a class lesson. He offered a Bible as a reward for good work. This same teacher leads a weekly Bible study and prayer group at school. Another issue has been brought to the principal’s attention, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has inquired about other religious …show more content…
Finally, a student asked permission to form a Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) club at school. The school has a history of allowing clubs to start mid-year. Each of these issues will be addressed as follows. First the principal needs to discuss with Mr. Wrighteous the activities in the classroom regarding promoting religious beliefs. The teacher needs to be reminded that by incorporating religion in his lessons, displaying the Bible prominently on his desk, and giving Bibles to students, he is in violation of the law and a lawsuit can be filed against him. The first amendment prohibits the advancement of religion in public schools through the Establishment Clause. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (U.S. Const. amend. I). Although students may express their beliefs about religion in homework and other assignments, the teacher may not teach or promote religion. Repeatedly the courts ruled in favor of those who spoke out against incorporating religion in schools. In 1971, the case of Lemon vs. Kurtzman developed a three pronged test to determine if a violation has occurred, 1. There must be a secular purpose, 2. There must not be the advancement nor the …show more content…
The Equal Access Act of 1984 agreed that public secondary schools may allow non-curricular clubs to meet during non-instructional time during the school day. The courts stipulated that the meeting is voluntary and student led, school employees do not sponsor nor participate in the gathering but are in attendance only in a supervisory role. In light of the current situation, Mr. Wrighteous will be advised to have the students lead the morning prayer group. If this is not feasible, then he will need to find another school employee to act as the supervisor for the club. The Equal Access Act also supports allowing the LGBT group to form. The student will need to submit the appropriate paperwork to the Board of Education for approval. In White County High School P.R.I.D.E. vs. White County School District the court ruled in favor of the students to form the LGBT club despite the Board of Education’s refusal of the
The case of Wallace v. Jaffree calls into question the constitutionality of an Alabama statute that authorized teachers to lead a one-minute period of silence for “meditation or voluntary” prayer in all public schools. Ishmael Jaffree, the parent of three students in the Mobile County Public School system filed a complaint that two of his three children had been “subjected to various acts of religious indoctrination,” as a result of Alabama statute 16-1-20.1 and asked for an injunction prohibiting Mobile County schools from “maintaining or allowing the maintenance of regular religious prayer services.” The purpose of Jaffree’s complaint was to prohibit the devotional services occurring in his children’s school and the consequent mockery of his children that occurred when they refused to recite the prayers to “Almighty God” (Stevens, 40). This type of law in Alabama public schools was not the first of its kind. Prior to statute 6-11-20.1, Alabama passed law 16-1-20 authorizing one minute of silence in public schools for meditation. After the authorization of statute 16-1-20.1 came 16-1-20.2, which allowed teachers to lead “willing students” in a prayer (Stevens, 40).
In cases having to do with constitutionality, the issue of the separation of church and state arises with marked frequency. This battle, which has raged since the nation?s founding, touches the very heart of the United States public, and pits two of the country's most important influences of public opinion against one another. Although some material containing religious content has found its way into many of the nation's public schools, its inclusion stems from its contextual and historical importance, which is heavily supported by material evidence and documentation. It often results from a teacher?s own decision, rather than from a decision handed down from above by a higher power. The proposal of the Dover Area School District to
The right to freedom of expression of ones religion is at stake in this case. Mrs. Williams has a right to express her religion freely. However, based upon the Establishment Clause which prohibits any law “respecting the establishment of religion”, she does not have the right to force others to conform to her way of thinking. At the same time, students and community members have a right to express their religion, too. They also have a right not to have another person’s religion forced on them. So there is only one individual right at stake here, but it is not possible to respect this right of behalf of all the claimants. While the majority of the community, the school board, and some students will feel that it is Mrs. Williams’ right to keep the bulletin board posted, some community members, students, and ACLU feel it is their right not to keep it posted.
This article analyzes the First Amendment of the United States Constitution in order to persuade the reader that religious education should be included in school curricula. However, Chaffee argues that public schools may not hinder nor prohibit the teachings of a specific religion over others, as “Public schools uphold the First Amendment when they protect the religious liberty rights of students of all faiths or none. Schools demonstrate fairness when they ensure that the curriculum includes study about religion, where appropriate, as an important part of a complete education” (Chaffee). Chaffee then mentions Professor Charles Haynes, a First Amendment scholar, master teacher, activist and change agent, whom he has spoken to about the matter.
