Court: Teachers have no free-speech protection for curricular decisions in classroom.

[madfloridian]

There are so many implications of this ruling.

Court: No Teacher Speech Rights on Curriculum

Teachers have no First Amendment free-speech protection for curricular decisions they make in the classroom, a federal appeals court ruled on Thursday.

"Only the school board has ultimate responsibility for what goes on in the classroom, legitimately giving it a say over what teachers may (or may not) teach in the classroom," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, said in its opinion. The decision came in the case of an Ohio teacher whose contract was not renewed in 2002 after community controversy over reading selections she assigned to her high school English classes. These included Siddhartha , by Herman Hesse, and a unit on book censorship in which the teacher allowed students to pick books from a list of frequently challenged works, and some students chose Heather Has Two Mommies, by Leslea Newman.

A group of 500 parents petitioned the school board against the teacher, Shelley Evans-Marshall, calling for "decency and excellence" in the classroom. The teacher also had various run-ins with her principal. Despite positive performance reviews before the controversy, the principal's evaluations afterwards criticized Evans-Marshall's attitude and demeanor and her "use of material that is pushing the limits of community standards." The school board in March 2002 decided not to renew her contract, citing "problems with communications and teamwork."

The teacher had sued the Tipp City, Ohio, school district and various officials in 2003, alleging that her termination violated her First Amendment free-speech rights.

Evans-Marshall sued the Tipp City, Ohio, school district and various officials in 2003, alleging that her termination violated her First Amendment free-speech rights. In 2005, she won a ruling from the 6th Circuit that allowed her case to survive a motion to dismiss by the defendants. The court said at that time that it appeared that Evans-Marshall's termination was "due to a public outcry engendered by the assignment of protected material that had been approved by the board."

There is much more on the ruling, but can't go past the copyright fair use.

I find myself wondering how such a ruling would be applied as we progress down the road in which privately managed schools get public money....in many cases now there is no elected school board. So...where would the final decision for curriculum lie in cases like that?

[villager]

1. So this means we can get "intelligent design" teachers out of the classroom

...in districts where the School Board itself hasn't gone off the rails?

[Catshrink]

3. Unfortunately, it can also go the other way

and force teachers to teach creationism in science class - or prohibit them from teaching evolution.

[villager]

6. Well, I think it *has* gone the other way, based on the decision... I'm just trying

to see if there's some ju-jitsu room to use this against the right, as well...

[Posteritatis]

27. The legality of that, at least, was thoroughly demolished a few years ago. (nt)

[ieoeja]

31. They should teach creationism.

Nobody but quacks have believed in the steady-state universe in decades. Not long after Edwin Hubble found proof positive that the universe is expanding, the scientific community accepted the Big Bang theory of creationism. Prior to that, it was rejected because most scientists believed the universe had no creation, but rather was always in existence.

This is one of those times where the Roman Catholic Church was out ahead of the secular community (probably the first time since the Middle Ages).

[Luminous Animal]

46. She was teaching literature in an English class. Not religion in a science class.

[hughee99]

60. So it depends on the subject?

What if a science teacher decides on their own they're going to teach creationism and maybe just briefly mention evolution? What if an English teacher decides that an Ayn Rand heavy reading program is just what the students need?

[Luminous Animal]

63. Creationism is not science, so that excludes it from the science curriculum.

And, if an English teacher in one grade emphasizes Ayn Rand? So what? There is still the textbook... a library... a brain... My 11th grade English teacher spent a lot of time showing slides of her summer trips around the world but my big giant text book had literature from around the world.

[hughee99]

66. With full academic freedom, why would anything be excluded from the curriculum?

You could teach it in Science or History, I suppose, and sort of be "on topic" (as opposed to teaching it in math, for example). If the students job is to learn in spite of the teacher, can you really say the teacher is doing their job?

[Luminous Animal]

133. Did I say there should be no standards? But yes, academic freedom within the subject matter

is not too much to ask. I believe the standard of proof for both admin and parents when censoring an educator should be confined to academic misconduct within a specific discipline that would hinder the ability of a student to meets state standards for course work, graduate from high school, or enter college.

[hughee99]

134. Creationism was taught as "science" for years.

So there is an argument that this is within the subject matter. It could also be taught in History class.

[Luminous Animal]

172. Yes. yes. And the sun used to revolve around the earth. What part of academic freedom

within a specific discipline do you not understand? And I've no doubt that creationism is currently being taught in history classes.

[hughee99]

180. "Within a specific discipline" can have a much wider interpretation

than I think you're giving it credit for.

I guess what I'm asking is this... If a public school decides it's not going to teach creationism, should a history or science teacher have the academic freedom to teach it anyway?

[Catshrink]

72. Not if a fundie school board says it's science.

[Luminous Animal]

132. Fundie schools can teach creationism as science now if they so choose.

[NJmaverick]

2. When I am representing my employer in my job I have no expectation of free speech

I am surprised Shelley believed otherwise.

[Goblinmonger]

14. So I have no academic freedom as a teacher?

Then just put a typed script into a text reader in the front of the class and have over with it. What if I happen to mention Heather has Two Mommies in class and some parent gets their undies in a bunch? Am I protected there or should I shut my pie hole about banned literature in English class?

My job ain't your job. Stop trying to put even more restrictions on teachers.

[NJmaverick]

21. So a Tea Bagger teacher should have the "academic freedom"

to teach that President Obama isn't an American citizen and is really a secret Muslim? When you are employed by a company, agency or institution you represent that entity and as a result you no longer have all the freedoms you enjoy as an individual.

[Luminous Animal]

44. Where would that fit in the curriculum?

Algebra maybe? Literature? Science?

[hughee99]

61. Civics?

[Luminous Animal]

64. I had civics in junior high. I learned the rights and duties of a citizen in a capitalist

society as opposed to a communist society. Nearly akin to birther disinformation.

[hughee99]

67. In my civic class, we learned about the requirements for office (among other things)

Age requirements and birth requirements, so based on my class, the birther horseshit would be "on topic".

[reggie the dog]

139. the birther horseshit is an outright lie

taking up marxism or laissez faire economics is a difference of opinion and both should be discussed and critiqued in a history or economics class, saying that obama is not an american is just lying to students

[hughee99]

140. No but having a discussion on the topic

without the teacher taking a side would be.

"Some have suggested that the current President is not a US citizen. What would the implications be if he were not? Should the president be required to be a natural-born citizen? Let's discuss".

It gives some legitimacy to the lie without outright supporting it and is completely within the scope of the class.

[reggie the dog]

161. it gives no legitimacy to the lie

kids should know that simply saying "some have suggested" means exactly that, some people, but that also implies that it is fals because no one has won any court case against obama dealing with that lie, otherwise people would say "it has been determined by the courts"....which is more credible than "some have suggested" but not 100%foolproof

[hughee99]

162. If a bunch of students were discussing

whether Obama is or is not a US citizen, it propagates the lie. It makes it seem as if there is some credibility to the belief that he is not. If I started a discussion with "Some have suggested Barack Obama is secretly out to destroy America because..." it starts with the premise that this is a legitimate viewpoint and is worthing of considering.

[reggie the dog]

174. i dont see how

the conversation would be basically, some people say this, it has been thrown out of court every time, it is likely not true and the people who still insist despite the evidence deny reality. high school students should be able to figure it out no problem.

[hughee99]

179. Some people say that Bush is a war criminal

but no one has brought sufficient charges to even get him into a court (let alone to get it thrown out of one).

If your expecting high school (or middle school) students, or even the teacher, to have all the information they need (how many times has it been in court, how many times has it been thrown out, why has it been thrown out, which arguments have not been addressed in court, how many cases are still pending) you may be disappointed.

[reggie the dog]

183. google is great for that

if we need a quick interjection of objective facts i have kids look up the issue on google on their cell phones. i have had similar conversations with my students here in france and even for other lessons when i forgot a detail (exact year of something, ect.) i have students look it up on google on their phones or i do it onthe computer in the classroom, but if the computer is not on their phones are faster. plus the kids love that they get to break the no cell phone use during the school day rule!

[chervilant]

54. Ah, yes,

The plaintive conformity cry of the shackled sheeple... A rather pathetic creature...

