Artifact 2: Teachers Rights and Responsibilities 1

Artifact 2: Teachers Rights and Responsibilities

Lauren Hawthorne

EDU 210

College of Southern Nevada

Artifact 2: Teachers Rights and Responsibilities 2

African-American principal, Freddy Watts, and assistant principal, Jimmy Brothers are

appointed administrators at a primarily African-American school. The two administrators were in

a heated conversation with a Caucasian tenured teacher, Ann Griffin, when she asserted that she

hated all black folks. The principal was afraid that she would treat the students unfairly and

that she was not fit to teach them. In response to the controversial statement, he recommended

her dismissal.

Loeffelman v Board of Education of the Crystal City School District (2004) supports the

scenario. Teacher, Jendra Loeffelman, stated that interracial couples should be fixed so they

cannot have children in front of multiple biracial students. She was terminated for making

discriminatory statements in front of students. Loeffelman filed a suit against the school board

saying that her termination was unconstitutional for it violated her right to free speech. However,

her misconduct was a direct violation of Board policy. Because her remarks were a matter of

private opinion and not public concern, the dismissal was not in violation of First Amendment

rights.

Another case in support of Ann Griffins dismissal is Bethel School District No. 403 v.

Fraser (1986). Although this case regards a student, the principles can still be applied to the

scenario. Student, Matthew Fraser, was disciplined for making obscene and inappropriate

statements. He filed a suit for the violation of his First Amendment rights. The court asserted that

schools are responsible for instilling habits and manners of civility as values. Because Frasers

statements undermined such a responsibility, the First Amendment did not protect them.

Similarly, Ann Griffins inappropriate statements undermine the responsibility of the school to

instill such manners and habits in students.

Artifact 2: Teachers Rights and Responsibilities 3

Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) opposes the scenario. In this case, a teacher was

dismissed for his criticism of the school board and superintendent. The Supreme Court ruled that

his dismissal was unconstitutional for it violated his rights to free speech. They could not prove

that his statements had or would have any ramifications on the operation of the school. Similarly,

principal, Freddy Watts, has no evidence that Ann Griffins statement had any detrimental

repercussions on the operation of the school itself. Dismissal on the grounds of her statement

would violate her right to free speech.

A similar case, Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) involved the suspension of

three students in Des Moines, Iowa. The students were suspended for wearing black armbands

protesting the governments policy in Vietnam. Although the case also regards the dismissal of

students and not teachers, the ruling decision applies to teachers as well. The court upheld the

decision that both teachers and students have a right to free speech. Without substantial evidence

that Ann Griffins actions would interfere with her role as an educator, her dismissal would be

unconstitutional.

Based on the rulings of similar court cases, I come to the conclusion that Ann Griffins

dismissal could be seen as a violation of her First Amendment rights. Although her statements

were appalling and offensive, there is not sufficient evidence that such opinions would affect her

performance as a teacher.
Artifact 2: Teachers Rights and Responsibilities 4

References

Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).

Loeffelman v. Board of Education of the Crystal City School District, 134 S.W.3d 637, 645

(Mo.App. E.D.2004).

Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968).

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969).