1

Artifact Two

Artifact Two Teachers Rights and Responsibilities

Melissa Villalba

College of Southern Nevada

Professor Nancy Webb

 2
Artifact Two

Administrators, Freddie Watts, and Jimmy Brothers v. Ann Griffin

Two administrators and a teacher were having a heated argument about personal

dispositions towards certain colors of people on a high school campus. Ann Griffin who is the

teacher made a negative skin color remark against all black people to one or more of the

African-American administrators which lead her to be charged with possible dismissal from her

job. The principle (whose skin color is not mentioned) recommended to the school board that the

Miss. Griffin be fired for incompetency and suspicions on not being able to handle her classes

effectively with her disposition.

The first side of the scenario I am discussing will be the side of Miss. Griffin. The court

case I am citing is on page forty-nine Pickering vs. Board of Education which is about a woman

who was fired by the school board for speaking her mind about a school tax levy law. The ruling

was against the school board and for the woman with the reasoning that the school board violated

the teachers freedom of speech civil liberty. The first amendment being that congress cannot

make any law prohibiting the freedom of speech n matter how offensive. Miss. Griffin should not

be fired for this exact reason, just because she stated her offensive disposition does not mean that

she should be fired because she is protected by the constitution. If people were fired all the time

for offending people then there would be no workers. Miss Griffin has the liberty to have any

disposition as long as she does not harm anyone and she clearly did not in the scenario. She

should be transferred to a predominately Caucasian school at worst. The women in the Pickering

case won her case because she spoke out and did not harm, and so should Miss Griffin because

just because someone does not like what you say does not mean they can fire you for it.
 3
Artifact Two

Tinker v Des Moines (1969) is case about some students who wore disruptive armbands

to school in order to protest the Vietnam War and were suspended while the mother of the

children filed suit against the school board on freedom of speech grounds and won. This is

related to the Griffin scenario in that Miss Griffin was just exercising her right to freedom of

speech. And again the armbands were thought to be disruptive by the school board just like Miss

Griffins dispositional comments were but they were allowed because they were not harming

anyone, only offending. So Miss Griffin should be transferred and not fired or dismissed as the

euphemism is said in the scenario because the school board cannot and should not take any

position on her feelings toward anyone they can only accommodate her to a new school where

her disposition will not offend anyone. As for the principles charge of incompetency, they will

have a really hard time proving that since she doesnt like black people she cannot do her job

because clearly she can, people do it every day even though they do not voice their opinions like

she did. She can still treat her students fairly as well because she voiced her opinion to the

administrators and not to the students, clearly showing that she takes her job seriously when she

steps into the classroom even though she feels another way in her private mind.

The second side of the scenario will be me arguing for the dismissal of Miss Griffin on

the principles charge of incompetency and treating students fairly. A case that is relevant here is

the Gil Voigt case where this teacher Mr. Voigt made a negative skin color remark to a student

about the president and was put on suspension for it. This should have been the case because

clearly what we learn in schools is to be tolerant towards other skin colors on the logic that

treating someone different just because of their skin color is very shallow and shows lack of

cultural and skin color sensitivity education. Education being the key term here in that these

teachers Voigt and Griffin, are teachers, they are representatives of the educational system of the
 4
Artifact Two

United States in general and need to act like it by thinking before they speak. If a teacher cannot

treat all skin colors equally then they have proved to be incompetent because it is in the job

description of a teacher not only be tolerant but to teach tolerance. These teachers were not

harming anyone but they were degrading the name of teachers everywhere and making it look

like they are very un-qualified to be where they are at. This Mr. Voigt and Miss Griffin both feel

the same way about black people and so they should stay away from them by not teaching

them, it is that simple.

The next case that is Timothy Olmsted vs. the St. Paul school board where this teacher

Mr. Olmsted stated some negative skin color remarks against black people as a whole just as

Miss Griffin did in the scenario. Mr. Olmsted eventually resigned and is therefore not facing any

disciplinary action but is actually receiving some grievance pay and denies all charges. Many

accusations were against him and charges brought up but none stuck unfortunately (if he really

did say what they say he did). This is just another case of a teacher stepping outside of his or her

bounds as an educator to make personal disrespectful comments on behalf of a minority that he

or she does not have a right to (as a teacher) make comments about. As a teacher an educator is

supposed to be un-biased and stand aside on questions of personal opinion when it comes to

things like discrimination because it is un-reasonable to do so. This Mr. Olmsted and Miss

Griffin obviously have been not fair in their treatment of grades or whatever their teaching

responsibilities which is shown by their personal opinions towards some of their classmates. If

they feel this way towards certain colors of people for no good reason then whos to say they

have been fair in their classrooms before the comments? They should both be fired on grounds of

incompetency because they obviously show a disregard for an educators true code of enforcing

tolerance and frowning on the ignorance the leads to discrimination.

 5
Artifact Two

I think that Pickering vs. Board of Education is the best case that represents the issue with

Miss Griffin and her comments towards black people in general. This is because I think that

the teacher Miss Griffin should not be fired just as the teacher Mrs. Pickering should not have

and for the same reasons, because they were harming no one. Again, offense is not harm and I

think that if we let one teacher go for offense the scope of offense gets widened more and more

every case so that eventually we will be firing teachers for the smallest little word of offense like

Hitler did to his people. Miss Griffin should not be at that school because it is a predominately

African-American school and she does not like them for some reason, just like Mrs. Pickering

did not like the school boards tax laws. But Miss Griffin should be transferred or at least

punished minimally for voicing unnecessary offensive comments in an educational environment.

 6
Artifact Two

References

Cadet, D. (n.d.). Gil Voigt, Ohio Teacher, Fired After Telling Student 'We Don't Need Another

Black President' Retrieved September 11, 2015.

Michael D. Clark, The Cincinnati Enquirer. (2014, April 18). Ohio teacher loses job for racist

comment. Retrieved September 13, 2015.

TINKER v. DES MOINES INDEPENDENT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT. (n.d.).

Retrieved September 12, 2015.

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). School law for teachers: Concepts and applications. Upper

Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.

Zhao, E. (n.d.). Timothy Olmsted, St. Paul Teacher Accused Of Discriminating Against Black

Students, Sees Case Move To Federal Court. Retrieved September 13, 2015.