[Goblinmonger]

73. But that isn't the same as a teacher.

Or are you not a fan of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_freedom">Academic Freedom? Sure, you can throw out all the "secret Muslim" scare tactics you want, but in the end do you support an educational system where the teachers have academic freedom or do you just want them reading from a board-approved script? Personally, I want teachers that can take the curriculum-based discussion where it is going in the classroom and allow them to discuss topics that might be pushing what kids are thinking.

[One_Life_To_Give]

97. Academic Freedom is not in the Bill of Rights

The First amendment right to Freedom of Speech has been held to be potentially restricted by an employer. Be it be wearing of a USS Bush shirt to work or the placement of Christmas decorations around an office or stating "minority group" sucks/must die etc. And having had to share long car rides with a Born Again at one time in my career. I can really appreciate my right to not have to listen to such as part of my employment.

This doesn't mean that academic freedom is not important. It obviously is, but there are again limits. Fornication for First Graders isn't going to pass muster as an appropriate academic choice. We hope that competent authorities will make these choices with great wisdom. But for the moment that authority rests with the Public School Board in many jurisdictions around the country. As such your mileage so to speak will vary greatly across the breadth of the nation.

[Goblinmonger]

100. Not allowing teachers to not have 1st Amendment rights isn't in the Bill of Rights.

What's your point?

As much as the school does have the ability to restrict my speech, they are also a government entity and, as such, I don't lose all my First Amendment rights when I walk in the door. None of those examples are what happened in the example in the OP. It was a discussion of banned books. Not books banned by THAT school but in general. Everyone seems to want to hop on the "I don't want conservative teachers to be able to say what they want" wagon that you are missing the forest for the trees. Academic Freedom needs to be preserved for teachers.

[One_Life_To_Give]

109. Suit claimed violation of First Amendment Rights

The courts have not agreed with an Employees unrestricted First Amendment Rights while on the Job.

While I agree this appears to be an unjustified firing of this teacher. I do not see this as a case of First Amendment Rights. Perhaps if she had made the statements over the weekend when not on school property nor representing herself as a teacher from the school. Then the First Amendment could apply.

[Goblinmonger]

110. Nobody is arguing for unrestricted First Amendment rights

Does she have the ability to supplement the curriculum? Was this someone crossing the line? I don't see how it is. Just because a bunch of parents got pissed off?

[One_Life_To_Give]

175. I agree she should supplement curriculum

Don't think she overstepped her professional duties and behaved in a manner consistent with her profession. I just also agree with the Judge. That it's not the first amendment that protects this. IMO This was a last ditch effort that had a more punitive affect by forcing the school to defend itself than any probability of prevailing purely on 1st amendment grounds. Perhaps in the previous seven years other legal remedies had already been exhausted?

I would think a professional teachers organization would be a better advocate in such matters with politicized school boards. An independent national organization that could rule on the Professional Code of Conduct. Still would be problematic with cases like this. But that and the unions are probably the best shot at the moment.

[reggie the dog]

137. you should be free to discuss things with your students

a book about a kid with two mommies is not a lie, it is reality. teaching that obama isnt american and that he is a muslim is an outright lie and the person should lose their post for disemmenating propaganda.

[bhikkhu]

42. Most states require this as a part of an education degree

...as in Oregon where "Civil Rights and Multi-Cultural Issues in Education" is a prerequisite for a degree, which covers free speech limits pretty well. A teacher, as a state actor, has reasonably well defined limits to free speech.

[Cid_B]

59. If the community standards and school standards...

... say no to "heather has two mommies" then yes you need to shush no matter your personal views on the subject. PERIOD.

[Goblinmonger]

87. I don't think that is the case here.

Do you think the assignment was a bad one (to read a banned book)? I'll give you a hint why they picked that one, by the way: It's a short picture book for kids.

[reggie the dog]

142. no you dont

my teaching license is issued by the state of illinois. if i work in redneck hell downstate i can still teach that the lifestyle depicted in heather has two mommies is quite legal in many states in the usa, most provinces in canada, and many countries in europe whom are our allies. if their parents do not want their children exposed to reality in their little community they are free to take their kid out of the school. teaching kids about a lifestyle that exists in their own community already is not out of line according to illinois state standards. how else can you use the classroom to change school standards??? isnt that the whole point of schools???? to push the political debate and to expand freedom, liberty, and the american dream to as many people as possible???

[lumberjack_jeff]

84. Your academic freedom as a teacher does not transcend the responsibilities of the school board

You have to teach what the governor, SPI and School Board tell you to.

[Goblinmonger]

86. Verbatim?

Do I get any leeway? Can I mention any other of Twain's work as I prepare to teach Huck Finn in a couple weeks? What if it isn't in the curriculum that I teach irony and satire but I decide to do so as I teach Twain so that they can understand more fully the complexity of his work? Should I just stop that foolishness?

[lumberjack_jeff]

138. If they so specify.

But if they do, it's probably prudent to look for work in another school district.

[KossackRealityCheck]

106. What a weird leap of logic

School boards can limit teachers' speech. That doesn't mean that teachers are reduced to reading a script.

[Goblinmonger]

107. If there is no freedom of speech

and no academic freedom, then what options are left. I certainly can't, then, talk about something a student asks about that isn't on the approved list of subjects to talk about. I would have to stay on the script to avoid being terminated for discussing something.

People on this thread are saying that there is no freedom of speech for educators. It's not a slippery slope to get to the point that there needs to be a script since it is being made clear we can't decide on our own what to talk about and that there are repercussions for discussion anything else. That's one step.

[KossackRealityCheck]

111. First you should read the OP

It says there is no freedom of speech in curriculum -- that is, there is a curriculum that has to be taught, as decided on by the school board. A teacher cannot substitute Leviticus for Shakespeare.

A lot of the alarm in this thread is alarmist hyperbole. The fact that there are limits doesn't mean no free discussion is allowed.

I'm amazed at how silly the alarmism is in this thread.

[Goblinmonger]

116. People in this thread are saying teachers can't go off on related tangents.

Nobody is saying they should be able to substitute Leviticus for Shakespeare (there is a lot of strawman building, too). But can you teach satire when teaching Huck Finn even if satire isn't in the official curriculum if you think understanding it will deepen the students understanding (and you are otherwise teaching the curriculum)? Can you read some Doonesbury as an example of excellent contemporary American satire and have a class discussion of it?

I think most people thing "curriculum" is something that it isn't. In our state, at least, curriculum is standard's driven from the state and we just need to meet those standards. We do some scope and sequencing at the local level, but it isn't "today you do this" spelled out.

[KossackRealityCheck]

121. Where does the OP article say teachers can't go off on related tangents?

That's not what it says. It says that teachers don't have free speech in curriculum. You can't decide to chuck Huck Finn and teach "banned books." That would be a better analogy for what this teacher was doing.

Talk about straw men -- you're elevating curriculum standards with teachers not being able to digress in discussion.

This is true at the college level as well. If you're hired to teach American history 101, you can't decide to toss the main texts and teach a history of the Vikings.

Common sense.

