uncomfortably numb: Teacher loses job for saying peace

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Teacher loses job for saying peace

National School Board Association (NSBA) silences all teachers
by Deb Mayer
Global Research, October 19, 2006
Global Research Editor's note
We bring to the attention of our readers the case of a community school teacher who has being fired for raising the issue of the war in Iraq in her classroom. The National School Board Association is arguing that First Amendment rights do not hold in the classroom:
1.A public school teacher’s curricular speech is per se not speech on a matter of public concern and therefore is not protected by the First Amendment
2. A teacher’s classroom speech is part of his or her official job duties and therefore is not protected by the First Amendment.
The conclusion of the amicus brief filed by the National School Board Association with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of the school district in Indiana is as follows:
"Permitting K-12 teachers to express personal opinions in class under the guise of academic freedom is less justifiable, because elementary and secondary students are more likely to be a captive audience with significantly less individual choice and control over the instruction to which they are exposed than college students. Stated more concretely, college students are better able to avoid through course selection and class attendance a professor who exercises his or her academic freedom rights in a manner the student finds offensive. In the public K-12 school district context, school boards consider parental input in setting curriculum and may allow parents to opt their children out of certain classes, such as sex education. But in general, parents and students who choose to attend public schools have more limited flexibility in selecting teachers and courses than college students. School boards and administrators assign teachers to teach specific subjects to specific grades at specific schools. In many instances, school administrators assign students to particular schools—and often particular classes and teachers. And, as the facts of this case illustrate, schools are not always able to grant parents’ requests to transfer their children from a particular teacher’s class, regardless of the parents’ reasons. It would be both impractical and impolitic for school districts to accommodate parental requests that their children only be taught by teachers who share the parents’ ideology. Not only would school districts have to spend countless hours rearranging students’ schedules, they might also be reduced to hiring teachers based on ideological viewpoint rather than professional competence. In short, a K-12 teacher deviating from the curriculum and injecting classroom discussion with personal opinions disregards parents’ expectations and robs school boards of their authority to implement a uniform curriculum of their choosing.
To date, this court has not recognized any academic freedom rights for elementary and secondary school teachers. Palmer, 603 F.2d 1271 (holding a teacher had no First Amendment right to refuse to participate in various patriotic activities); Webster, 917 F.2d 1004 (holding a teacher had no First Amendment right to teach non-evolutionary theories of creation). Even in the higher education context, this court has stated that deviating from the curriculum is not protected by academic freedom rights. Clark v. Holmes, 474 F.2d 928, 931 (7th Cir. 1972) (denying college professor’s claim that academic freedom allows him "to override the wishes and judgment of his superiors and fellow faculty members as to the proper content of the required health course"). This court should similarly decline to give constitutional significance to speech in the K-12 context where no academic freedom rights are established.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons explained above, Amici urge this court to affirm the district court decision and to preserve the authority and discretion of school boards to determine and implement curricula and ensure that teacher expression advances the adopted program of studies."
For the complete transcript click: http://www.nsba.org/site/pdf.asp?TP=/site/docs/39200/39151.pdf
The implications of this case are farreaching and we call upon people across the US to take a stand to protect freedom of speech in America's classrooms.

For details on how you can support Deb Mayer, click here