This post is about students and the rightful place for the expression of their voice. As a passionate Social Studies educator (history, geography, political science, economics, psychology, sociology, etc.), one of my primary goals is for students to think about, explore, discuss/debate, and compare the sundry aspects of human interaction across time and space. Further, I want my students to take those lessons and apply them to their personal lives and the collective lives of society for the purpose of making the world a better place. Do I proscribe for them a specific path or set of ideas that will create the perfect world? NO! The "whys" are for them to decide as are the "hows" they choose to use.
In December of 1965, Mary Beth Tinker, her brother John, and a small group of their friends chose to shift their ideas regarding the Vietnam War from conversation to action. They all wore black arm bands to their schools in Des Moines, Iowa, as a protest against the war. (Again, this post is neither pro or con regarding the merits of the arm band protest nor the war in Vietnam.) The students were coerced into removing their arm bands in the face of disciplinary action from the school district. The students' families believed that their students' First Amendment rights were being unnecessarily violated. Following years of decisions and appeals, the Tinker v. Des Moines case landed before the U.S. Supreme Court. In their landmark 1969 decision, the Court ruled 7 to 2 that the students' rights were indeed violated.
The Court did not rule that any/all protests by students at school were automatically protected by the First Amendment. The Court, reasonably, recognized that there would plausibly be protests which could unnecessarily disrupt the educational mission of a school and/or hinder other students from their rights in obtaining an education. While there are limits surrounding students protesting in the educational setting, those peaceful protests which do not overtly disrupt the educational process are protected.
For more information on the Tinker case, click here OR click here.
Questions surrounding student led protests within the educational context have come back to the forefront in the aftermath of the shooting which occurred at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14, 2018. In the shooting, 17 students and staff members from the high school lost their lives. Within the immediate aftermath of the shooting, some students from Stoneman Douglas gained notoriety by their appearances within national media. Their efforts inspired a student based movement seeking new legislation to prohibit specific types of weapons. The movement called for a 17-minute student walkout from class at 10:00 AM on March 14th as a peaceful protest against gun violence and as a demonstration in memory of the 17 individuals who lost their lives one month prior.
Again, without focusing on the merits of gun rights, gun control, or the Second Amendment, the question many schools began grappling with was whether or not prohibiting a protest/demonstration in the form of a walkout from class would violate the Constitution in light of Tinker and subsequent Court decisions on student protests. Many school administrators found ways of partnering with student leaders of a walkout at their local school to allow the walkout in a way that limited disruption to the educational day beyond the 17-minutes and in a context that provided as much safety as possible to students participating in the walkout (and/or any counter protests led by students with differing ideologies). Other schools have opted to try and punish their local students for participating in the walkout. It may very well be the beginning of another Court case to clarify when disruptions to the school day are considered acceptable or not. To what extent does a 17-minute walkout truly impact a school-year's worth of education? If a 17-minute walkout is unreasonable to the Court, what about a 45-minute student led pep rally??
I attended the March 14th walkout at one of the junior high schools with which I work. I wasn't there to spy and report on any nefarious intent from either the student protestors nor the local administration. I had already learned that the students who were leading the movement at this school were working with the local principal to provide the most meaningful 17-minutes possible. The focus of the walkout was remembering the 17 individuals who had lost their lives. There was nothing inflammatory presented. I was proud of the way all participating students expressed themselves.
Over the course of this weekend, my heart was stirred to see the images of students across this country collectively voicing their concerns on issues of which they are passionate--again, I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the nature of the March for Our Lives. When you look at the statistics of voting and other forms of civic engagement, the participation rates of those aged 25 and below are dreadfully low even amidst a decades worth of efforts to get this demographic more engaged. I hope that today's students, regardless of their ideological bend, are inspired to think critically about a wide range of important issues and to act within the appropriate ways so as to bring meaningful change to the societies in which they live--especially to exercise their right to vote!
Most schools have as part of their mission statement or guiding philosophy the idea of helping to create civically engaged life-long learners. With such a statement of purpose, it would be highly hypocritical of an educational institution to teach about constitutional rights in their historical and political settings (as is required by the teaching standards of most, if not all, states) and then turn around and seek to deny students, as vigorously as possible, the ability to exercise those very rights. What better place than a school exists to equip students with an understanding of the intricacies surrounding their constitutional rights coupled with the appropriate ways to exercise those rights in the public forum? Teaching students how to develop their ideas into a sound argument and how to effectively champion their ideas so that they can become civically engaged life-long learners is the ultimate purpose of education. When students exercise their voice I get excited.
No comments:
Post a Comment