[reggie the dog]

144. you cannot substitute leviticus for shakespeare

but if you cover what you are mandated to you should be free to add other stuff in. i got away with teaching a unit last year about rastafarianism as a resistance religion, resistant against racism and colonialism and that it took its roots from the likes of marcus garvey, the anti slave movement and the back to africa movement. i showed a video of bob marley playing a concert in zimbabwe the night it became independent and had another image up on the projector for a good 10 minutes with a big reefer leaf and the words "rastafarianism, it is about much much more than the cannabis smoking you already know about." the kids had that on their handout to take home to and i did not get a single parent to complain. this was for high school juniors at a public/private catholic high school with an international section in which i was teaching history in english. in the international section i was adored by the kids and their parents for getting the kids to think for themselves and for helping the kids work on working in groups, working solo, giving presentations, preparing logical arguments and the like. i took 9 students to paris for a mock UN conference in which they acted like delegates from saudi arabia, myanmar, and turkey. the conference was in fontainbleau so i took advantage of the fact that we arrived in paris, had the kids put their bags in lockers, and took the kids to see the ghetto of paris during the afternoon. they kids loved it because in all the times they had visited paris they went to the monuments, not the north east side where you have working class/poor people and a shitload of immigrants. it is not dangerous, but so alive and so diverse. the kids talked to their parents and i received positive feedback. i even pointed out the drug dealers to the kids and had a talk about why kids their age were selling drugs instead of being in school, what kind of employment opprotunities they had compared to people born in the neighborhood we were in, and what kind of career future (death, jail etc) awaited the dealers in the streets. NOT A SINGLE PARENT COMPLAINT. I did get complaints when i taught ESL at the same school because no one ever taught me how to teach esl and i stayed largely on the book, the kids were bored and misbehaved and i had parents complain. in a history classroom it is academic freedom which permits me to make engaging units that cover the topics demanded by the state. my version of teaching is one that pushes students. I had these students reading 20 to 30 pages of articles i got off the net each week (the beauty is that for me in the international section there are not textbooks in english, just a list of topics to cover and the I AM FREE to teach!!!) so they did not adore me because i was an easy teacher. the only reason i got canned is because i dared hint that the principal should have given me all the history hours, not split them with another teacher, that way i wouldnt have had to have taught esl where i had problems with kids acting up. the kids and parents in the international section signed a petition to keep me and can the other history teacher. when the boss pressured me out one month before the end of the year because of parents complaigning in the esl section (their little angles never misbehaved according to them and did not deserve the detentions etc i was giving) the kids in the international section went on strike for a couple of days. they wrote me many letters on facebook, the day the dude canned me i went back to get my stuff into my classroom full of students and i told them what happened and they gave me a standing ovation like in the film "dead poet's society". i think out of the box and teach history out of the box and students generally adore it, as do most parents. were it not for 2 groups of unruly 6th graders not wanting to learn esl (i am in france) and acting up i would still have a job. my fatal flaw??? when the kids were drawing nazi images at lunch i called them out for it and when a bully singled out the only jew and said he should have been deported during wwii i pushed for the bully to be punished even though he dad was cheif of police in the town!

[One_Life_To_Give]

177. Nobody is arguing that you can't

What is being argued is the Legal Foundations upon which your ability to discus tangents is based.

The Judge ruled only the Narrow argument that the 1st amendment does not. Saying nothing about the rest of the volumes of law and their potential impact on the subject. To which several of us have commented to the effect that this is consistent with previous rulings about the 1st amendment and the workplace.

[reggie the dog]

181. i think we agree then

but that i have less understanding of the law per say, what law would give the teacher a right to discuss homosexuality in literature in the classroom if not the 1st amendment?

[One_Life_To_Give]

182. Don't think there is one today

At least not a Federal Law. Best help would probably come from advocates in the Federal and State departments of Education. Probably based upon a national definition of Proper Teacher Code of Conduct. And that would give you some defense in arguing with the local school board/administration over what you did or did not do.

Perhaps after repeal of DOMA and adoption of a comprehensive Non-Discrimination act or incorporation of GLBT rights under the Civil Rights act. There will be arguments related Civil Rights for excluding based solely on Homosexual content.

[lumberjack_jeff]

143. Courts have held that flag burning is protected speech.

Should a social studies teacher be fired for leading the class in a parking-lot flag burning?

If a teacher's individual choice of curriculum for her students is protected by her first amendment rights, it would seem not.

There's no way to argue that the teacher in the lawsuit and the one in my example are in any way different except for our personal appraisal of the merit of her views.

A teacher doesn't have an unabriged right to teach whatever (s)he wants because the student is the one in the class with a superior right.

[PVnRT]

24. You're right. Teachers don't know best what to teach.

:eyes:

[MedicalAdmin]

81. Are u a teacher? No? Then stop using false analogies.

The court decision goes to academic freedom.

A short word to anyone considering becoming a teacher. Due to this decision and the accelerating destruction of teaching as a profession - don't.

[reggie the dog]

135. as teachers we should be free to prepare our lessons

so long as we meet the district standards. using non restricted art that parents dont personally like should not result in losing one job. Those same parents would probably object to me using the megadeth video "holy wars" as an intro to the crusades even though it is a big success with the kids. the parents also probably would not have liked me showing bob marley play the concert when zimbabwe became independent and would not have liked the following unit on rastafarianisms links to anti colonialism and its historical links to marcus garvey, liberation of slaves and the back to africa movement. those kinds of parents would prefer that their kids know that rastas smoke cannabis and nothing else..

[MedicalAdmin]

141. Why academic freedom is important.

Here's a wiki article on it. It's a pretty good read especially the case studies in totalitarian countries. Give it a go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_freedom


Speaking only for myself, I believe that if a free education is considered a bedrock of democracy in America, then academic freedom must be given to everyone within the limits of the set curriculum. Said curriculum materials need to be discussed, reasoned about, challenged, and/or defended. And most of all teachers at all levels should be able to respond to their students passions, hatreds, desires, ignorance and elightenment in order to make them better at reasoning and thinking and emoting. Without this, we may as well hand all the schools over to Walmart, hire minimum wage cashiers and hope for the best.

That's my 2 cents.

[LoZoccolo]

4. That's probably because they are there to do a job and not to express themselves. n/t

[Goblinmonger]

15. You forgot the little "sarcasm" thingy. n/t

[reggie the dog]

145. you can do both you know

just as students can learn and express themselves too, the whole point of teaching history is to get kids to learn how to express themselves in an organized, logical, argumentative manner.

[LoZoccolo]

5. duplicate

[jotsy]

7. in all the wrong hands.

I guess we should be used to it by now...but I just can't get okay with that.

Recommended.

edited to finish sentence.

[The Philosopher]

8. We can’t teach about censorship?

How am I supposed to teach if I am only the intermediary of the School Board? If I have a child that isn't responding to the lesson, am I allowed to ask for a meeting with all the members as many times as I need in order to solve the problem? Or will I just be fired so that a teacher who will ignore the child and unethically cook the books can be hired and the School Board can go back to patting themselves on the back?

Teachers are trained for this job. Teachers work to know their shit. And we’re government approved! So obviously the government thinks we’re no good teaching children. We’re not allowed to challenge the children intellectually so they can grow. We’re not allowed to introduce them to new concepts. What the hell are teachers for?

When the school board tells me to teach Shakespeare, and I teach Shakespeare and I tell the students that Shakespeare's identity is questionable, and suddenly there's a flood of parents screaming at me about questioning whether or not Shakespeare was a real person or the name for someone else (or if he wrote all the plays attributed to him or not), am I going to get fired?

I guess I'm supposed to assume that's the hazards of the world and not notice the injustice of that. Oh, wait, that would make me a Republican.

[madfloridian]

10. I also found the part about the censorship list very interesting.

There will apparently be no more creative teaching.

[One_Life_To_Give]

105. More to the Story?

From what is in the OP it's hard to tell what the full story is. Other than there may be more than just the single incident.
I would expect as any other employer/employee relationship. A teacher would be expected to conform to the expected norms of the profession unless otherwise directed. If the school board says you will or won't discus XX then that's the way it is. There are other ways via the Union, Ballot Box etc. to pursue change than to go vigilante.

So where was the Union in all of this? What about her peers within the school? State Education Dept/Board?

[madfloridian]

136. More to the story. Yes. Will give a chill to teachers with intelligence.

They will be fearful of going off script, lest they be fired.

But then it is cheaper to hire those who don't care anyway.

[One_Life_To_Give]

176. Union? Professional Org?

Individually you will not be able to successfully fight against a local school board IMO. You will need to fight such intrusions upon Professional Code of Conduct and Teacher Ethics as a combined group of Professionals.

[madfloridian]

9. Well, I guess this ruling is approved of here.

Judging by the posts I can't see. :shrug:

SO...who will make the decisions in schools run privately but funded publicly...and in which the school board has been marginalized which has happened in many districts already. :shrug:

They were starting to script teachers before I retired. Now I guess it's legal.

Teachers once were thought of as having some intelligence and allowed to use it.

[NJmaverick]

11. Should the parents and the administration have a say

as to what is taught in the classroom?

[cornermouse]

13. Is school a place where children are exposed to

new thoughts and philosophies that they won't hear at home? Is school supposed to expand the child's horizon? Or is school only supposed to teach what's taught in the home and church? Isn't that the heart of the argument?

