Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 9

1

Freedom of Speech in Schools

Paulina Chyrk
Dr. Bruner
University of St. Thomas

First Amendment

Freedom of speech: what is it and exactly how much freedom do we as citizens have in
this country? Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment of the United States which
reads, 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 (First
Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw). When it comes to freedom of speech and schools,
students enjoy the same constitutional rights as adults; therefore, the court system guarantees
their protection of these rights. This constitutional right is very crucial especially in todays day
and age with all of the new technological features that allow students to express themselves with
the touch of a button. In addition to schools worrying about the legal ramifications of protests,
demonstrations, and walk-outs, they must now worry about expressions held by students online
in this digital age. Essex says it best when he claims, This freedom [freedom of speech],
however, does not include the license to exercise such rights in a manner that creates material of
substantial disruption to the educational process (p. 54). In other words, although students are
protected under this amendment, this privilege should not be abused.
Freedom of Expression
Perhaps the most famous case involving the First Amendment, freedom of speech, is the
Tinker case. This case involved three public school students who wore black armbands to school
in order to protest the governments policy in Vietnam. The students were suspended for
wearing the armbands even though there was no evidence that it disputed the learning
environment. The students decided to fight back against the schools decision to punish them
claiming that it was unconstitutional and their rights had been violated. The Supreme Court
ruled in their favor claiming that the schools ruling was unconstitutional because the students

were protesting peacefully and this was an expression of their opinion which is protected under
the First Amendment (Essex, p. 54).
Protests, demonstrations, walk-outs, and marches are also considered forms of freedom of
expression. Students are allowed to participate in these forms of expression under certain
circumstances, of course. According to Essex, Because school officials are charged with
protecting the health and safety of students and providing an orderly school environment, they
may regulate the time, place, and manner of conducting these activities (p. 57). In a popular
court case, four students in California walked out of their school in order to partake in a protest
regarding immigration reform measures. The vice principal harshly threatened to punish the
students upon their return to campus (but the said punishments never took place). The students
retaliated against the school because they felt their constitutional and state laws were violated.
The case reached the U.S. Court of Appeals, but unfortunately, the court ruled that no First
Amendment retaliation claim could be made on the threats of discipline if the punishment never
took place (Essex, p. 57). School administrators should keep in mind that although students are
allowed to express their opinions in a protest or demonstration, these activities should not
disrespect any authority or cause a destruction of property or violation of school rules.
Many campuses throughout the nation have a school-sponsored publication that is written
by the students. The school newspaper is a place where students are allowed to express their
opinions on different matters; however, students should be mindful when it comes to expressing
their opinions. There is a slight difference when it comes to a school newspaper that is part of
the schools curriculum and one that is not and that being that students may have more freedom
in expressing opinions in the newspaper that is not supported by curriculum, however, it should
not cause disruption to the learning environment nor defamation. Typically, school newspapers

include guidance of a faculty advisor, but their responsibility should include advice form, style,
grammar, and appropriateness of material. The final draft decisions should be left in the hands of
the school editor, usually a student. The leading case of Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier
depicts freedom of expression in a school publication. In this case, a high school principal did
not allow the publication of a school newspaper because it included articles that profiled three
pregnant students. The principal did not want the pregnant girls identity to be revealed because
of the articles and he also felt that the articles information on sexual activity and birth control
were inappropriate topics of discussion for some of the younger students on campus. The
students retaliated, claiming that their First Amendment rights were violated. In the end, the U.S.
Supreme Court ruled that the principal did not violate the students rights by ordering certain
information to be removed (Essex, p. 59). All in all, when it comes to school sponsored
publications, school administrators should ensure that responsible student editors are chosen to
make certain that school newspapers don't violate the educational process, and principals should
also develop justifiable policies governing the publication of school newspapers.
In addition to school-sponsored newspapers, some students also partake in nonschoolsponsored newspapers. These publications are not endorsed by the schools, but instead, are
printed at students expense away from school. Although school officials are not responsible for
what is printed in nonschool-sponsored newspapers, restrictions may be imposed on these
publications. According to Essex, students have the right to distribute underground
newspapers as long as the distribution does not interfere with normal school activities or create
material disruption (p. 60). In the case of Bystrom v. Fridley High School, the publication
included some vulgar and profane material that ranged from the schools policy on students
leaving campus during lunch, to an article regarding vandalism that occurred at a teachers

house. One day when the publication was being passed around, it sparked a huge conversation
among students in class to the point that teachers had to stop teaching due to the disruption. The
school officials suspended the students due to one of the articles in the publication that advocated
violence on teachers homes. The students filed a charge against the school, but the court
supported the school due to the school rule that prohibited indecent and vulgar printing of
information (Bystrom v. Fridley High School). When it comes to nonschool-sponsored
newspapers, school administrators should keep in mind that school policies regarding these
publications should not be vague and broad so that there is no misinterpretation of the policy.
Freedom of Expression and the Digital Age
With such easy access to so many forms of technology in our society today, it puts a
whole new spin on freedom of expression because it so easily accessible. According to Blacher
and Weaver, The challenge for educators is to determine when student speech whether
physically spoken within the schoolhouse walls or delivered through some form of social media
should result in disciplinary action (p. 82). Even though students have access to technology
outside of school which allows them to partake in social media, this does not allow schools to be
off the hook that easily. When students are using social media as a form of expression, there are
times, not always, that that expression could lead to forms of bullying. Just because it does not
happen at school that does not mean it does not disrupt the learning environment at school.
Many times students involved in a cyberbullying incident off-campus, come to campus with it
still on their minds, and then they get their friends involved (if their friends haven't already
witnessed it themselves), and before anyone knows it, it is the talk of the school. So how can we
ensure that our students are being protected and their learning environment not disrupted in this
day and age? Blacher and Weaver claim that courts must first not place a distinction between

