TEACHING SIDDHARTHA: UPDATES ON FREEDOM TO CHOOSE CONTENT AND METHODS Nancy C. Patterson Bowling Green State University NCSS Academic Freedom Community

YOU BE THE JUDGE Sterzing v. Ft. Bend SD, 1972 Texas Teacher states he is not opposed to interracial marriages

SHOULD TEACHERS BE ALLOWED TO DISCUSS CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES? Sterzing v. Ft. Bend SD, 1972 Reinstated in position Teacher won at federal level: “conducted within the gambit of professional standards” because neither interfered with discipline nor unfairly indoctrinated students

YOU BE THE JUDGE Mailloux v. Kiley, 1971 Massachussetts

SHOULD SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHERS BE ALLOWED TO USE CONTROVERSIAL LANGUAGE? Mailloux v. Kiley, 1971 Reinstated in position Method did not disturb the students, the topic of taboo words was relevant to the subject, and the word “fuck” was relevant to the topic of taboo words.

YOU BE THE JUDGE Lacks v. Ferguson, 1998 Missouri Teacher allows students to use street language in the performance of student-created plays.

Lacks v. Ferguson, 1998 Missouri Not reinstated to position Violated school policy; the school board has a "legitimate academic interest in prohibiting profanity by students in their creative writing."

YOU BE THE JUDGE Mayer v. Monroe County Cmty. Sch. Corp, 2007 Indiana Teacher says she would honk for peace.

TO WHAT DEGREE CAN TEACHERS EXPRESS THEIR OWN POLITICAL VIEWS? Mayer v. Monroe County Cmty. Sch. Corp, 2007 Not reinstated to position Teachers in public schools have no constitutional right to express personal opinions in the classroom. A teacher's speech is "the commodity she sells to an employer in exchange for her salary.”

THE FIRST AMENDMENT Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

A CADEMIC F REEDOM The right of an instructor to teach subject matter within his or her professional competence without undue restraints or interference from school administrators or other officials.

PICKERING V. BOARD OF EDUCATION, Address a matter or matters of public interest and concern? 2. Demonstrate that his or her speech was a significant or motivating factor in the employer's decision? 3. Balance the interests of the individual commenting on matters of public concern as a citizen and the public employer's interest in "promoting the efficiency of public service?"

NEA’S STANCE

GARCETTI V. CEBALLOS, 2006 “when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.”

MORE ON CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS Evans-Marshall v. Board of Educ. of the Tipp City Exempted Village Sch. DistEvans-Marshall v. Board of Educ. of the Tipp City Exempted Village Sch. Dist, 2010 Not reinstated to position "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."

MAJORITY OPINION “Even to the extent academic freedom, as a constitutional rule, could somehow apply to primary and secondary schools, that does not insulate a teacher’s curricular and pedagogical choices from the school board’s oversight, as opposed to the teacher’s right to speak and write publicly about academic issues outside of the classroom.”

DISSENTING OPINION IN GARCETTI The attorney’s speech was governed by “canons of the profession,” which regulate speech independently and which obligate the attorney to speak under certain circumstances. “Where professional and special constitutional obligations are both present,” Breyer wrote, “the need to protect the employee’s speech is augmented, the need for broad government authority to control that speech is likely diminished, and administrable standards are quite likely available.”

TEACHING THE PASS WAY Join the NCSS AF community Negotiate for strong contract language and policies

S TAYING O UT OF T ROUBLE Align your lessons with the standards Inform your administration Present both sides Seek appropriate permissions Refrain from the use of profanity Teach using an NCSS lens

L ENSES THROUGH WHICH TO T EACH ABOUT C ONTROVERSIAL T OPICS Historical Constitutional Sociological Anthropological Public Issues

Nancy Patterson Bowling Green State University