[NJmaverick]

20. If you had children in a school that taught creationism would you as a parent

want the right to object and have a say in your child's education?

[cornermouse]

25. Considering where I live it is entirely possible that they could

have been taught creationism by at least one teacher. So far, they haven't run out and become religious right wingers.

All of which takes us away from the heart of the matter. Should children be exposed to new philosophies and ideas in school or should the teachers be told they can only expose them to the philosophies and ideas, such as creationism, they've already learned from home and church?

[Gaedel]

77. So, if I am a history teacher

I can emphasize all of the "positive aspects" of Hitler and National Socialism on Germany?

I can explain to the students how the Confederacy was just fighting for "States Rights"?

I can tell the students that Ronald Reagan's presidency was a needed correction to the "creeping socialism" of the New Deal?


How will "academic freedom" work for you then?

[reggie the dog]

149. sure you can, so long as you meet the standarts

you can teach the kids that the war in germany helped lower unemployment there so long as you dont omit the part about the death camps and persecution.

you can explain that many soldiers in the south had no slaves and actual had the value of their labor lowered due to slavery and that they were obliged to fight a war in order to preserve slavery. you can teach that the south said slavery was a states right but that the feds considered it to be a citizenship right and therefor something the fed could decide about. so the "just" states rights would not fly

as for ronald reagan yes you can teach that so long as you mention that others on the left would aruge that reagan was out of line for destroying all the progress made by FDR.

i let my students know that i am on the far far left and that their grade will not go down if they disagree. there is pretty much always a right wing student who will pose a counterargument when i extoll the virtues of democratic socialism and i let them have the floor so long as their arguments are laid out in a logical manner. i give studetns A's if they have a right wing interpretation of history or a left wing interpretation. the key is that to get an A you have to be able to look at evidence, think it through, and make a logical conclusion based upon what you see and judge (which is dependent on your value system).

[Gaedel]

79. So, if I am a history teacher

I can emphasize all of the "positive aspects" of Hitler and National Socialism on Germany?

I can explain to the students how the Confederacy was just fighting for "States Rights"?

I can tell the students that Ronald Reagan's presidency was a needed correction to the "creeping socialism" of the New Deal?


How will "academic freedom" work for you then?

[cornermouse]

168. Well, I guess we could just stick the teachers under a toadstool

with ear mufflers and gags on and tell them to teach...

Seriously, do you distrust your ability to raise your child to know the truth when he/she sees it? Do you distrust your ability to teach your child right from wrong? Do you distrust your ability to teach your child to choose wisely when they're old enough to choose? As a parent you have your child pretty much to yourself in the first few years when they learn the most. If you work at it, something pretty close to your belief system is what the child will follow when they get older.

[Luminous Animal]

45. As part of comparitive religion, I'd have no problem. As part of a science class?

Not science. What discipline in elementary/high school do you propose creationism fits in?

[MedicalAdmin]

114. Yes.

And as a parent I EXPECT good teachers to challenge the kids and to present them with ideas and concepts that I don't/can't/won't. Children are not an expension of their parents - they are people.

[reggie the dog]

150. thank you

i too think that is my job, to try to interest kids by pushing their horizions, they dont have to change, my goal is to help them work on their logical/analytical thinking and their communication skills.

[reggie the dog]

148. yes, but creationism is not science and should not be accepted

in any science classroom. you cant teach that shit here in france as science because it is not science, it is religion. having kids read a book about a girl with 2 mommies is not disinformation like creationism, it is teaching kids about the reality of the world they live in and gives an example of a legal family in some us states and some countries in europe.

[Goblinmonger]

16. Should the teacher? n/t

[NJmaverick]

22. The teacher was demanding complete freedom according to her lawsuit

that is asking a bit much, don't you think?

[Posteritatis]

30. Do you think demanding any at all is a bit much, too? (nt)

[The Philosopher]

19. So

When do we get to go into the court room and tell the Judges they're doing it wrong? Or is the more appropriate place outside the court room? Because the more appropriate place for a parent to have a say on what is taught is not the class room. Lives are ruined, ignorance is perpetuated, and this only plays into the hands that employees should never have protections from personal reprisals. They should instead go to state education board meetings, or local school board meetings, and then hash it out there.

[NJmaverick]

23. So you wouldn't object if you were a parent and the teacher was teaching

your children that abortion is murder? You don't feel the parents or the school board should have a say in what is taught?

[cornermouse]

26. Actually my kids may have had a teacher that tried to teach them that too.

I don't think they bought into it. At some point, you have to trust your kid's ability to think and the staying power of what you taught them in the home.

I've always seen this as a situation where parents teach their kids the basics at home and the school makes an effort to teach them what they don't learn in the home. It prepares them better for the world.

[reggie the dog]

152. you are the kind of parent

that understands my role as a teacher, you also understand your role as a parent... thanks

[The Philosopher]

39. That's like asking me

If I wouldn't mind my child being molested because the school hired the teacher. After all, if the school hired the teacher, they must approve of the actions.

The teacher has the right to say in the class room, "There are people who believe abortion is murder." The teacher has the right to even bring up Creationism. Teachers are approved for teaching by the government, by the universities that produce them. They know how to teach. They know that teaching is not the superintendence of rote memorization, but the challenging of the mind for intellectual growth. That can't happen unless the teacher is protected from undue firings.

Your question is ignorant because it assumes that the parent hasn't had the say before the teacher was even hired. The state holds open meetings to talk about curriculum that anyone can attend. The School Board has open meetings to talk about it. Parents do have a say. These parents that protested the teacher weren't having a say in what their child learns. They were protesting that their child was learning at all. They're the ones who are slowly killing off the humanities in secondary education, leaving only the sciences (which they wage war on). They don't want their children to think for themselves. They want them to stay babies, to have control over them the rest of their lives. At what point should someone tell that parent, "You can't baby them all their lives?" While it's not the teacher's job to do so, it's a position of nature. A Teacher's existence is reality's way of telling the parent, "Your child is growing up."

[Goblinmonger]

75. +1. Thanks. n/t

[MedicalAdmin]

119. +1 - great reasoned response.

Will he listen to reason?

[MedicalAdmin]

118. Object - of course.

And I would go to the board. If the board was stacked with fundie twits, I would step it up to the state level and then federal if I needed to.

And yes, I would talk to the teacher. It's part of communication. But if they were a screeming loon like these twits - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEFWDYB0rWo&feature=player_embedded then yes, I would take it up the food chain.

Here's the other thing. I wouldnt't whine or bitch or moan about it if I lost. I would just get back to the job of educating and parenting my kid.

[reggie the dog]

151. i would have no objection

i teach that many people think that the state condones murder, on both the right and the left. i tell students that on the right they say abortion is state condoned murder and on the left they say that the death penalty is state condoned murder.....
i am pro choice but abortion is not an easy cut and dry issue. the whole debate lies with when does life begin, when do the rights of the new life trump those of the mother. the fact that some people disagree with me and think abortion is murder boils down to a question of whose rights should be respected and i love having this discussion with high school students.

[KossackRealityCheck]

108. "tell the Judges they're doing it wrong"

all the time. They're called appeals. There's also disciplinary committees.

[Luminous Animal]

51. As long as the teacher is sticking to the subject, in this case English class...

not so much. If a parent disagrees with a teacher's point of view, they can counter educate. It will only serve to broaden a child's horizons and hone their arguments for the real world. Otherwise, we all end up like teabaggers... all slogan and no depth.

[MedicalAdmin]

112. Yes, and they already do.

And that control is growning.

If parents and administrators want to micro-manage then perhaps they should get their asses in front of a class. No?

Administrations job is to implement board policy. Boards job is to set policy. Voters job is to pick the board. Parents job is to parent. Teachers job is to teach. What is so difficult to understand about this?

