Statement of Academic Honesty: I have read and understand that plagiarism policy as outlined in the

Student Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct document relating to the Honesty/Cheating Policy. By
attaching this statement to the title page of my paper, I certify that the work submitted is my original work
developed specifically for this course and to the MSED program. If it is found that cheating and/or
plagiarism did take place in the writing of this paper, I acknowledge the possible consequences of the
act/s, which could include expulsion from the University of New England.

Teachers Rights
Tenure: Central to any discussion on teachers rights since it creates a property right for teachers
and with that comes constitutional protection (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).

After years of service, a teachers job is protected.

Each state is different in determining when a teacher receives tenure

Seniority: A concept counting the number of years an employee has worked in an organization.

Reduction in for (RIF) or lay-off, first to be laid off would be the last-hired faculty
member.

Freedom of Expression
Four questions:
1. Does the item being discussed relate to a public issue or is it a private or personal
concern?
2. Disruption- Did the speech interfere with the schools operation?
3. Did it harm anyones reputation?
4. If some statements were false, were there ways to know they were false?
Landmark case that used the check list:
Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205, Will County, (1968)
Hillman and Trevaskis quote:
Pickering, a teacher in Township High School District 205, Will County, Illinois, was
dismissed from his position by the appellee Board of Education for sending a letter to a
local newspaper in connection with a recently proposed tax increase that was critical of
the way in which the Board and the district superintendent of schools had handled past
proposals to raise new revenue for the schools (2014).
In the end proving his innocence Pickering received his job back.

Freedom of Expression cases: THE test:

1. Does the item being discussed relate to a public issue or is it a private or personal
concern?
2. Disruption- Did the speech interferes with the schools operation?
3. Did it harm anyones reputation?
4. If some statements were false, were there ways to know they were false?
5. Are there other sufficient causes independent of the protected speech that would cause the
dismissal?
6. Is the employee speaking pursuant to his/her job or is he/she speaking as a private
citizen?
7. Is the employee filing under federal law that has anti-retaliation protections?
Academic Freedom
The right of teachers to speak freely about their subjects, to experiment with new ideas, and to
select appropriate teaching materials and methods (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).
Factors in deciding academic freedom cases:
Age of students and maturity
Words and materials used
Purpose of the material and its relevance to the curriculum
Opinions of other educators as to the quality of the material
Effect on class (disruption test)
Cases using these factors were:
-Fowler v. Board of Education (1987), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to remove a
teacher from the position because of showing a movie not up to school policy.
-In the case Keefe v. Geanakos, (1969), the First Circuit Court of Appeals allowed this teacher to
return back to the classroom after showing a magazine with vulgar language in it.
Freedom of Association
Freedom of association is not explicitly stated in the United States Constitution, but has been
implied in the freedom to peaceably assemble and also with right to free speech in that
expressive association is part and parcel to being able to act on this right (Hillman and Trevaskis
2014).
Assessing teachers behavior:

Was the teacher proselytizing or indoctrinating?

What is the age and maturity of the students?
Did the speech cause disruption?

Personal Appearance:
E. Hartford Ed. Assoc. v Board of Education, (1977), Hillman and Trevaskis quote:
Richard Brimley is a public school teacher reprimanded for failing to wear a necktie
while teaching his English class. Joined by the teachers union, he sued the East Hartford
Board of Education, claiming that the reprimand for violating the dress code deprived
him of his rights of free speech and privacy (2014).
Balancing Test if required:

(Hillman and Trevaskis 2014)

Although if this was the scenario and happening today this probably would not even be a case
but in the decision for Mr. Brimley was lost and the district won the case.
Constitutional Privacy Rights
Three amendments:
Fourth Amendmentprotection against unreasonable searches and seizures
Ninth Amendmentaddresses rights that are not specifically listed in the Constitution
so here a personal privacy right has been construed to be present
Fourteenth Amendmentprotection against state action impairing personal liberties
without due process of law
Cases:
Gaylord v. Tacoma School District Number (1977)
Erb v. Iowa State Board of Public Instruction, (1974)
Governing Board v. Brennan, (1971)
Teachers Right with respect to Discrimination Protections:
Facial discrimination
Facial neutral discrimination
Federal laws:
Title VII
42 U.S.C (1981)

Pregnancy Discrimination Act (1978 Amendment to Title VII)

Equal Pay Act of 1963
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Section 50 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
The American with Disabilities Act of 1990

Race of National-Origin Discrimination

Lawsuits alleging race or national-origin discrimination may be filed under the Fourteenth
Amendment, Title VII, and 42 U.S.C. 1981 (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).

Ricci v. DeStefano(1982)

Sex Discrimination
Lawsuits alleging sex discrimination may be filed under the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VII,
the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act.
Boyd v. Harding Academy of Memphis, Inc., 88 F.3d 410 (1996)
Religious Discrimination
Lawsuits alleging religious discrimination may be filed under the First Amendment, the
Fourteenth Amendment, and Title VII (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).
Age Discrimination
Lawsuits alleging age discrimination may be filed under the Fourteenth Amendment and the
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) and includes people over the age of 40
(Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).

Age Discrimination is limited to hiring

It is difficult to prevail in an age discrimination claim

Gross v. FBL Financial Services, 129 S. Ct. 2343 (2009)

Disability Discrimination
Lawsuits alleging disability discrimination may be filed under 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).
To receive disability teacher must show:
That he/she has a disability
Otherwise qualified or, in other words, be able to perform the essential functions of the
job in spite of the disability, although reasonable accommodation at times may be
necessary (Hillman and Trevaskis 2014).

Winston v. Maine Technical College System (1993).

Mark which type of case this is:
Freedom of Expression
Academic Freedom
Freedom of Association
Personal Appearance (if dress/hair can be seen as symbolic speech, then
analyze under freedom of expression)
Privacy Rights

-Age of students and maturity

Lawyers arguments for the teacher
The English teacher was doing a lesson on persuasive writing. The students were at the High
School level of 10th grade and allowing the teacher to feel they were mature enough for this
assignment. The teacher had every right to open up their minds and express their feelings for this
lesson. The teacher had no intent to corrupt the students into becoming prejudice towards Jews.
The teacher felt the students were highly classified to fulfill this assignment and was most
definitely mature enough. Superintendent Wyngaard quotes I dont believe there was malice or
intent to cause any insensitivity to our families of Jewish faith proving she feels they were
mature enough to handle this assignment.
Lawyers arguments for the school
These children were absolutely too young for this assignment. Being only 15-17 years old and
having to argue and pretend that Jews are evil, and use solid rationale from government
propaganda to convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich is too much for these young
minds. This assignment could lead into a major race war throughout the school against Jews and
another minor Holocaust (minus the killing) could happen all over again. The Jewish students
could be treated differently, become bullied or a target, and that is not fair to any Jewish student
or his family. Superintendent Wyngaard if anything was being kind and looking to settle this
matter when quoting, I dont believe there was malice or intent to cause any insensitivity to our
families of Jewish faith. If she was supporting the teacher then we would not be here.

-Words and materials used

Lawyers arguments for the teacher
Academic freedom is the right of teachers to speak freely about their subjects, to experiment with
new ideas, and to select appropriate teaching materials and methods. (Hillman and Trevaskis,
2014). The teacher had the right for this lesson to be taught and was speaking freely for this
topic. There was no harm intended what so ever and the teacher came up with a creative lesson
for a persuasive paper. In the case Keefe v. Geanakos, (1969), the First Circuit Court of Appeals
allowed this teacher to return back to the classroom after showing a magazine with vulgar

language in it. The teacher realized their mistakes, removed the lesson and continued to be a
successful teacher. This should be the same scenario for this teacher. Mistakes happen every
day and just because this teacher took a chance with a touchy subject does not mean their racist
or should be fired.
Lawyers arguments for the school
The materials used in this lesson forces students to choose words and thoughts they should not
have or use towards Jews. It is an assignment that allows students to speak freely towards
Jews. What will the next assignment be on slavery for African Americans and mobsters for
Italians? Worst of all is the teacher wanted to students to use personal experiences which then
allows them to speak negatively towards Jewish people in the present not the past. This proves
the assignment is racist and the teacher should be removed from the position. In the case Fowler
v. Board of Education,(1987), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to remove a teacher
from the position because of showing a movie not up to school policy. This assignment is not
up to school code but this is not a movie. This is something more serious and the teacher should
be removed.

