Read the following case studies and be prepared to discuss in class tomorrow.
http://www.freedomforum.org/packages/first/curricula/educationforfreedom/supportpages/L08-CaseSummaryTinker.htm
http://www.freedomforum.org/packages/first/curricula/educationforfreedom/supportpages/L08-CaseSummaryHazelwood.htm
I don't believe anything like this occured in Ursula.
ReplyDeleteI found the case of Hazelwood very interesting and believe that Ursula would have done the same if something like that occured here. The reason is because Ursula cares a lot about education and if anything would be harming it they would easily go against it.
As a reporter, I would agree with the school's decision because I understand the school's point of view. I say this because freshmen, girls of ages 13/14, shouldn't be reading newspapers talking about their classmates getting pregnant due to the fact that they will think that it is acceptable to be a mom in high school.
In terms of the pregnancy scandal at Hazelwood, I agree with the U.S Supreme Court decision of removing the article. I understand as part of the student newspaper I have a responsibility to the students, bu rather than expose the sexual history of other students, the newspaper staff should write an article to educate the student body on how to make smart decisions about sexuality. I also think the article should inform students of the risks of teen pregnacy, the life of a teen mother, and the forms of contreceptives available. We do have to remember we are in a high school environment so some level of maturity is needed from the student body as well as a certain level of censorship. I don't say this to deprive the students from the right to freedom of speech, but since this is a school newspaper and not a gossip column a level of professionalism is expected.
ReplyDeleteThe topic of teenage pregnancy is a very touchy subject. With the fact that this is a Catholic religion-based school, I wouldn't be surprised that the school admninistration wouldn't allow an article on pre-marital sex and conception. While on the other hand, during this century it's actually common to freely discuss teenage pregnancy because of the current media distribution of it.
ReplyDeleteToday, this topic is a very real one and it DOES happen. The school shouldn't specifically try and censor such topics because the student body already is fed this through todays media. As long as the article does not slander the person, it shouldn't be such a big controversy. In my opinion, accidents happen and people learn to deal with it. If a person maturely handles their situation and cares for their child, I don't see a problem.
So while people would argue that the shcool is censoring them and is breaking their Freedom of Speech right, they must understand that they CHOSE to attend a Catholic-based school and must follow these regulations of the Catholic faith while attending.
I think that Ursula would have handle the situation about the same way. The case of Hazelwood, the article on teen pregnancy, is rather inappropriate. I don't think the students in Ursula should be knowing or hearing about teen pregnancy. It is a touchy subject. I think that, as a catholic school especially, we shouldn't be presenting this kind of news to the student body. Students hear enough about teen pregancy on the media. Students come to school for an education, not to gossip about how other students are pregnant.
ReplyDeleteBut also, I don't think that the principal handled the situation correctly. They shouldn't have just deleted the pages. They should have consulted the students who wrote the article and explain to them why it would have been inappropriate to publish it.
If my school, the Academy of Mount Saint Ursula, went through a case such as Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, I feel it would have been better dealt with here than it was back then. We live in a society where there are always protests, and someone’s always trying to make a statement, I actually do remember a similar case that happened in this school. October 20th, 2011, it was Spirit Day for GLAAD, Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, we were asked to wear purple. That the students ourselves would wear the purple, now it was on such late notice that no one could really get permission to wear purple. Yet students, like me, tried to get away with the purple, hoping that maybe if they asked, they’d understand. Unfortunately, I almost got in trouble for wearing purple stockings. That was my freedom of speech, and the rules at the time had said solid colored stockings, luckily for me. They understood,and a few days later, the school itself had its own day for Spirit Day, where we were allowed to wear purple. I believe that if we ever got into this situation again, we would know how to handle it, and it would never proceed so far.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe First Amendment is the people's given right to show their expression or how they feel. It is the freedom of speech. I don't think that there has been a case like the Tinker case or Hazelwood case in Mount Saint Ursula where they were basically taken away their right to say how they feel. However, if this situation ever did happen at the Acandemy of Mount Saint Ursula, I want to know what the reason is. Everything in the newspaper is/was posted there for a reason. The newspaper is there for people to know information, even if it is about teenage pregnancy,which is a sensitive topic, but still should be known.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't believe anything like this has occured at Ursula (at least, not during my 4 years here), I believe I may have handled the situations differently if they were to arise.
ReplyDeleteIf Tinker was to happen today, I think it would be praised, not vindicated. Anti-war sentiments are common in the world today and I don't think it'd be offensive to show these beliefs in a strong but subdued statement (such as the armband Tinker wore). As long as no one else felt personally attacked by the message, I wouldn't see anything wrong with the act.