[reggie the dog]

147. here in France they have no say

i have a state set of standards, the school decides what textbooks to use in all but the international section i am in (there is no french history in english book). for me i find what i want to meet the standards and have a few rules from the state such as no porn (nakedness in art is ok but no porn, this is france afterall) other teachers use the textbooks and are free to add what they sey fit. the local towns have little to no say as the standards to be met are national. I have to teach decolonization as a theme, the standards say 2 of 3 examples, indochine, algeria, india, so i taught about india, the history in french teacher taught about algeria and i also taught about zimbabwe and decolonization as a general idea. everyone was happy. i go to conferences of other interantional section teachers so we can talk about how to test kids in a central exit test that all french kids take while giving them freedom to talk about decolonization of any country as the teachers all have different countries they are interested in. so we ask open ended questions and let the kids give whatever case study example they want.

[Ignis]

154. Kids certainly shouldn't be forced to read _Heather Has Two Mommies_!

They should be allowed to be insulated against any life experiences that do not mirror those held to be appropriate by their parents and school administrators.

:eyes:

[tnlefty]

38. No, I just don't know how to answer your question about decisions

made in privately run schools, and I'm taken aback by some of the responses.

When my kids were in elementary school (long time ago) I mentioned the list of books that some crazy assed parents put on a list for banning to the principal and the librarian. They didn't believe me so I came home, printed the list and presented the list to the principal and later to the librarian and although right wingers they were furious...especially the librarian as they don't take kindly to banning books.

I don't remember all of the titles, but I do remember 'Where the Red Fern Grows', and 6 Newberry Award Winners were on the list.

A friend who teaches high school English (12th grade and advanced placement classes) has for decades taught Mark Twain, and the subject matter for the class had been approved. A few years ago she had a little snot who objected to 'The War Prayer' and he got his scrotal sack twisted up in his shorts and her offering to assign something else by Twain to read and write a report on just wasn't good enough for him and his parents. They went to the principal who called my friend into the office to get the details. The principal informed her that the student and parents were demanding that nothing by Mark Twain be taught in the class. Perhaps your ignored in the quest to take everything to the extreme don't understand how some parents will take great literary works, and an American legendary author and humorist and wipe them out of school curriculum.

As for the teacher you referenced and those parents:

HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS chose what they wanted to read and comment on. My sons read some works during their years that I wasn't too thrilled with, Ayn Rand for one, but I didn't go have a fit at school. Mine read it and dismissed it as utter horseshit. What are these parents going to do when their kids are in college? Those big libraries, with all of those books - diverse books must have them wetting their pants at night.

[Joe Fields]

52. You know, no one needs to answer your threads.

You do a marvelous job of commenting on your own posts. Is that so you can keep them on the front page, by any chance?

I don't expect an answer. You are too afraid of actual dialogue with someone who happens to disagree with you.

Are you looking for some kind of validation for your years of service?

[chervilant]

55. OMG!

Just what has motivated your vitriol?!?

Apparently, you haven't been paying attention. I've not seen madfloridian hesitate to engage in dialogues with those who happen to disagree with her posts. On the other hand, I've seen several naysayers post prickly and indefensible little bon mots, then disappear into the blogosphere when their post(s) elicit firm rebuttals.

Our nation has been failing miserably on most measures pertaining to our children, Joe. We don't protect our children from relationship violence. We don't help our children habituate exercise and good eating habits. We don't honestly acknowledge that our corporate hedonism has poisoned the very air that our children breathe, or the water they must drink. And we certainly don't insure that our children get the education they will need to compete in a global economy.

At the very least, our children deserve our fearless and consistent efforts to insure that they receive an exemplary education. Thus, we should wholeheartedly support and appreciate madfloridian's advocacy for our nation's children.

Indeed, we must all advocate for our children's future. Perhaps you might use your time and energy to pick up the gauntlet and join in our efforts to insure that our children are truly our nation's first priority.

[CBR]

89. It is bizarre... the constant griping about the recs/unrecs

on one's own posts.

[Ignis]

156. Well of COURSE authoritarians are quick to agree with this ruling.

We can't allow those nosy, liberal teachers to show our kids books in which people have two mommies.

The horror! :scared:

[cornermouse]

12. I think as they continue to "refine" what they want their children

to be taught our children will suffer for it.

[Zoigal]

17. Thank goodness i am retired from teaching. Would have never made it

in today's environment. Have discouraged members of our family from
even considering entering the field.....:)z

[cornermouse]

18. Same here when the grandchild started talking about it.

[bvar22]

40. Thank goodness I'm old, and have no children.

I don't think I would enjoy living in the New World-in-a-Box we are giving to them.

I am very grateful for my education,
and the creative, enlightened, out-of-the-box mentors (teachers) I was exposed to during that time.

For all the teachers on DU who are appalled at the recent and proposed "change" in our education system, this student thanks you and your teachers for their unselfish service.

We are entering a New Dark Age of indoctrination, not education.
The Catholic Church of the 12th century would be delighted.

[WinkyDink]

28. "protected material that had been approved by the board"? How can a teacher be fired for teaching

APPROVED works?

She needs to sue each member of the school board, her principal, and the super.

[Blue_Tires]

37. that's my question as well...

I guess the board caved to some knuckle-dragging parents

[EconomicsIsGod]

50. oops, sorry

this was supposed to be a response to the main thread.

[MedicalAdmin]

120. Most teachers can be fired for any reason.

It just takes some documentation and, voila', non renewal. She has not a single legal leg to stand on her, much as it pains me to say it.

[cynatnite]

29. Bad, bad, bad...in every way...

Not allowing a teacher academic freedom in the classroom is no different than taking books out of a library and burning them, IMO.

Sure, it could go either way, but I would rather support a teacher's right to teach what he or she sees fit than to have someone outside the classroom force their agenda.

This is just appalling.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MedicalAdmin]

122. I guess it's lucky for kids everywhere that you don't own a school.

Or books, I suspect.

[damntexdem]

32. None? I mean, it's understood that school boards and administrators make curricular decisions.

But it would seem that there would be some room for teacher autonomy, and certainly some free speech.

On the other hand, this can surely be used against Creationist teachers who want to teach their fantasies in place of, or alongside, real science in biology and other classes.

[madfloridian]

33. Well, she got fired for letting them read Heather has Two Mommies,

showing them the censored list of books, and reading to them Siddhartha. So I guess that pretty much says the teacher has no rights on choice of curriculum or speech in the classroom. Looks pretty clear to me.

It may be said to work both ways, but it sure as hell silences teachers.

[MedicalAdmin]

123. There is no need for that.

Federal law and every state board have already made creationism deader than a duck - if they try it then they can be fired. Which isn't to say it doesn't happen, just that it shouldn't legally.

This is a BAD decision for education and kids.

[Joe Fields]

34. Thank God.

A teacher doesn't deserve the right to free speech in the classroom.

I'd like to know whatever in the world made you think that teachers ever had such a right?

Your little post leaves an awful lot out of the whole picture, but I can tell you that a teachers job is whatever the administration tells the teacher it is. When will you ever, ever, ever get that through your head?

[cornermouse]

36. I hope you were joking.

I'd hate to think you were serious.

[Joe Fields]

47. As serious as a heart attack!

[cornermouse]

68. I can't help but wonder if I'm still on DU.

Somehow this doesn't look very democratic. More like autocratic.

[MedicalAdmin]

124. A heart attack?

It is to die for!

[chervilant]

57. Wow...

You are SOOOOOO going on ignore, and you RICHLY deserve it!

[Goblinmonger]

91. Ever taught?

I mean really taught? In the grind with the real teachers? You clearly show no understanding of what happens on a daily basis. If I have no freedom of speech and can only teach what the admin proscribes, then what happens if a kid asks a question that isn't on the list? Tell them I can't answer? What if, during Huck Finn discussion of satire a kid asks about the "War Prayer" that they heard about? Should I not say anything because that isn't on the list? Do I have no ability to talk about the satire in that piece of Twain's? Personally, I would call it up on the laptop and project it on the screen and talk about it with the kid(s) and discuss the satire. But you would rather I clearly not actually engage the students in anything but rather just read the script.

It's people like you that cause a problem with education. It is people like you that refuse to treat educators like the professionals we are that lead to a shitty education system. Rather than allowing experts in the area to do there job, it is people like you that want to hamstring us so that we never go off script and in the process leave children un-engaged and hating school. Congratulations.

