More handpicked essays just for you.
Critical thinking skills and reflection
Critical thinking and decision making skills
Critical thinking skills and reflection
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Unit 2 Research Simulation Task Directions: Complete the research simulation task for Unit 2 below: Chaos in the School Why would someone decide to go against school board decisions? By having symbolic protests, there would be less disruptions and less chaos. Usually what people think of when they hear protests is chaos, fire, and violence. Now if the students would’ve chose to have a protest with signs and chaos, that would’ve been a bigger problem. When the kids chose to go against the school board, they hurt themselves because when you go against adults in a school you could never win because they have the more power. If the kids wanted to be smart about the protest, they would’ve conducted it more silent and wouldn't even let the school board find out about it. …show more content…
In one source it explains,”Ruling that wearing armbands could disrupt learning” (Ross 40). There is no way that wearing an armband could disrupt anyone. By wearing armbands it limits the amount of the bad things that could’ve happened if they would’ve had posters and signs. If this was done somewhere other than on school grounds it would’ve been all good. One source says,”They began by saying that students don’t shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhousegate” (Ross 41). The administration took it to serious because it really isn’t that big of a deal if they are wearing armbands to the school. Now since those few people wore those armbands the school decided to ruin it for everyone and ban the armbands all
Justice Hugo Black dissented and feared that the Court’s ruling would cause more revolutionary actions from students. However, Justice Fortas addressed this potential outcome. He says, “Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained.Burnside v. Byars, supra at 749.” The school’s ban of the armbands could not be upheld because the expression had not caused any harm. If the students underwent another expression, the school would still have the power to make a decision. If their actions were disruptive, the school would still have the power to limit these actions. The students’ rights are still protected, and the school still has the authority to operate the
Through using case laws, the First Amendment, and previous cases, Justice Abe Fortas explains the reasoning behind why the principal was not permissible. In the first two paragraphs, Fortas provides a brief summary stating how the policy banning armbands go against the First Amendment. In the following paragraph, Fortas says, “Only a few of the 18,00 students in the school system wore the black armbands.” When introducing his first argument, he supports this fact explaining how “the work of the schools or any class was [not] disrupted.” As for the fourth paragraph, Justice Fortas provides a counter argument with what the District Court said. The District Court concluded the school authorities were reasonable since it was based upon their fear o...
Mary Beth Tinker was only thirteen years old in December of 1964 when she and four other students were suspended from school because they wore black armbands. The black armbands were a sign of protest against the Vietnam War. The school suspended the students and told them that they could not return to school until they agreed to take off the armbands. The students did not return to school until after the school’s Christmas break, and they wore black the rest of the year, as a sign of protest. The Tinker family, along with other supporters, did not think that the suspension was constitutional and sued the Des Moines Independent Community School District. The Supreme Court’s majority decision was a 7-2 vote that the suspension was unconstitutional (Tinker V. Des Moines).
Furthermore, the opinion of the Supreme Court reveled that students can express their opinions anywhere even when the principal clearly made a rule banning armbands so problems would not be created. The disruptions from armbands could ca...
The case under review involves Bill Foster, who attends a large high school in the northeastern part of the United States. Due to a strong gang presence in the high school, the administrators created a strict policy which denies students the wearing of earrings, jewelry, athletic caps, and emblems. Foster was suspended for wearing an earring to school. He claims that wearing the earring was a form of his self expression and individuality; his intention was not as a gang emblem, but rather a means to attract girls. Foster is suing the school district for violation of his freedom of expression right, guaranteed under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Student court cases against schools, or vice versa, are not as uncommon as they may seem. Tinker v. Des Moines was a court case that ended in 1969 regarding students protesting the Vietnam War. The three students involved in the trial wore black armbands to school, which was prohibited, and were suspended. Since the students felt that their First Amendment right was abused by the school therefore they took the issue to a local court, then eventually the Supreme Court. The case has left a mark on First Amendment rights for students since then. The Tinker v. Des Moines court case impacted the United States by questioning the First Amendment in public schools, spreading awareness of student rights, and by challenging future court cases using
In December 1965, an issue was caused by teachers’ in violating students’ freedom of speech. In December some students from Des Moines Independent Community School District, in Iowa were suspended for wearing black armbands to protest against the American Government’s war policy in support Vietnam (Richard, Clayton, and Patrick).The school district pressed a complaint about it, although the students caused no harm to anyone. Students should be able to voice their opinions without the consequences of the school district.
