Running head: Portfolio #4 Student’s Rights 1

Artifact #2

Teachers’ Rights & Responsibilities

Francisco Perez

College of Southern Nevada

February 14, 2019

 Artifact #2 Teachers’ Rights & Responsibilities 2

Principal Freddie Watts and assistant principal Jimmy Brothers are African-American

administrators at a high school with mainly African-American students. Ann Griffin is a white

teacher who is under tenure. During a heated discussion with the two administrators, she said

that she “hated all black folks.” This statement caused an uproar among both white and black

faculty members. Freddie Watts recommended that Ann Griffin should be dismissed because of

concerns about her ability to treat students fairly, poor judgment, and competency. If you heard a

teacher say this how would you feel about the issue? She did say something terribly incompetent

and unacceptable but she does have the right to express herself under the first amendment. On

the other hand, racists and intolerant people should not be anywhere near a classroom. This is

especially unacceptable because she works at a school with predominantly white students.

Some may agree that Ann Griffin should be protected from dismissal under the first

amendment which promotes freedom of speech. One court case that relates to this issue is

Loeffelman v. The Board of Education of The Crystal City School District ​(2004). Loeffelman

expressed her disapproval towards interracial relationships in front of her students. On the other

hand, Ann Griffin did not say that she hated all “black folks” in front of her students the way

Loeffelman did. Loeffelman knowingly said that she disapproved of interracial relationships in

front of at least one biracial students. Her comments also disrupted classroom time which the

court considered when they decided not to appeal her termination.

Another court case that can help give insight into this side of the scenario is ​Tinker v. Des

Moines ​(1969). This court case came to be because students were wearing black armbands to

protest the Vietnam War. They were all suspended for doing so. Later these students disputed
 Artifact #2 Teachers’ Rights & Responsibilities 3

their suspension in court and won the case. The outcome of the case asserted that students and

teachers do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the

schoolhouse gate.” Griffin was expressing her personal opinion, even if it was controversial, she

has the right to say what she wants. Therefore, Ann Griffin still had the right to say what she said

to the administrator. Under these circumstances, it can definitely be argued the Ann Griffin

should not be terminated base on what she said.

It can also be argued that Ann Griffin should be terminated because of what she said to

the administrators. Any parent who heard about a teacher saying this would more than likely

disapprove of them especially if their own children are African-American. Most people would

probably be in favor of her being terminated based on what she said but it is up to the court to

decide whether or not her statement is worthy of termination. While she did not make this

comment directly to a student it was a derogatory comment that insults the administrators and the

students. Her statement is an indirect attack on the African-American students and staff at the

school. Personal attacks and racism are not to be tolerated in a school setting.

Pickering v. The Board of Education​ (1968) was one of the first cases to deal with

freedom of speech in the classroom. Pickering has spoked out in a letter that was of public

concern. The teacher’s opinion was unfavorable to the school board which dismissed the teacher.

The court appealed the dismissal and state that teachers do not lose their first amendment right

especially on matters of public concern. Unlike Pickering, Griffin’s comment was not a matter of

public concern. If her statement had been simple criticism of the school then this would be a

different story. Her statement was a racially charged comment that insulted the
 Artifact #2 Teachers’ Rights & Responsibilities 4

African-American staff and students. Her statement is definitely worthy of dismissal from the

school.

Another case that supports her dismissal is ​Garcetti v. Ceballos​ (2006). This court case

ruled that teachers do not have first amendment protection for speech part of their official duties.

Griffin had no place making her remark to the administrators. They have the right to recommend

her dismissal based on her unprofessional conduct. ​Garcetti v. Ceballos​ (2006) also insists that

the first amendment does not separate their comments from the employer’s discipline decisions.

The school is within its right to dismiss Griffin. Matthew Fraser

Based on the information from the cases presented and the situation of Ann Griffin I

believe that the court will rule in favor of the principal dismissing her from the school. She

displayed blatant racism and incompetence through her statement to the administrators. It was

also a personal attack towards the African-American students and staff at the school. As

mentioned earlier, her comment has no place in a school setting. This kind of intolerance is not

something that students look for in a teacher. Students need teachers who are accepting and

open-minded. Freddie Watt was right to recommend her dismissal and the court would agree

with his decision.

 Artifact #2 Teachers’ Rights & Responsibilities 5

References

Garcetti v. Ceballos, 04-473 (2006). (n.d) Retrieved February 15, 2020

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/596/garcetti-v-ceballos

LOEFFELMAN v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CRYSTAL CITY SCHOOL

DISTRICT (2004). (n.d.) Retrieved February 15, 2020

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1423417/loeffelman-v-board-of-educ/

Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 . (1968). (n.d) Retrieved February 15, 2020

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1967/510

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). (n.d)

Retrieved February 15, 2020

https://www.aclu.org/other/tinker-v-des-moines-landmark-supreme-court-ruling-behalf-student-e

xpression

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. D. (2006). ​School law for teachers: concepts and applications.​

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.