An argument against the censorship in public schools

Censorship The suppression or proscription of speech or writing that is deemed obscene, indecent, or unduly controversial. The term censorship derives from the official duties of the Roman censor who, beginning in b.

An argument against the censorship in public schools

Policies and practices designed to respect free expression and encourage discourse and discussion are rarely, if ever, disturbed by courts B.

The decision to remove material is more vulnerable, and often places motivation for the removal at issue since actions motivated by hostility to particular ideas or speakers is not permitted C. The deference frequently shown school administrators with regard to the curriculum is not always accorded when a dispute arises over material in the school library Introduction: This document describes in practical terms what the right to freedom of expression means for the public schools.

We hope it provides students, teachers and administrators with a deeper understanding of their constitutionally guaranteed rights and responsibilities, as well as renewed respect for the power of free expression to enhance the educational experience. But education, they also knew, involved more than reading, writing, and arithmetic.

Education in a democratic society requires developing citizens who can adapt to changing times, make decisions about social issues, and effectively judge the performance of public officials.

In fulfilling their responsibilities, public schools must not only provide knowledge of many subject areas and essential skills, but must also educate students on core American values such as fairness, equality, justice, respect for others, and the right to dissent.

Rapid social, political, and technological changes have escalated controversy over what and how schools should teach. While issues like sexuality and profanity have raised questions for generations, debates are becoming more and more contentuous thanks to increasing cultural, religious, ethnic, and religious diversity.

Thus, educators frequently face a daunting task in balancing the educational needs of a diverse entire student body while maintaining respect for individual rights. The First Amendment establishes the framework for resolving some of these dilemmas by defining certain critical rights and responsibilities.

It protects the freedom of speech, thought, and inquiry, and requires respect for the right of others to do the same. The First Amendment and Public Schools Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment The first provision of the Bill of Rights protects the rights essential to a democratic society and most cherished by Americans: It embodies human rights that are celebrated throughout the world. However, the First Amendment applies somewhat differently in schools than it does in many other public institutions.

As many commentators have observed, a democracy relies on an informed and critical electorate to prosper. Given the complexity of these responsibilities, school officials are generally accorded considerable deference in deciding how best to accomplish them.

Des Moinesspeech is not quite as free inside educational institutions as outside. This does not mean that students and teachers have no First Amendment rights at school.

Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything they choose. Understanding Censorship Censorship is not easy to define. Alternatively, many censors attempt to suppress speech simply because they disagree with it.

In many countries, censorship is most often directed at political ideas or criticism of the government. Advocates for censorship often target materials that discuss sexuality, religion, race and ethnicity—whether directly or indirectly.

Censorship demands require educators to balance First Amendment obligations against other concerns: There are practical and educational as well as legal reasons to adhere as closely as possible to the ideals of the First Amendment.

An argument against the censorship in public schools

School districts such as Panama City, Florida, and Hawkins County, Tennessee, have been stunned to find that acceding to demands for removal of a single book escalated to demands for revising entire classroom reading programs.

Other jurisdictions have been pressed to revise the science curriculum, the content of history courses, sex education, drug and alcohol education, and self-esteem programs.

Experience has shown far too many times that what appears to be capitulation to a minor adjustment can turn into the opening foray of a major curriculum content battle involving warring factions of parents and politicians, teachers, students and administrators. Distinguishing Censorship from Selection Teachers, principals, and school administrators make decisions all the time about which books and materials to retain, add or exclude from the curriculum.

They are not committing an act of censorship every time they cross a book off of a reading list, but if they decide to remove a book because of hostility to the ideas it contains, they could be.

Not every situation is that simple. If professional educators can articulate a legitimate pedagogical rationale to maintain such material, it is unlikely that an effort to remove it would be successful. Most people do not consider it censorship when they attempt to rid the school of material they consider profane or immoral, or when they insist that the materials selected show respect for religion, morality, or parental authority.

School officials who accede to such demands may be engaging in censorship. Efforts to suppress controversial views or ideas are educationally and constitutionally suspect. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.

Yet profanity appears in many worthwhile books, films, and other materials for the same reasons many people use it in their everyday language—for emphasis or to convey emotion. But even minor use of profanity has not shielded books from attack. Profanity, however, is only one of many grounds on which books are challenged.

As these examples illustrate, censorship based on individual sensitivities and concerns restricts the knowledge available to students.[Content warning: Discussion of social justice, discussion of violence, spoilers for Jacqueline Carey books.] [Edit 10/ This post was inspired by a debate with a friend of a friend on Facebook who has since become somewhat famous.

Meaning of Philosophical arguments for censorship as a legal term. What does Philosophical arguments for censorship mean in law? Before the constitutionality of the prior restraint argument was decided, the NEA released the school from its obligation to sign the pledge.

A Reference Guide to Book Censorship in Schools and Public. Censorship demands require educators to balance First Amendment obligations and principles against other concerns – such as maintaining the integrity of the educational program, meeting state education requirements, respecting the judgments of professional staff, and addressing deeply held beliefs in students and members of the community.


Censorship - Wikipedia

Our Views & Yours This is not an argument against censorship for students who want to express controversial ideas simply for the sake of controversy. The First Amendment in Schools: A Resource Guide. July 10, The Public Schools. Censorship A.

Understanding Censorship B.

An argument against the censorship in public schools

Distinguishing Censorship from Selection C. Consequences of Censorship. American public schools often censor controversial student speech that the Constitution protects.

The Battle Against ‘Hate Speech’ on College Campuses Gives Rise to a Generation That Hates Speech

Lessons in Censorship brings clarity to a bewildering array of court rulings that define the speech rights of young citizens in the school setting.

Catherine J. Ross examines disputes that have erupted in our schools and courts over the civil rights movement, war and peace, rights for LGBTs. The UK Labour party on Wednesday pledged to “take action” against a Jewish MP who called party leader Jeremy Corbyn an “anti-Semite and a racist.”.

Sex & Censorship - Page 16 of 26 - Defending Liberal Values in Authoritarian Times