free speech in person and free speech that occurs on the Internet. They say, Student electronic
communications originating off-campus, if they concern other students or staff in the school, will
absolutely make their way to the campus and influence the daily life of the school and students
(p. 84). Next, they assert that courts should consider adopting a public concern requirement
for students. This public concern requirement would allow for schools to take the appropriate
disciplinary action when students engage in online, off-campus activity that is derogatory and
serves no public purpose. Third, Blacher and Weaver also claim that courts should really
reconsider the definition of substantial disruption and legally understand what is meant by
individual and institutional harm. These researchers claim that, Courts appear to treat the
"substantial disruption" standard as requiring essentially a riotous reaction from students, an
immediate and significant call upon district resources, or even some kind of threat of physical
harm or property damage (p. 85). The courts dont seem to understand that free speech online
can cause physical harm or property damage as well. Finally, courts should schools the ability to
discipline students for speech regardless of whether it is on or off campus. Blacher and Weaver
assert, These standards allow a school to discipline students for engaging in harsh juvenile
ridicule directed at a particular individual, ganging up on a target with inappropriate harsh
comments, and communicating in a mode that violates "habits and manners of civility (p. 85).
All in all, these researches claim that the courts are living in the past and instead must live in the
present with all of the forms of technology and the easy accessible Internet.
In a perfect world, the courts would agree and pass new laws that allow schools rights to
take disciplinary action due to violation of freedom of speech off-campus. However, only time
will tell if anything will be done on this issue. In the meantime, researchers Brunner and Lewis
say that there is something school administrators can do to help the school community decrease

digital harassment and cyberbullying, and they say it all begins with a conversation. School
administrators should start by recognizing and addressing the many concerns that educators,
parents, and students face when it comes to digital harassment and cyberbullying. Next, school
administrators should educate the school community on different aspects of digital harassment
including different signs of perpetrators and signs of victimization. Brunner and Lewis claim
that these topics of discussions can take place in class meetings, parent newsletters, parent
education events, school Web sites, and forums for students (p. 48). Finally, a plan of action
should be in place on campuses to help with digital harassment and cyberbullying incidents.
Brunner and Lewis say, School officials should promise parents and students that they will
exercise due diligence when investigating every occurrence of bullying, harassment, or
intimidation and will intervene in all situations when legally appropriate to do so (p. 48).
School administrators should also put in place a plan of action for his/her staff members to report
any incident of digital harassment and cyberbullying.
In the following court case dealing with cyberbullying, student, Megan Meier, committed
suicide after she was cyberbullied by a classmate and her mother. The classmate and her mother
created a fake MySpace account acting as a fictitious sixteen-year-old boy whom Megan was
attracted to. I firmly believe that if school officials educated the school community about the
dangers and consequences of digital harassment and cyberbullying, Megans life could have been
spared (Essex, p. 112).
Conclusion
The student code of conduct in our district does not specifically have a section for
freedom of speech or freedom of expression. It does, however, list the ramifications for

students that partake in incidents of bullying, cyberbullying, and dress violations, as students use
their clothing as a form of expression. The student code of conduct does say that bullying and
cyberbullying will not be tolerated and it lists the appropriate consequences that will take place
in the case of these actions. Clothing must not be offensive or cause a learning disruption in the
classroom. I did not realize that our student code of conduct or the employee handbook do not
specifically include information on freedom of expression which was surprising to me.
Students are allowed the same constitutional rights as adults, therefore they are entitled to
their own opinions however they wish to express them. What students and school administrators
need to keep in mind though is that if the educational process or learning environment is
disrupted due to the expression of ones opinions, appropriate disciplinary action can and will be
taken. Schools should be a safe place for students and more often than not, teachers welcome
controversial and debatable topics in the classroom. However, opinions and discussions should
always be mindful.

Works Cited
Blacher, M., & Weaver, R. (2013). The Internet, Free Speech, and Schools: Why the Courts
Have It Wrong and Why Parents and Schools Need to Get It Right. Independent School, 72(2).
Brunner, J., & Lewis, D. (2010). It Begins with a Conversation. Principal Leadership, 11(1), 4448.

BYSTROM v. FRIDLEY HIGH SCHOOL. (n.d.). Retrieved July 13, 2015, from http://
www.leagle.com/decision/19872073686FSupp1387_11869.xml/BYSTROM v. FRIDLEY HIGH
SCHOOL
Essex, N.L. (2012). School Law and the Public Schools: A Practical Guide for
Educational Leaders. Sixth Edition.
First Amendment - U.S. Constitution - FindLaw. (n.d.). Retrieved July 13, 2015, from http://
constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1.html

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi