Link
A few days ago, (See my April 24 post, I believe) I blogged about an embattled (barely hanging onto her job) high school journalism teacher/adviser in Indiana.
My good friend, Terry Nelson--former Dow Jones High School Journalism Teacher of the year for the entire United States (yes, you all, she knows her stuff about the First Amendment and how to do dance with journalism at the high school level), this morning sent me the following school superintendent's response to the hullabaloo. Terry definitely gets up early on Saturday a.m. when she's wrankled about something!
And who can blame her?
Here, courtesy of Terry's e-mail to me, is what the school superintendent wrote:
EACS Statement Re: Recent Events
>By
>
>Dr. M. Kay Novotny, Superintendent
>
>(April 27, 2007)
>
>
>
>It is a sad day for this nation, and the free society we live in, when
>public school administrators are chastised and ridiculed for taking
>actions that the United States Supreme Court recognized nearly twenty
>years age were permitted under that Court's interpretation of the First
>Amendment of the United States Constitution. It is equally disappointing
>when professional journalists, in their eagerness to sensationalize a
>story, ignore facts inconsistent with the journalists' "theme" for a
>story. East Allen County Schools, and several of its senior
>administrators, have been the victims, over the past three months, of
>just such an experience.
>
>
>
>Through no fault of EACS, or its senior administrators, a routine
>personnel matter has taken on a much larger existence. That routine
>personnel matter has now been concluded with the uncontested written
>reprimand and temporary unpaid suspension of EACS journalism teacher,
>Amy Sorrell, for neglect of duty and insubordination. Yet, during the
>time period this routine personnel matter has been pending, East Allen
>County Schools administrators have been accused of both intolerance and
>"waging a war against the First Amendment." Neither accusation has any
>basis in law or in fact.
>
>
>
>First, as part of the settlement agreement of this personnel matter,
>Mrs. Sorrell has issued a statement which recites: "None of the actions
>I have taken or comments I have made from January 23, 2007 through April
>25, 2007 were intended to suggest that the administrators of Woodlan
>Junior-Senior High School have been motivated by intolerance towards
>homosexuality. To the extent that any other person has interpreted my
>comments or actions as so suggesting, I apologize." East Allen County
>Schools senior administrators have accepted Mrs. Sorrell's apology and
>assume that her statement of apology was sincere and heartfelt and not
>some shallow, insincere statement made, with her fingers crossed behind
>her back, in order to save her job. Although Mrs. Sorrell's apology is
>the first one received, it should not be the last apology East Allen
>County Schools, and its administrators, should receive on this matter.
>
>
>
>Second, as part of the settlement agreement of this personnel matter,
>Mrs. Sorrell has made the belated acknowledgement that "EACS
>administrators have the right and duty to regulate the publication of
>school-sponsored publications, including establishing a uniform
>statement of editorial policy for all school-sponsored publications" and
>"SACS administrators may review all or part of any school-sponsored
>publication prior to its publication in order to satisfy this
>obligation, and that the mere existence of prior review does not imply
>intolerance on the part of the administration." Had Mrs. Sorrell
>displayed this "new-found" wisdom earlier, there would have been no
>personnel matter to precipitate this recent controversy. In contrast to
>the initial position taken by Mrs. Sorrell, the District-approved
>school-sponsored publications policy has been adopted and published in
>the school-sponsored newspapers of the other four EACS high schools.
>
>
>
>EACS officials have heard from a great number of individuals, on this
>matter, during the course of the past few months. Sadly, a significant
>majority of the comments received have been rude and disgusting
>character assassinations that could lead one to conclude that many who
>preach tolerance and observation of First Amendment protections do so
>only to provide themselves a forum and a protection for their own
>foul-mouthed commentary.
>
>
>
>Of greater concern are the comments received, and the editorial opinions
>expressed, that claim to come from First Amendment "scholars" and
>"fans." While there is certainly room for debate as to the meaning and
>application of any amendment to the United States Constitution, there
>should be no basis to accuse a public official of unconstitutional or
>illegal conduct when the public official's conduct is consistent with
>prior judicial interpretations of the constitutional provision in
>question. In this instance, not a single critic of EACS, or its senior
>administrators, called to the public's attention a recent 7th Circuit
>Court of Appeals decision that squarely addressed the parameters of the
>First Amendment rights of public school teachers. In Mayer v. Monroe
>County Community School Corporation, 474 F.3d 477 (7th Cir. 2007), that
>Court reaffirmed an earlier position it had taken in 1990 "that
>public-school teachers must hew to the approach prescribed by principals
>(and others higher up in the chain of authority)" and that public school
>teachers did not have a constitutional right to introduce their own
>views on a subject "but must stick to the prescribed curriculum--not
>only the prescribed subject matter, but also the prescribed perspective
>on that subject matter." As Judge Easterbrook, the Mayer opinion's
>author noted: "A teacher hired to lead a social-studies class can't use
>it as a platform for a revisionist perspective that Benedict Arnold
>wasn't really a traitor, when the approved program calls him one; a high
>school teacher hired to explicate Moby-Dick in a literature class can't
>use Cry, The Beloved Country instead, even if Paton's book better suits
>the instructor's style and point of view; a math teacher can't decide
>that calculus is more important than trigonometry and decide to let
>Hipparchus and Ptolemy slide in favor of Newton and Leibniz." There is
>no exemption from this well-settled rule of law stated in the text, or
>any footnote, of the Mayer opinion for public school journalism
>teachers.
>
>
>
>The journalism class Mrs. Sorrell was assigned to teach at Woodlan
>Junior-Senior High is described in the EACS secondary course catalog as
>"Student Publications (LA1160)." That course is a designated school
>newspaper or yearbook course and meets the State of Indiana requirements
>for such a course. The course, according to the catalog, "offers
>practical training in publishing the school newspaper and yearbook."
>Even the course syllabus authored by Mrs. Sorrell identified the course
>objective to be "to produce a quality newspaper for Woodlan High School
>within the budget of the Tomahawk staff." Once a decision was made,
>regardless of who made it, to discontinue publication of the newspaper
>for whatever reason, there was no academic basis to continue the-class
>under some alternative, self-selected curriculum. Once Mrs. Sorrell was
>removed, the course, with eight of ten students remaining in the class,
>returned to its stated purpose and is once again publishing a
>school-sponsored newspaper.
>
>
>
>EACS has appreciated the public statements from professional journalists
>who have recognized the soundness of the District's position throughout
>this matter. For example, the editorial staff of the Indianapolis Star,
>in its April 22, 2007 "Voices" section, noted that "the [Woodlan]
>principal seems to be on solid legal ground in limiting content." And
>apparently, according to the Fort Wayne News-Sentinel, Steve Key,
>counsel for governmental affairs at the Hoosier State Press Association,
>confirmed that, under United States Supreme Court precedent, school
>administrators can serve as "publishers" of school-sponsored student
>publications. Locally, veteran News-Sentinel columnist, Kevin Leininger,
>recognized that EACS had legitimate reasons to be concerned about
>portions of the original student article that appeared to question or
>criticize some people's religious faith.
>
>
>
>Mr. Leininger also noted: "The principal is, in effect, the publisher--
>and has the legal authority and obligation to review content when deemed
>appropriate."
>
>
>
>The most difficult question to answer is why, with the strong evidence
>of multiple episodes of misconduct marshaled against Mrs. Sorrell, is
>she being allowed to teach next year at an EACS secondary school? The
>answer to that question has the potential to have multiple parts. But
>the central core of any answer would be compassion. EACS senior
>administrators have been able to set aside their frustrations with the
>"spin" applied to this situation to give Amy Sorrell a second chance to
>prove, despite her relative youth and obvious inexperience, that she can
>make as great a positive mark on EACS education as the administrators
>whose reputations her comments and actions have helped tarnish. Just
>last year Woodlan Principal, Dr. Ed Yoder, was Indiana's middle school
>principal of the year. And Assistant Superintendent Dr. Andy Melin was
>recently named Superintendent of Peru Community Schools. Both
>individuals have made significant contributions to the education of EACS
>students over many years. Neither deserved to be falsely and wrongfully
>accused of intolerance or "waging a war against the First Amendment."
>
>
>
>In the end, it would appear that EACS and its senior administrators are
>more tolerant and more knowledgeable about the First Amendment than
>their critics.
>
No comments:
Post a Comment