[liberalhistorian]

99. So, if they're required to teach that slavery was good

and slaves were happy, that blacks weren't segregated and oppressed and that the civil rights movement was blacks starting a war against whites, that the Holocaust was a fake, or that only Christians should have religious freedom in this country and only creationism, along with the earth is only six thousand years old despite all scientific evidence to the contrary, should be taught, that'd be just fine and dandy? After all, it's what they're TOLD to do, so it's all okay even if it's historically or scientifically WRONG?

Obviously, you just want automated little robots to read automated little scripts. In that case, just forget about training educators and hire adults off the streets to read the damned scripts.

[liberalhistorian]

185. Um, hello?

Crickets. I see. You're so gung-ho fascist and authoritarian regarding teachers and claiming that people are just getting mad instead of arguing the points, and yet, when someone does pose legitimate, reasonable questions regarding your stance, you pass? Uh-huh. Showing your true colors.

[MedicalAdmin]

125. Can you tell me if rights are curtailed.

If rights can be denied to anyone, then they don't exist for anyone.

[reggie the dog]

153. so what shouldnt i talk about in a history class???

any issue can be talked about ANYTHING,

religion, rape, murder, genocide, drug use, homosexuality, marx, smith, hitler, stalin..... so long as i meet the ciriculum requirements i can add on lots of other bits of info.

[Starry Messenger]

35. Looks like people are just fine and dandy with that.

They can't wait to see teachers in matching little smocks doing loyalty cheers.

[madfloridian]

41. Yep. Blame them for everything. Give them no power to think or create.

Fire them if they cross the line and show a list of censored books.

[Joe Fields]

49. Yes, yes, all teachers are saints and we should kiss their feet.

They are never wrong.

They have ABSOLUTELY NO BLAME in the state of our educational system today.

[liberalhistorian]

104. No one is saying that.

But here's where the blame breaks down: 60% to the parents, 30% to the admins, and 10% to the teachers. You DO realize that PARENTS have major responsibilities as well in their children's education? Such as ensuring that they're adequately rested, fed, clothed and treated and secure? That they take education seriously and that they do their homework to the best of their ability? Teachers cannot follow each child home and ensure this. They have them for far less time than the parents do.

And admins not only put forth ridiculous policies that they themselves don't have to follow, but they kowtow all the time to parents, regardless of the merits of the parents' complaints. My parents were tenured teachers who cared and did a damned good job, and yet, if they hadn't had tenure, there were times when they would likely have been fired because they gave deserved bad grades and the parents refused to believe that their little Janes and Johnnies deserved the grades, even if they'd done no work, and the admins just wanted to appease the parents. My stepdad was even assaulted in the classroom once, yet, to the parents, it was his fault and their little darling had done no wrong. That's the kind of shit teachers deal with every fucking day.

And public schools must accept ALL students, regardless of physical, learning, mental or emotional disabilities. Private and charter schools can cherry pick and don't have to accept everyone. Class size is a factor as well. More than twenty kids in a class and you cannot give the kind of attention they need.

[MedicalAdmin]

126. You said it, not us.

But thanks for getting on the bus.

[reggie the dog]

155. who is more to blame

creative teachers like myself, or close minded school boards who dont want their kids to be presented with reality, or perhaps peouple who think schools should be for profit, not for giving the best service to the greatest number....

[Starry Messenger]

76. It's shocking how many people actually embrace their oppression

and wish it on others. I never knew just how fascist some of our "progressives" here could be. Another amazing new low.

[defendandprotect]

43. Hi, madfloridian ... do all teachers today have HBP ... and, any good news in this struggle???

:)

[UndertheOcean]

48. Teachers should be the king/queen of the classroom , withing reasonable limits

what is this nonsense of tying Teachers hands and then blaming them for being ineffective. I could never teach under such an environment.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WinkyDink]

101. N/M.

[MedicalAdmin]

127. First of all, academic freedom is not what you think it is.

Second of all, you are using false equivalencies (handy dandy link for your education edification supplied right here - http://www.theskepticsguide.org/resources/logicalfallacies.aspx ) .

Wood, bridges, etc. don't ask questions, reason or grow intellectually, emotionally or physically. They are not people. Therefore you talk of engineering /carpentry/ etc. freedom is bunk.

You are not dealing with inanimate objects in a classroom (most of the time).

[madfloridian]

58. Seems people want classrooms turned into voids of rote learning.

I notice post after post in this thread saying that workers must do what the boss says. In that case since a teacher can now be fired for speaking on something not in the script...then the children will suffer from the lack of free flowing thought, creativity, and discussion of real topics.

The insults over a court case are stupifying. I find myself wondering why it is being done.

[liberalhistorian]

96. Yes, it appears that the "Flowers are Red" brigade is finally,

sadly, winning out in this country despite all efforts to stop it. That's a reference to the Harry Chapin song Flowers are Red, where he contrasts teachers and people who believe in strictly scripted conformity vs. those (the majority, in my experience, except for nowadays) who believe that some degree of creativity, originality and freedom must be permitted. Here's the chorus:

Flowers are red and
Green Leaves are green
There's no need to see flowers any other way than the way they always have been seen

But the little boy said,

There's so many colors in the rainbow
So many colors in the morning sun
So many colors in the flowers
And I see every one.

My retired teacher parents are truly sickened at this turn of events.

[WinkyDink]

103. Exactly. TPTB do not want THINKERS on either side of the teacher's desk.

[chervilant]

62. And,

apparently no free-speech protection OUTSIDE the classroom, either:

http://www.rr.com/video/1625980464

[BzaDem]

65. Where would you draw the line?

Obviously parents and the community should have some role in setting the curriculum. Yet teachers also shouldn't just be there to read a script.

My question is: where would you draw the line?

[midnight armadillo]

69. Siddhartha is WAY too subversive

I mean, the main character makes a ton of money, then throws it all away to seek out real happiness.

can't have that message out there.

[RobinA]

128. Sheesh

In my high school in the '70's we ALL read Siddhartha. And judging by what I see on Facebook, quite a number of us grew up to be raving tea baggers and other capitalist types.

[RC]

70. This is nothing more than micro-managing teachers by the ignorant.

I guess a real education doesn't fit in real well with a "Teach to the Test" curriculum for the sole purpose of money for the school.
The real losers are, first our kids, then this once great nation as we circle the drain.

[MadHound]

71. Amazing how many people here are cheering this decision.

What is ironic is that probably ninety percent of them vastly benefited from a teacher who had academic freedom in the classroom. I know I did. I had an African American teacher take my American lit class and turn it into an African American lit class. She would probably be fired today.

And let's not forget that this effects all subjects. Which do you want your kids to learn, America's history or the myth of American history? On and on this will go, helping dumb down our kids even further.

[LWolf]

74. This is how you get teachers to stick to scripted curriculums

and adopted textbooks. You make it dangerous to ever step outside of those boxes.

[madrchsod]

78. some of these comments/replies are really funny...

i get a smile on my face when i read it`s the teachers fault , the children should be fed community standards,or what ever the adults think best to control kids. it`s not the teachers who are the bricks in the wall it`s the parents who are afraid they might have to make a decision and the administration who will do anything to keep their jobs.

sorry folks, the kids are light years ahead of us and we better figure out how to catch up.

[madrchsod]

80. for an answer to your question i`ll give you this

google is the best thing since sliced bread.....:hi:

[Jefferson23]

82. "community controversy over reading selections"...then perhaps

this case can be legally challenged on another level that would ultimately protect the
students and teachers from the 500 assholes who petitioned the school board.

"pushing the limits of community standards" hmmmm.

I hope this is not the last we hear of this case.

[tblue37]

83. And yet the USSC was very concerned to protect the "free speech"

rights of corporations to pour unlimited amounts of secret cash into our political compaigns!

[lumberjack_jeff]

85. The individual with rights in the classroom is the student.

The student has a right to an appropriate education. If the teacher's curriculum/teaching techniques (in the judgment of the school board and the SPI) fails to meet that standard for any reason, the teacher's right to free speech shouldn't be a permissible defense.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

88. Nor should they

The idea that an employee has First Amendment protections in the performance of her job is insane.

Her non-renewal may have been improper for some other reason but not her First Amendment rights.

This is not controversial... does a teacher have a right to be paid to teach that the holocaust is a hoax?

This has nothing to do with whether or not her contract should have been renewed in general. She may have a case on some other basis.