The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits teachers from expressing their religious preference while teaching or performing duties as a teacher. However, Title VII requires accommodations of “all aspect of religious observance…” if it does not produce undue hardship on the employer. Based on student performance, required ritual times and declining enrollment, the school district is experiencing hardship, but there are several factors that may constitute a more in-depth review of what is happening with the teacher and her class. For example, I would recommend that she complete her rituals before classes start, during lunch and at the end of the school day. This will provide the required reasonable accommodations for her religious
De-prescribing is, therefore, a complex process that is required for the safe and effective cessation of inappropriate medications to improve the quality of life (Hasler, Senn, Rosemann, & Neuner-Jehle, 2015). Page et al. (2016) suggested a five-step approach for safe and successful de-prescribing: (1) consider all medications currently taken and the indication for each medication, (2) evaluate the overall risk of medication-induced harm in an individual, (3) assess each medication for its potential to be de-prescribed, (4) sort medications by the order of priority to de-prescribe, (5) implement and monitor de-prescribing regimen. While de-prescribing appears feasible and relatively safe to reduce the impact of polypharmacy in older adults,
gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender students; part-time and full-time students; students with and without disabilities; and students of different races and national origins," it says. The guidance goes on to say that schools are obligated to "respond appropriately" to complaints of
By applying the Coercion Test, the court will find that the school board did coerce their impressionable students to attend biased board meetings and to partake in Christian prayer. “The constitution guarantees that government may not coerce anyone to support or participate in religion or its exercise, or otherwise act in a way which establishes a religion or religious faith.” Lee, 505 U.S at 585. The Coercion Test protects school-aged children from
Is it ok for students to express religious beliefs in class discussions, or through assignments? If you were Brittany Settle you would probably answer “No”. Settle v. Dickson County School Board, 53 F. 3d 152 (6th Cir. 1995), Brittany’s assignment was a research paper and her topic was drama approved by her teacher, which she later changed, without approval, to “The Life of Jesus”. The teacher refused her paper and Brittany received a zero. The teacher gave six reasons why she refused Brittany’s paper. Court ruled that Brittany’s free speech was not violated, by having to abide by a teacher's curriculum, and the teacher has control over the curriculum and classroom.
Many people today have their own personal beliefs. In a school setting, there have been many controversial situations that have been brought to court to help resolve individual rights. As National Coalition Against Censorship (2017) stated, the First Amendment guarantees of religious liberty include the freedom to believe or not to believe, to observe one’s faith openly without government interference, Freedom of speech encompasses religious as well as secular speech, but the Establishment Clause is where Thomas Jefferson described it as “a wall of separation between church and state”, because it has important implications for religious speech and observance in public schools” (Retrieved from http://ncac.org/resource/the-first-amendment-in-schools-resource-guide-religious-expression-in-the-public-schools). For this paper, legal issues regarding grading of assignment, appropriate of displaying student’s work, application of First Amendment to scenario, and conclusion will be discussed.
The First Amendment is designed to protect all citizens by giving them the right to express themselves in different ways. In doing so, we still have to be careful on how we do it. Students have the right to express themselves as long as it does not cause any disruption. In my school district, we abides by the First Amendment by not forbidding all mention of religion in the school system (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015). The only part that is prohibited is the advancement or inhibition of religion (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015). My school district feels that there’s nothing unconstitutional about using religious subjects or materials as long as it is in compliance to the neutrality of the education program (Pamlico County Board of Education, 2015).
Historically, legal issues regarding the grading of assignments containing religious material have come to similar decisions. In Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District (1969), a group of students decided to express their views about Vietnam by wearing black armbands to school. Although the district attempted to punish them for this, the Supreme Court ruled that the students were expressing a form of “symbolic speech” and were protected by the First Amendment, as long as it did not disrupt normal school functions. Similarly, expressing views of religion in school is protected if it does not disturb the educational process. According to Haynes and Oliver (2007), students have the right to express religious beliefs “in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions” (p. 65). An educator must
According to Essex (2006), one of the requirements placed on schools is that they remain viewpoint neutral. This means that if the literature was suppressed because it was religious in nature, the suppression violated her First Amendment rights, even in the school setting. In all court cases, the real message has been that schools are responsible for making sure parents and students are aware that the schools are merely sending messages indiscriminately from religious and non-secular sources and that they are not in support of any of them (Essex, 2006). Really the essence of the article is that sound policies must be in place, well documented, and consistently followed for a school to be able to regulate what a student says or distributes and there must be no endorsement of any particular ideas from any group or student.
Religion in Schools has proven to be a very controversial matter as of lately. Even though teaching about religion is allowed in public schools, there are still many questions that are being asked in order to provide a basis of what is appropriate for school, and what is inappropriate. The first amendment to the United States Constitution says that 'congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof' which implies that you have the choice of exercising your own religion, no matter what it may be. However, this poses an interesting argument within the public schools of America because we have such a diverse population with