-Purpose of the material and its relevance to the curriculum

Lawyers arguments for the teacher
The purpose of the material was to open the minds of these 10th graders and get a true feeling of
what prejudice is. That is what this persuasive writing class is about. Again the assignment was
that Students were asked to watch and read Nazi propaganda, and then pretend their English
teacher was a fascist official whom they must convince of their loyalty. This is why the teacher
has a strong case against the district because it was an assignment to allow the students to be
open-minded.
Lawyers arguments for the school
This assignment had no relevance to the curriculum. All it did was allow the students to become
prejudice towards Jewish people and prejudice towards their Jewish classmates. If I were Jewish
and seen this assignment I would be outraged. The teacher should have thought harder on the
repercussions that would be unfolding with this assignment.

-Opinions of other educators as to the quality of the material

Lawyers arguments for the teacher
The teacher was creative and wanted to have a lesson that was persuasive and historical. Using
this cross curricular lesson was that creatively. The teacher wanted to allow the children to step
back into history and feel how the Third Reich was and towards Jews. The teacher wanted the
students to know how wrong it was to be prejudice and somewhat feel the hate towards Jews
during the time of the Holocaust. The teacher may have been out of line for using present
experiences but again was not trying to teach the children/students how the Jews were treated.

Lawyers arguments for the school

It is wrong for allowing students to argue that Jews are evil, and to use solid rationale from
government propaganda to convince the teacher of their loyalty to the Third Reich. It is wrong
for the teacher to allow 15-17 year old students to use recent personal experiences of their own
and lash out at the Jewish community for a persuasive writing course. If you want to use cross
curricular lessons the teacher has to come up with a way more creative lesson but unfortunately
did not.

-Effect on class (disruption test)

Lawyers arguments for the teacher
There was no disruption that occurred during this lesson. Some students refused to be part of
this lesson and were excused. When the faculty and staff became involved the teacher felt he/she
was being immediately misguided with the lesson and was soon labeled as prejudice. Being
labeled and removed from their job was acted on quickly with the administration allowing no
disruption in the class.
Lawyers arguments for the school
How can there not be disruption. This story made Time magazine! The proof is there how
disruptive this lesson was for the class, school, and community. If there were no disruption then
why did one-third of the 10th graders involved refuse to take part in the assignment? The
superintendent then had to go on record apologizing revealingly to the community and to all
Jewish families around in the town and basically the world. This proves how much disruption
this lesson caused for the school and the community.
Who would win this case?
As much as this teacher was using a cross curricular lesson for their persuasive writing class
unfortunately I feel will lose their job. Yes, you are supposed to be open minded when it comes
to writing but this was too much. The teacher should had realized this is not a college class and
that the students were far too immature for this lesson being only 15-17 years of age. Racism
although not as much a delicate subject as it once was no matter what is still apart of us today.
The teacher was out of line with this lesson and did not think of the repercussions and negative
impact it has on these young minds. If all the students took part of the assignment and supported
the teacher there may have been a dismissal of the case and lives would move on. But one third
of the students stood up for their rights against this assignment which proves that something just
was not right with it. The best case used to help the teacher is the case of Keefe v. Geanakos,
(1969). The case used against the teacher, which is a stronger case proving that it was the right

decision is the Fowler v. Board of Education, (1987). As much as I want to be open-minded with
this lesson and want to support this teacher I feel the district will win this case.

References

Hillman, S. J., & Trevaskis, D. (2014). School law: Legal framework, guiding principles, and litigated
areas. Swedesboro, NJ: The American Institute for History Education.