On balance this will help more than hurt.

[Goblinmonger]

90. RIP Academic Freedom

All Hail computers reading a script to our students so they can "learn."

I do not give up all my First Amendment rights when I walk into the door of my school. Neither do students.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

92. I don't think she should have been let go.

I don't think she should have been let go.
The First Amendment claim is senseless.

Those two statements are not incompatible.

If the Board let her go for teaching Board approved curriculum items then that's something to argue about.

But what you personally decide to teach cannot be protected speech insofar as you cannot be terminated for it. Of course you can be terminated for teaching things that are protected speech.

How would you fire a teacher who insisted on leading the class in prayer? Religious expression is doubly protected by the First Amendment, yet somehow we (sometimes) manage to prevent fundy teachers from lecturing that the world is 5,000 years old in science class.

Teaching for a salary is not an expressive act, legally.

This teacher is surely in the right and got a raw deal and I hope she finds a better legal argument.

[Goblinmonger]

94. The religion argument is specious.

There are clear court cases that delineate what the line is as far as religion in public schools and what can and cannot be say by the teacher.

That is not the case with the matter at hand. Teachers have to teach the curriculum, but as long as they are doing that, they can (and should be allowed to) supplement that with additional materials. I have to teach Huck Finn. It isn't in the curriculum that I teach satire. But I think it is important and can fit it in while still meeting the curriculum requirements. So I do. We read Doonesbury cartoons and other contemporary examples of satire and discuss how they meet the definition of satire and if it works. Often it leads to miniature political discussion where all sides are welcome to discuss. It seems you would not like me to be able to do that. But it's a good lesson and falls within the purview of Academic Freedom. Conservative parents may not like Doonesbury but shouldn't we be able to discuss that cartoon as some of the best American satire out there? I don't shoot them down conservative students voice their problems with the satire. I, and I require the class to, listen respectfully and we have a discussion. To throw that aspect of education out the window would be a horrible thing.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

98. I am sure you are a fine teacher.

Here is what you are saying, or would be if you were addressing the topic:

"That is not the case with the matter at hand. Teachers have to teach the curriculum, but as long as they are doing that, they cannot be fired or otherwise disciplined for supplementing that with additional materials, provided those materials are constitutionally protected."

That is false on its face. You have no argument at all here.

But that doesn't mean you are not a fine teacher.

[Goblinmonger]

102. Are you disagreeing with what is in bold?

And if so, why? I don't have a constitutional right to teach my (lack of) religion to my students at a public school. That is clearly defined by case law. I don't have a constitutional right to push my political views on students at a public school. That is also clearly defined by case law. But I do have the ability to engage them in a discussion of Christian symbolism in Old Man and the Sea as a means to them understanding the theme of the work. That isn't in our curriculum that we cover that symbolism, but you would argue I don't have that right? I should be able to be fired or disciplined because a non-Christian doesn't want me talking about how Christ symbolism is a big part of American Literature? That just seems like an icky world to teach in.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

166. Okay, since you're not the only one reading that way I take some blame

We are talking about constitutional rights but folks want to read it as being about ideal teaching practice.

"I cannot be arrested for what I say."

This means that I cannot be arrested for anything I say.

If I said, "In the Soviet Union you could be arrested for what you said" it wouldn't make much sense to read that one would be arrested for saying, "Lovely weather we're having."

And saying, as a hypothetical, that a teacher cannot be disciplined for extra-circular teaching, in the context of this OP, means he cannot be disciplined for any extracurricular teaching.

If there is a First Amendment right to what you teach and you work for a public school then you cannot be disciplined for teaching ANYTHING except child pornography, state secrets and perhaps certain kinds of slander.

That is why there is most assuredly no such right.

I am 100% sympathetic to the teacher in question but there is no legitimate first amendment issue here. And if there were then you could teach anything whatsoever with impunity.

[madfloridian]

113. So you think a teacher can not supplement any additional stuff?

I mean come on now. There is rigid and then there is rigider.

We don't need educated teachers then anymore, we just need programmed robots.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

130. Wha?

I don't mind defending things I say but it's a bit much to ask me to defend things I don't say.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

165. Okay, I see the problem here

We are talking about constitutional rights but folks want to read it as being about ideal teaching practice.

"I cannot be arrested for what I say."

This is means that I cannot be arrested for anything I say.

If I said, "In the Soviet Union you could be arrested for what you said" it wouldn't make much sense to read that one would be arrested for saying, "Lovely weather we're having."

And saying, as a hypothetical, that a teacher cannot be disciplined for extra-circular teaching, in the context of this OP, means he cannot be disciplined for any extracurricular teaching.

If there is a First Amendment right to what you teach and you work for a public school then you cannot be disciplined for teaching ANYTHING except child pornography, state secrets and perhaps certain kinds of slander.

That is what it means to have a first amendment right in this instance, and it is an absurdity. Hence the inevitable ruling on a nonsensical argument.

From the lawyer of a teacher who I'm sure is great and I hope she sues successfully for a bunch of money or reinstatement.

[reggie the dog]

158. what is in bold

is my job to do as a teacher. i meet the state requirments then the kids also get some of my added expertise. how often are the students in contact with someone with a master's in history??? am i supposed to deny my training and expertese???

[BzaDem]

169. You are allowed to supplement if your school allows you to. But you don't have a constitutional

right to supplement if your school does not allow you to.

That is the crux of this issue. NO ONE is saying supplementing is a bad idea. If a school told you not to do so, NO ONE would be praising the school.

But it is simultaneously true that if you choose to supplement when your school tells you not to, you can be fired. There is nothing illegal about that. However good an idea supplementing the curriculum is, you do not have a first amendment right to supplement the curriculum when you are working for the school.

[reggie the dog]

157. the teacher in question did not teach an obvious falsehood

she had kids read a book about 2 lesbiens with a kid, that is something leagal in some states and is real. teaching that the holocaust is a hoax is disinformation and propaganda. there is a big big difference between lying to kids and getting kids to explore parts of reality that make some people uncomfortable.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

167. No, there is no difference.

The First Amendment does not protect the truth, or things you approve of. It protects expression.

There is no constitutional distinction between your examples.

[reggie the dog]

173. yes, that is why she used the 1st amendment

pretty much all of us teachers accept that free speech or not you can be fired for teaching outright lies to students. most of us teachers also expect that we can speak of other issues, such as homosexuality, and explain how there are indeed families in which there are 2 mothers and that it is legal in some states of the usa already. teaching an outright lie is breech of contract, teaching about gay people is not.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

93. Of course teachers shouldn't have free speech rights in the classroom.

It is entirely right that employers are allowed to set limits on what a teacher says in class, e.g. "you must teach the theory of evolution and not intelligent design" or "you must not launch into racist tirades".

Freedom of speech is a right it is entirely legitimate and reasonable to ask someone to sign a contract not to use.

In this specific case it looks like there might well be other valid grounds for contesting the dismissal, but the 1st ammendment certainly isn't one of them.

[jobycom]

95. Of course a teacher doesn't have full freedom of speech in the classroom.

That should go without saying. A teacher shouldn't be allowed to teach intelligent design instead of evolution, either. They have the same freedom of speech anyone else has outside the classroom, but inside they represent the government (people, same thing), and cannot use their power to force a religion or hate speech or any other form of forbidden material.

The problem here isn't the courtroom or the teacher's right--I don't believe anyone here would be protesting this if the teacher had been fired for saying something racist or homophobic--but that the school district is allowed to punish her for that specific list. Siddhartha is banned only because it's a non-Christian world view--it has great literary value. Most of the stuff on the banned books list is banned for false morality issues, issues of bigotry and hatred (of the banner, not the material), and issues of religious ideals that the school is banned from enforcing, anyway.

I don't want my kid taught by a conservative wacko twisting religion for his own goals, so I don't want freedom of speech in the classroom. The First Amendment was never meant to allow an employee to say whatever they wanted, it was about forbidding the government from banning the speech of citizens. It's the difference between the State Department telling a journalist "You can't publish that," and an editor saying "We're not going to run your story because we have one we like better." The first is censorship and a violation of the First Amendment, the second is a business decision. Nothing (so far) forbids that teacher from reading these books, or talking about them outside class, so it's not about free speech.