By having school board meetings, it helps to see what the school’s needs. This is very important for the reason that this may be the only time that a concern parent or person voice might be heard. From this meeting, it was learned that the school board members are willing to help people that have concerns. An example, of this, was when the concern Pre-K parent was worried that she heard that Pre-K has been just a daycare. However, someone from the board mentioned to her that she would personally go with the parent the next day and show her how Pre-K is running during the day. This made the parent so happy because her concerns were being met. I have learned that school board members look out for the students and that they are the number one source that community members should go to if they have a concern or a suggestion to better their children’s
It is probable that the administration in taking away the student’s political frontline were only aiming to subdue the civil rights movement. However the effect of banning everyone from speaking their mind had an effect unforeseen by those in charge. Students from all backgrounds and schools of political thought were united; students that under any other circumstance never would have come together. This is what made the free-speech movement unique; it was a merger of forces across the political front, only possible because the matters at stake transcended political orientation.
Censorship even extends to school dress codes. A school dress code is a set of rules about what clothing may or may not be worn in schools. As previously mentioned, a set of criteria are used to determine whether or not student expression should be censored in schools. For censorship involving dress codes, there are two: the “Tinker disruption standard” and the “forum issue,” which determine if student expression disrupts the school day and by who it is regulated, respectively (Emert). One case involving censorship of the school dress code was of a boy who violated his school’s dress code (Nguyen). Zachary Guiles, a thirteen year old boy, had to cover up his shirt denigrating former President George W. Bush, which violated his First Amendment rights (Nguyen). The shirt showed President Bush’s head on a chicken with derogatory names. It had images of oil rigs and lines of cocaine (Nguyen). A student, who had opposite views as Guiles, notified the administration of the shirt (Nguyen). Guiles was sent home on May 13, 2004, when he didn’t cover up the shirt after being asked to. The next day, Guiles’ wore the shirt, which was covered with tape and the word ‘censored’ was written on the tape (Nguyen). The school which Guiles attended, Williamstown Middle High School in Vermont, said that the shirt violated the dress code. Guiles’ parents felt that their son’s “rights to engage in political speech” were violated, and they sued the school (Nguyen). Guiles did not win the lawsuit in December 2004, when the US District Court for Vermont ruled in favor of the school, saying the images were “’plainly offensive and inappropriate’” (Nguyen). Guiles appealed, and the Second Circuit court ruled that the images were not offensive an...
... the established case law because of the schools ability to limit those freedoms. When looking at restricting or granting student or group speech administrators must be consistent, because allowing one student or group to expression their First Amendment right opens a door for other student or groups that can be difficult to close. The institution should have clear policies that designate Public Forums, Designated Public Forums, Limited Public Forums, and Non-public Forms. Furthermore, a policy should be created explaining a student’s rights with procedures for a student to redress grievances. Beyond the established policies, administers must be aware of (and have training in) student rights, but should also understand the breadth of power public institutions have to restrict those freedoms when the expression of those freedoms would cause disruption to the school.
Would anybody want their freedom taken from them? Nobody would willingly give their freedom up. What’s the next thing thats going to happen, will schools having edible food. Hard to see, right? So are uniforms. Schools should not have uniforms for these three reasons: It takes the students freedom of expression away, it’s a bandaid reason to cover up violence, and some parents might not be able to afford the uniforms.
In the past, people debated about school uniforms whether uniforms should be required for student to wear or not? Uniforms are basically an outfit that student wear. School uniforms may sound outdated, but will help children in the long run. According to New York Times, former President Bill Clinton’s 1996 state of Union address called for all 16,000 school districts to adopt a uniform policy” (Kershaw). The public school district in Long Beach, California was the first to adopt the uniform policy. Many teens across the country have mixed feelings about school uniforms. Some say uniforms violates the first amendment and others don’t mind at all. Wearing school uniforms should be a policy that every school should have, because it will decrease the violence and
When some parents from Forney, Texas requested exemptions for their children, the school denied them causing lawsuits to be filed against the districts. The reason these parents opposed the uniform dress code? Because they believed it took away their children's freedom to express themselves. Other parents who oppose the uniforms also state that their parental rights are being stripped away. They have even gone so far as to set up web sites to draw others into their fight.
Anyone can sneak into YOUR school wearing a uniform pretending they are a student, and possibly be selling illegal items. Say two people look alike, wearing the same uniform. One of them has committed a serious crime. They both walk by the camera at the same time. You can’t tell them apart. So safety? Same thing as theft. They say this is a free country, when they do this and make students wear uniforms, this curtails their freedoms. The school board is giving off one simple message by doing this...