In the case of Hazelwood, I definitely would have responded differently. I believe that writing about teen pregnancy and the effects of divorce would help students rather than hurt them. Showing the struggles of teen moms (not glamorizing them)is, in my opinion, the best way to deter teens from getting themselves into similar situations. By expressing the hardships divorce puts on kids, parents might be swayed to reconsider their options and try to work things out before it's too late. By deleting these articles, the subsitute teacher did nothing to promote the health and welfare of the students and parents in the school community.
After reading th article I believe nothing similar has happend. If it has to deal with jeopardizing the education of students Ursula wouldnt allow it. While pregnant you should be home worrying about the welfare of your child. Also by the end of the day easch person does deserve an education. I agree with Ursula's decision as a reporter but after the "teen mom" ets her life together she should be able to come back and get an education.
ReplyDeleteFreedom of expression is a human right, and no one--students, adults, and even children--should be deprived of it. Putting myself in the shoes of the students that were put aside for discipline for wearing black arm bands to school makes me infuriated. The students weren't even using violence as a way to protest. Individuality shouldn't be stifled, and people shouldn't be punished for voicing their thoughts. For one, the board didn't even decide on a course of action for the protesting students: it was postponed. For the principals to go ahead to address this issue themselves without a definite answer from the school board is absurd. Then the issue blew up into a federal case--something I find questionable for a group of student's protesting using peaceful means against the US's involvement in the Vietnam war. As a student of this class, I believe we as people have the right to do what we want, to say what we want. Punishment may not always be part of the equation, but it should be something reasonable. For wearing an armband to promote peace to explode into a federal case seems a bit extravagant.
ReplyDeleteI do not recall any situation similar to these legal issues ever occurring in the school. If a situation like this one did occur in the school I think it would be necessary for the student body to be aware of what was going on. For example, the Hazelwood Case involved pregnant women and teenagers discussing their excitement in a school newspaper. As the article states, “The Court said schools could censor any forms of expression deemed “ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences,” or any expression that advocates “conduct otherwise inconsistent with the shared values of the civilized social order.” Personally what they stated in the newspaper was nothing inappropriate or anything categorizing under these terms; I think the principles were just worried about the reputation of the school. ? But then again it would be constitutional because then students would get the wrong idea about pregnancy and think it is okay. So how could something like this be possible in our school.
ReplyDeleteHypothetically, what if someone wanted to start a sort of advice column in our school and someone interviewed someone who was previously pregnant? There would be nothing wrong with this article but our principle still decides to deny it being printed in the newspaper. This would only be acceptable if the article was harming the education of other students throughout the school. In conclusion legal issues can be very controversial and sometimes its up to the court to make the final decision.
The two court cases display a violation of the First Amendment which is: freedom of expression and speech. I think that if this were to happen here at AMSU, the best way to tackle this situation is to interview and get the full story of the victim. It is necessary that we do this so that we don't publish false information and attack someone else. Although the teen mom case was unfair because of the simple fact that somone wasn't present in order to defend themself, we can make sure that doesn't happen in our case. We must also take into consideration the audience that we are writing for. Even though it may be a touchy topic, it is something we must present to our peers because it is an issue. Although this is true, we shouldn't be discussing teen preganancy due to the fact that we are a Cathlic school and should respect that and other peoples' beliefs against teen pregnancy. Also, students shouldn't be hindered from their rights. It would be completely wrong, in my opinion, if a student were to get suspended or bullied for their belief and right.
ReplyDeleteI found that the Hazlewood case clearly shows a great example of how to deal with this situation. In my opinion teen pregnancy should not be advocated especially at school. AMSU is keen on education and anything that would come in the way of this would be an issue for us. Things like this are personal and deserve personal opinions not everyone at school's opinion. Reading someone's personal life can be damaging to the person's life. All in all some things are just not approptiate for school and this is a clear example of something not to post in a newspaper article!
ReplyDeleteRegarding the pregnancy scandal at Hazelwood I believe the Supreme Court was in the right by removing the article from the public eye. I do not believe a student’s sexual life should be exposed because that is extremely personal. This can jeopardize their reputation and cause problems among the student body at the school. This type of exposed information can also result in a suicidal act because of extreme embarrassment. Instead of exposing a teen’s pregnancy, the school newspaper should’ve taken action in the prevention on teen pregnancy. Although our job as a newspaper team is to inform the student body of what is going on, there should be some type of privacy when it comes to one’s personal life. Our freedom of speech is important but if an article will affect one’s personal life then it should be altered.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the Hazelwood case I believe we have the right to expose the real truth. We don't live in a world where everything is picture perfect. Unfortunately we have to tell the truth even if it's something we don't like. In reality teens do get pregnant and if we show this to the public then other teens would probably think twice before they have an intercourse. However we shouldn't always expose another person's life through media, a better suggestion would be to use statistics and show facts.
ReplyDelete