The problem is the book list, and what parameters the school board is allowed to set. As we can see from the Texas School Board, the goal of these decisions is more about brainwashing than about education. There should be national educational standards that local and state districts are forbidden to violate. They should be broad enough to allow for local variation, but they should be strict enough that racists and bigots on the Texas School Board or a local school board in Arkansas can't reject a textbook or fire a teacher for not being bigoted enough.

That's what the teacher should have sued over. Not freedom of speech, but freedom from government-established religious values. "Siddhartha" and "Heather Has Two Mommies" was banned for religious reasons only, and that should not be allowed. Government shall make no law establishing a religion, and therefore a law saying "You can't teach these books because they violate our religious values" is forbidden.

States rights, charter schools, school choice, school competition--this the goal of all of these. They want to find a way to keep the federal government from enforcing our rights in schools. They want schools segregated and our students taught to hate properly. They want to return us to the early 20th century, when Plessy v Ferguson was the law of the land, a teacher could be jailed for teaching evolution, and homosexuality was labeled as a mental illness to be wiped out by eugenics. That's not an issue of Freedom of Speech. The problem here wasn't that the teachers Freedom of Speech was abridged, but that human rights are still not considered absolute by society and by law. That's what we need to be fighting for.

[RobinA]

129. Uhmmmm...

The first amendment applies to the government. How do you get around this?

[jobycom]

131. I don't understand your point.

Are you saying because the school board is a government agency they can't limit what the teacher can teach? How do explain the ban on school-led prayers?

When the teacher is in her classroom, she is the government. She is the one you separate religion from.

If you're asking something else, I don't follow.

[BzaDem]

170. So what? You voluntarily signed a contract to work for the school. No one forced you to do so.

If you were forced to work as a teacher by law, and THEN they limited your first amendment rights, that might be one thing.

But you aren't forced to do so. You voluntarily decided to work for the school. If you want to express yourself in ways that the school is not letting you, you can voluntarily part ways with your school. There is absolutely no first amendment right to teach what you want against your school's wishes, and I don't think any court has ever held otherwise.

[reggie the dog]

159. banning books is fascist in and of itself

rather than sit down and talk with their kids about what is in the book (which may involve reading it themselves) the parents just ban it because they dont agree with it, well you know what, noting guarentees that our kids will share our worldview. if my daughter ends up being on the left like me i want her to do it by seeing the world and making her own judgement call. being presented with multiple ideas is a good thing so long as they are not taught that genocide/taking rights away from certain people are a good thing.

[jobycom]

178. Yeah.

I can understand that some books are considered inappropriate for a classroom assignment, especially for a certain age group. I doubt fifth graders have the sophistication to understand Chuck Palahniuk, for instance. And I can see a case for not assigning "Huckleberry Finn" or "Too Kill a Mockingbird" to junior high students, since many might lack the maturity to understand that the constant use of the N word in them is a criticism of the social and cultural systems represented, and might instead feel hurt or worse, pick the word up as a weapon.

But banning ideas, even ideas we disagree with, is wrong. You counter ideas with other ideas, not with bans. My kid's high school had a banned books assignment, where each student had to pick a book from a banned book list and do a report on it. They had to have a parent's signature and a parent could even refuse the assignment for the kid altogether. They sent permission slips home. I think that's pretty standard, and I wonder if the teacher above did that, too, or not.

Bottom line to me is that the teacher shouldn't have been released, but it's not an issue of free speech for the teacher in the classroom. It's an issue of a school board having too much power to limit a kid's education.

[madfloridian]

115. Why bother with hiring educated teachers if this be true.

Just hire people who follow the rules the best.

[Goblinmonger]

117. You wouldn't think you'd get that at DU, now would you?

People are so scared of Republicans saying something in a classroom that they want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[reggie the dog]

160. its not right wing teachers who get kids to go to the right

it is greed and consumer society.... rage against the machine says it in a song "i'm deep inside your children, they'll betray you in my name" i think he is singing about the greed culture pushed on us by greedy capitalist assholes.

Sleep Now in the Fire Lyrics
YAAAAAAAAA
The world is my expense
The cost of my desire
Jesus blessed me with its future
And I protect it with fire
So raise your fists
And march around
Just don't take what you need
I'll jail and bury those committed
And smother the rest in greed
Crawl with me into tomorrow
Or I'll drag you to your grave
I'm deep inside your children
They'll betray you in my name

Hey, hey
Sleep now in the fire

Hey, hey
Sleep now in the fire

The lie is my expense
The scope of my desire
The party blessed me with its future
And I protect it with fire
I am the Nina The Pinta The Santa Maria
The noose and the rapist
The fields overseer
The agent of orange
The priests of Hiroshima
The cost of my desire
Sleep now in the fire

Hey, hey
Sleep now in the fire

Hey, hey
Sleep now in the fire

For it's the end of history
It's caged and frozen still
There is no other pill to take
So swallow the one
That made you ill
The Nina The Pinta The Santa Maria
The noose and the rapist
The fields overseer
The agent of orange
The priests of Hiroshima
The cost of my desire
To Sleep now in the fire

[derby378]

146. Our state school board (in TX) is staffed with deliberate morons

And this court ruling just declared our school board to be God.

[BzaDem]

171. The court ruling just declared what was obvious in the first place.

Lots of things suck in life. That doesn't mean you have a constitutional right to correct every wrong.

This isn't to say that your school board is good. I have followed the Texas school board somewhat, and suffice to say what is going on there is disgusting.

It's just to say that the solution to your horrible school board is to throw out your horrible school board at your next regularly scheduled election.

Like it or not, we live in a democracy, and the majority does have power over the minority in terms of what gets taught (and over how much money you pay in taxes, and many other things). They can't ban you from saying what you want outside of school, and they can't ban you from leaving the school, but they can obviously prevent you from teaching what you want if you remain voluntarily employed with the school. This isn't to say that they should -- it's just to say that they legally can.

[petronius]

163. I think this is the right decision, although the board was wrong to cave to the parents

in my opinion. A diversity of reading is of value, but the overall curriculum is the purview of the Board. The voters in the distract have the responsibility to keep an eye on the board, or on whatever agency is supervising the for-profit school.

There are circumstances - for example if the board was requiring the teaching of something improper, or not adhering to over-riding state standards - for which a court would be the proper remedy, but I don't see how it's ever a First Amendment issue...

[Shireling]

164. I can't imagine

a parent objecting to their child reading "Siddhartha" by Herman Hesse or "Heather has Two Mommies". I think the parents would greatly benefit from reading "Siddhartha". The book might awaken them from their ignorance.

If the parents are upset from their child reading such great literature, they should have their children enrolled in a fundamentalist Christian school.


Mad floridian, thanks for posting this.

Heaven Help Us!!!! :wow: :hippie:

[madfloridian]

184. District had purchased the books the teacher used. Yet she was fired.

Yet the court found the teacher could be fired for using them.

"The nutshell version: A parent complained, the school initially backed the teacher, 500 angry parents packed a school board meeting, and despite the fact that the district had purchased the books in question for use in the classroom, the district crumbled. Citing problems with “communications and teamwork,” it sacked Evans-Marshall. In 2003, she sued, alleging her First Amendment rights had been violated.

The case spent the last seven years bouncing back and forth between the district court, which initially agreed to the district’s request to dismiss it, and the appellate court, which in 2005 refused to throw the case out, noting at that time that it appeared that Evans-Marshall's termination was "due to a public outcry engendered by the assignment of protected material that had been approved by the board."

Summary judgment granted to the district
Last week, the appeals court upheld a lower-court ruling granting summary judgment to the district. The reasoning: “When a teacher teaches, the school system does not regulate that speech as much as it hires that speech. Expression is a teacher's stock in trade, the commodity she sells to her employer in exchange for a salary. And if it is the school board that hires that speech, it can surely regulate the content of what is or is not expressed, what is expressed in other words on its behalf."

http://www.minnpost.com/learningcurve/2010/10/26/22698/court_rulings_offer_guidance_but_clarity_on_teachers_speech_rights_remains_elusive

So in this case the prejudices of the community won out even over material the district itself had purchased.