Teachers’ Rights and Responsibilities

Stephanie Vivas

CSN Education 210

 The United States of America was founded on the belief that every American should be

treated equally. Our history shows just how much we have succeeded in making this belief true;

from giving woman the right to vote to our most recent right to same sex marriage.

Unfortunately, there are many cases to this day that are being brought to the courts due to a

violation of someone’s rights or from discrimination. The following case regards the decision a

principal took after a teacher made a racist remark towards her colleagues. We will discuss why

the principal’s decision should be dismissed as well as why it should be affirmed. Ann Griffin

was a Caucasian teacher working in a predominantly black high school. She was having a

conversation with two administrators which were African-American, Freddie Watts, principal,

and Jimmy Brothers, assistant principal. The conversation escalated and Griffin stated to the two

administrators that she “hated all black folks.” The principal decided to dismiss the teacher based

on concerns that she may not have the ability to treat students fairly. Her remark also caused

negative reactions among many colleagues.

We can look into the case of Loeffelman vs. Board of Education of the Crystal City

School District (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division 5, 2004) where the teacher

was terminated by the school district on grounds that she violated her contract with the Board of

education when she made a comment against biracial students. Loeffelman tried to argue that she

did not violate her contract. The comments she had made were against interracial couples having

children. She stated she was against interracial couples having children. Loeffelman made these

comments in front of her classroom where biracial students were present. Since this did in fact

have an effect on some of her students the court affirmed with the decision the school board took

to terminate her employment. She did not show enough evidence to prove that her comments did

not effect any of her students. Also there were witnesses that stated she did in fact make those
statements. This case shows how words against a certain group of people can have an effect on

students especially when it is coming from someone they rely on to learn from. Any type of

racial comment that effects students is not permissible and disciplinary action will follow.

Contrary to the above case the following case states how termination of employment over

a remark or statement that was not made in front of students is too harsh of a punishment.

Christine Rubino v. New York City Department of Education (Thomson Reuters, 34 Misc.3d

1220(A), 2013) issue was that Rubino was terminated from the school district because of a post

made on a social media website. She made a comment against 5th grade students stating, “after

today, I’m thinking the beach sounds like a wonderful idea for my 5th graders! I HATE THEIR

GUTS! They are all the devils (sic) spawn!” Although this comment was disturbing the court

found that since it was not made intentionally and directly at the students; Rubino should not

have been terminated. The message was made on a personal facebook page that could only be

seen by friends and family. The court stated that the punishment was too harsh and a different

penalty shall take its place.

Another case that allowed the teacher to get there teaching license back was the case of

Kyana Fennell, Lawanda Fennel-Kinney vs. Marion Independent School District; Glenn Davis;

Cynthia Manley ( Document 00513257817, 2015). In this case several students sued the school

district because of several occasions where they were discriminated against based on race. They

go on to state that students as well as teachers discriminated against them. The school district

provided enough evidence that showed the school district took disciplinary action against those

students and teachers that were involved in discrimination towards the plaintiffs. The court

decided that the school did not intentionally subject students and took the necessary steps to stop

any further discrimination towards the plaintiffs.

 These court cases show that substantial evidence is needed in order to make a decision of

such high value to a teacher’s career. In regards to our scenario, since we know that this was an

argument amongst teachers where there were no students involved; I believe that the teacher

should not be terminated. There is not enough evidence of said remark. Also, the teacher did not

intentionally make this remark to effect any students. This remark was made amongst colleagues.

I believe a lesser disciplinary action should be taken. The biggest argument the teacher would

have if they terminate her is there just is not enough evidence to terminate her employment. In

conclusion Griffin should be able to keep her job and the case be dismissed.
 References

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division five, Loeffelman v. Board of Education of
the Crystal City School District (2004). Retrieved from http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mo-court-of-
appeals/1109760.html

Thomson Reuters, Campus Research, 34 Misc.3d 1220(A) (2013). Retrieved from

https://edlawfaqs.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/rubino-v-city-of-new-york.pdf

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Fifth Cicuit, No. 14-51098, Document:
00513257817 (2015). Retrieved from http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions%5Cpub%5C14/14-
51098-CV0.pdf