Summary: Pickering V. Board Of Education

The third case, Daniel RR v. State Board of Education, was documented in United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit in June 12, 1989. This case discussed whether a child with disability is given a right to receive mainstream education.

[A student] may express his [or her] opinions, even on controversial subjects…if he [or she] does so without materially and substantially interfering with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school and without colliding with the rights of others. But conduct by the student, in class or out of it, which for any reason – whether it stems from time, place, or type of behavior – materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others is, of course, not immunized by the constitutional

A student benefits from the freedom of inquiry that Academic Freedom allows because it means they can agree or disagree and share the reason why. If a teacher is abusing their Academic Freedom and assuming that they can control the classroom anyway they see fit, the student can object to it. In 1984, J.D. Martin had many complaints filed against him for his profanity and verbal abuse in the classroom. Students did not like his intimidating teaching style and with enough reporting, he was given a warning and then fired (Jones, para. 2). He took the University to court and lost. Following the loss, Martin made an appeal because he continued to believe his language was justified through his 1st Amendment rights as well as his Academic Freedom.

Censorship cases often bring about debates over students’ first amendment rights. Students’ first amendment rights are important to preserve so that students can not be excluded from meaningful works or literature. It is understandable for the government to design educational plans as a way to get its voice into classrooms, but “the truth-promoting function of the First Amendment provides no reason, however, to question the right of students to explore a variety of ideas and perspectives, and to form and express ideas of their own” (Brown, 1994, p. 30). Schools already place a restriction on religious material or material addressing current political controversy (Brown, 1994).

While reading Journal 1 of The Alternative and reflecting on the assignment giving, memories of teachers flooded through my mind. I am unabashed to admit that I believed some teachers to be poor at their job, and have more than once thought that perhaps this wasn’t the correct career path for them. One such teacher was my 7th and 8th grade science teacher, who believed public shaming to be the preferable way of teaching adolescents. When a student would answer a question wrong in class he couldn’t help but laugh as well as bring it up throughout the lesson, refusing to let the student move past their mistake. He chose to

A troubling issue for schools now is how to deal with the issue of homosexuality. The struggle for gay rights often causes heated opposition, particularly on moral grounds from members of religious groups. (Essex, 2005, p. 43) Schools have an obligation to maintain a peaceful environment free of significant disruption, while supporting students' rights of free speech. Schools should ". . . create an environment that is characterized by respect for individual views and divergent forms of expression within reasonable limits. The challenge seems to involve achieving a reasonable balance between an orderly educational environment and respect for the free speech rights of students. Precisely, where do they draw the line?" (Essex, 2005, p. 44)

In the Emerson v. Board of Education Case New Jersey passed a law authorizing local school boards to provide transportation of children to and from school. The Board of Education of Ewing Township, following this law, authorized reimbursement to parents of money spent by their children on public buses. However, Arch Everson, a resident and taxpayer in the Ewing Township school district, learned that a reimbursement was going to parents who sent their children to Catholic schools as well. He then claimed that this money supported religion and violated the establishment clause of the first amendment. Ultimately, the court ruled that the new law was not in violation of the establishment clause.

Des Moines is an important case for free speech in the United States. It affirms that students don’t lose their rights when they go to school. However, it also affirmed that schools can limit speech that “materially disrupts classwork or involves substantial disorder or invasion of the rights of others” (Tinker v. Des Moines, 1969). However, the Court has ruled that there are times that the school can limit speech. In 1986, the Supreme Court ruled in Bethel v. Fraser that students can be disciplined for using vulgar and offensive language in school (Gooden, Eckes, Mead, McNeal, & Torres, 2013, p. 25). This case differed from Tinker v. Des Moines because that case was about political speech or expression. Another example of where school can limit the First Amendment is school sponsored newspapers. This was affirmed by the Court in Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988). That decision stated that schools can reasonably limit the content of school-sponsored newspapers (Gooden, Eckes, Mead, McNeal, & Torres, 2013, p.

