In 2006, the Yonkers School District hired Jeffrey Kirby to teach Health Education at the Pearls Hawthorne School which serves pre-kindergarten through eighth grade. Kirby used an icebreaker assignment to introduce the topic of Health and the Human Reproduction. Kirby invited several students to draw and label the parts of the male reproductive system on the blackboard. Amanda, a female student, who arrived late for class saw the drawings on the blackboard and asked to be excused for a bathroom break but never returned to class. After class, Kirby was summoned to the Principal's office where he surprisingly met with Amanda's father, Principal Campanero and Vice Principal Brown. Amanda's father requested the school administrators to fire
…show more content…
A teacher and a student's constitutional rights can be protected within the classroom as long as the educational process is not disruptive. (Tinker vs. Des Moines Indep. Sch. Dist., 1969). In Hazelwood, the Principal prohibited the publication of articles he deemed inappropriate but the Court ruled the articles promoted educational goals and to prohibit publication would violate free speech. (Hazelwood Sch. Dist. vs. Kuhlmeier, 1988). A school's action to suppress free speech can also depend on the age and maturity of students; the relationship between teaching method and valid educational objective; and the context and manner in which the material is presented. (Ward vs. Hickey, 1993). School officials have broad discretion to restrict school-sponsored speech to further educational goals and the right to impose regulations to ensure students receive age appropriate educational materials. (Hazelwood Sch. Dist. vs. Kuhlmeier, 1988). Although the Icebreaker was a school-sponsored assignment, the Plaintiff departed from the School District's curriculum when he did not get the school's approval to implement this particular assignment. The school determined the assignment lacked the maturity level and could be an insensitive assignment for seventh and eighth students. Students may or may not be mature enough to draw or even see other classmates draw the male reproductive system while other students may be tempted to make inappropriate and/or vulgar comments. The School District had a responsibility to ensure teaching methods further the educational goals of the classroom and ensure Icebreaker exercises were age appropriate assignments, therefore deemed the Icebreaker assignment was not suitable to
A teacher and a student's constitutional rights can be protected within the classroom as long as the educational process is not disruptive. (Tinker vs. Des Moines Indep. Sch. Dist., 1969). In Hazelwood, the Principal prohibited the publication of articles he deemed inappropriate but the Court ruled the articles promoted educational goals and to prohibit publication would violate free speech. (Hazelwood Sch. Dist. vs. Kuhlmeier, 1988). A school's action to suppress free speech can also depend on the age and maturity of students; the relationship between teaching method and valid educational objective; and the context and manner in which the material is presented. (Ward vs. Hickey, 1993). School officials have broad discretion to restrict school-sponsored speech to further educational goals and the right to impose regulations to ensure students receive age appropriate educational materials. (Hazelwood Sch. Dist. vs. Kuhlmeier, 1988). Although the Icebreaker was a school-sponsored assignment, the Plaintiff departed from the School District's curriculum when he did not get the school's approval to implement this particular assignment. The school determined the assignment lacked the maturity level and could be an insensitive assignment for seventh and eighth students. Students may or may not be mature enough to draw or even see other classmates draw the male reproductive system while other students may be tempted to make inappropriate and/or vulgar comments. The School District had a responsibility to ensure teaching methods further the educational goals of the classroom and ensure Icebreaker exercises were age appropriate assignments, therefore deemed the Icebreaker assignment was not suitable to