Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis - Student Freedom of Speech PPT.

511

Published on

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis - Student Freedom of Speech PPT

Dr. William Allan Kritsonis - Student Freedom of Speech PPT

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
511
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Student Freedom of SpeechWilliam Allan Kritsonis, PhD
  • 2. Loco Parentis Acting in Place of Parents School Authorities are acting in Loco Parentis and are not subject to the constraints of the 4th Amendment. Before the 1960’s regulations were very lose in this area and state courts rarely and federal courts almost never got involved in student vs. school affairs regarding this.
  • 3. Symbolic Speech (1969) Tinker vs. Des Moines~ Kids suspended for wearing armbands as a war protest.~ School violated 1st and 14th amendment rights~ Armbands were symbolic speech akin to pure speech.
  • 4. Tinker vs. Des Moines Student speech cant interrupt learning; the armbands did not. “Students and teachers do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”
  • 5. Lewd and Offensive Speech Bethel vs. Fraser (1986)~ Student was suspended for assembly speech based on sexual metaphor.~ 1st and 14th amendment rights not violated~ Schools can restrict speech that under minds the basic educational mission.
  • 6. School Sponsored Speech Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier (1988)~ Right of school to control school sponsored newspaper-experiences of 3 pregnant students and students going through divorce, in which principal took out the articles.~Articles not protected in 1st and 14th amendments
  • 7. School Sponsored Speechcont.~ School not required to promote controversial speech.~ School action must be reasonably related to a legitimate pedagogical concern.
  • 8. Key Points Tinker- Cant suspend for an armband unless disruption or invasion of others rights Bethel- Lewd speech is always unprotected. Hazelwood- School Sponsored content is unprotected.
  • 9. Protected Speech Must be actual or symbolic, meaningful to the school community, convey a message that is easy to understand.
  • 10. The End Dr. William Allan Kritsonis Professor PhD Program in Educational Leadership PVAMU/The Texas A&M University System

×