Citizens in America are born with a various amount of rights. One of these rights include the freedom of speech and expression. However, school administrators have the ability to restrict a student’s expression. The Supreme Court Cases ‘Bethel School District v. Fraser’ and ‘Frederick V. Morse’ gave schools the right for the administrators to discipline children when they see fit. Students should be able to express themselves in any way without fearing that their school administrators will discipline

The topic I’ll be discussing will be the biasedness in media about a particular topic, the US Supreme Court’s decision on the case of Alexander vs. Holmes County Board of Education. The case involved a previous Supreme Court ruling of Brown vs. Board of Education, where they gave schools to desegregate public schools “with all deliberate speed.” 15 years passed and school districts were still segregated, so the courts gave them till the beginning of the next year, 1970. This gave some schools a very abrupt shock as they had to conform to the decision. As something that opinionated, it allows news media to explore and write about such a topic.

Brown v. the Board of Education was a case that helped shaped America’s education system into what it is today. ‘Separate but equal’ is phrase well attributed to the civil rights movement in all aspects of life: water fountains, movie theaters, restaurants, bathrooms, schools, and much more. This phrase was coined legal in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896. Plessy v. Ferguson said that racial segregation of public facilities was legal so long as they were ‘equal.’ Before this even, Black Codes, passed in 1865 under President Johnson legalized the segregation of public facilities including schools. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified guaranteeing all citizens equal protection under the law. Still, though, blacks were not given equal opportunities when it came to voting, schooling and many other inherent rights. 1875 brought the Civil Rights Act that prohibited the discrimination in places of public accommodation. These places of public accommodation did not seem to include educational facilities. Jim Crow Laws become widespread in 1887, legalizing racial separation. These downfalls were paused by development of the Nation Association for the Advancement of Colored People that was founded in 1909. This association began to fight the discriminatory policies plaguing the country, especially in the southern areas. Finally Brown v. the Board of Education fought these decisions, stating that ‘separate but equal’ and discrimination allowed by the latter decisions did not have a

The book “Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents” is Waldo E. Martin’s observation on not just the landmark case of Brown v. Board but also the institutionalized racism that was overcome to get there. It also documents other cases that Brown v. Board built upon to get the decision that challenged “separate but equal”. In this text Martin gives a glimpse into not just what the court order did from a legislative standpoint, but from a human standpoint, what happened to the people, community, and society in general both prior and in the wake of the of this monumental decision.

Everyone in America should be guaranteed the freedom of speech granted by The Constitution. In 1988, the court ruled in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier that schools \could limit freedom of speech in school if they had “educational concerns” (Jacobs). The problem is that “educational concerns” is too vague and school districts are able to use this as a loophole to get away with removing articles that do not need to be removed. Often, the concern is based on perception and image more than anything else. Angela Riley’s article “20 years later: Teachers reflect on Supreme Court’s Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier ruling” quotes Frank LoMonte, executive director of

In 1971, the case of Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education was in North Carolina which is part of the South. Even after Brown v. Board of Education, there was troubles of segregating the schools, especially in the South. This case was challenge because of the busing system sending black students all to black schools and white students were being bused to schools with whites. The plaintiff wanted schools to have a diverse population for a better education for all students in Charlotte, North Carolina.

As an educator, it is extremely important to know educational policies. On top of the knowledge, it is also imperative to respect the rights granted to students in the democratic society. Attached above is an article, published by the first amendment center, regarding how the first amendment is employed within public schools. The first topic in the article is titled speaking out in school. Here I learned that the school cannot limit the student’s freedom of speech, unless it is hindering the environment to learn, and even then, there is a lot of grey area. Here the school must be able to provide substantial evidence that the student’s writing, speech, or expression would cause great disruption. This also ties directly into school dress code and uniforms required by the school corporation. Students, in many