E Wayne Ross

Yet another blow against free speech in schools. NCLB has resulted in strong pressures on teachers to operate as mere clerks for the state, mere conduits for the transmission of “official knowledge” to students. Now the US Supreme Court has upheld a ruling that strips free speech and personal judgment from the act of teaching. For teachers in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, this means they now are by law imperial agents.

San Francisco Chronicle: Supreme Court denies hearing for fired ‘honk for peace’ teacher

An elementary-school teacher who was dismissed after telling her class on the eve of the Iraq war that “I honk for peace” lost a U.S. Supreme Court appeal Monday.

The justices, without comment, denied a hearing to Deborah Mayer, who had appealed lower-court decisions upholding an Indiana school district’s refusal to renew her contract in June 2003. The most-recent ruling, by a federal appeals court in Chicago, said teachers in public schools have no constitutional right to express personal opinions in the classroom.

A teacher’s speech is “the commodity she sells to an employer in exchange for her salary,” the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in January. “The Constitution does not enable teachers to present personal views to captive audiences against the instructions of elected officials.”

The appellate ruling is binding only on federal courts in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, but is one of a series of recent decisions taking a narrow view of free speech for teachers, other government employees and students.

The Supreme Court ruled in June that an Alaska principal was entitled to suspend a student who had unfurled a banner outside the school reading “Bong Hits 4 Jesus,” a message the principal said promoted drug use. Last year the court ruled that government employees are not protected by the First Amendment when speaking at work about job-related controversies, a ruling that the appeals court applied to teachers in Mayer’s case.

Mayer, who now teaches sixth grade in Florida, was distraught.

“I don’t know why anybody would want to be a teacher if you can be fired for saying four little words,” she said Monday. “I’m supposed to teach the Constitution to my students. I’m supposed to tell them that the Constitution guarantees free speech. How am I going to justify that?”

Mayer, a teacher for more than 20 years, was in her first year at a Bloomington, Ind., school district when the events occurred.

She said her class of fourth- through sixth-graders was discussing an article in the children’s edition of Time magazine, part of the school-approved curriculum, on protests against U.S. preparations for an invasion of Iraq in January 2003. When a student asked her whether she took part in demonstrations, Mayer said, she replied that she blew her horn whenever she saw a “Honk for Peace” sign, and that peaceful solutions should be sought before going to war.

After a parent complained, the principal ordered Mayer never to discuss the war or her political views in class. Her contract was not renewed at the end of the school year.

The district said she had been dismissed because of poor performance and complaints by parents. Mayer said that her previous evaluations had been good and that the district had solicited the complaints after the fact.

The appeals court that ruled on her case assumed she had been fired for her comments and said the school had the right to punish her for defying its policy, just as it could fire a creationist who refused to teach evolution. Mayer asked for a rehearing, saying no such policy had existed when she made her comments, but the court turned her down.

Similar cases have arisen in California, where federal courts have allowed schools to discipline teachers for expressing dissident views if the policies they violated were clearly explained in advance.

In one such ruling, in 2005, a federal judge in San Jose rejected a Cupertino teacher’s argument that his principal had violated his freedom of speech by prohibiting him from using outside religious materials in history lessons.

In papers filed with the Supreme Court, Mayer’s former school district described her as a “failing teacher” who had manufactured a controversy about free speech to try to keep her job.

“Public employees, including primary and secondary school teachers such as Ms. Mayer, simply do not have a constitutional right to interject their own opinions when speaking as employees,” the district’s lawyer said.

Grambling investigating pictures of noose lesson

The Associated Press

GRAMBLING, La. (AP) — The Grambling State University president is investigating a case in which adults at the university-run elementary school on campus put a noose around at least one child’s neck and the school newspaper’s publication of photographs of it.

Kindergarten and first-grade students at Alma J. Brown Elementary School were being taught why nooses are a symbol of racism, an article from the historically black university’s student newspaper said.

The article said the children also were being taught about the “Jena Six” — black high-school students who are accused of beating a white schoolmate. Court proceedings brought about 20,000 to 25,000 people to Jena, about 70 miles from Grambling, for a civil rights march in September.

The Revs. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have said the charges were too heavy for the actions and that three white students who were suspended after hanging nooses from a tree on the school campus three months earlier should have been expelled and prosecuted.

The date of the Grambling incident was not clear and the article and the photos had been removed from the site.

University President Horace Judson said he ordered photos removed from the Web site as soon as his secretary called him Friday to describe them. At the time, he said, he was driving to Dallas for Saturday’s football game against Prairie View.

Judson told The News Star of Monroe and the Ruston Daily Leader on Friday that he was starting an investigating immediately, and would meet Monday morning with everyone involved.

It is at least the second time this year The Gramblinite has tangled with school administrators.

Provost Robert Dixon ordered the newspaper on Jan. 17 to stop publication, a move criticized as censorship by alumni, the Student Press Law Center in Arlington, Va. and Gramblinite editor Darryl Smith. He accused Dixon of trying to block editorials criticizing the school’s maintenance and suggesting the state was trying to shut down the university.

Eight days later, Dixon said the newspaper had provided a satisfactory plan to end what he said was shoddy editing and plagiarism, and the paper could resume publication the following week.

The brief Gramblinite article about the elementary schoolyard “march” said teachers “even had a replica noose and explained why it is such a symbol of racism,” but did not mention that the noose was put around anyone’s neck. That was shown in photographs, which The News Star of Monroe obtained by e-mail and e-mailed with the article to The Associated Press.

The Daily Leader, which does not have a Saturday edition, also published an article about the incident online Saturday, saying it was not using Grambling photographs because of copyright considerations and to protect the child’s privacy.

It said the student paper sent it copies of pictures and the article Friday morning, but later asked it not to use the photographs removed from the Web site.

One shows a young girl in a school uniform being held up by a woman while someone else, mostly hidden by a tree, holds a noose around her neck and up to a branch.

The article said kindergarten and first-grade students circled their playground with their teachers as a “march” to protest “the imprisonment of Mychal Bell, and the seemingly racial bias shown toward blacks in a small Louisiana town.”

Judson said Sean Warner, dean of the College of Education, has spoken with the principal of the elementary school about the incident.

“This is very serious. I will say that,” Judson told The News Star. “I’ll have a face-to-face meeting with everyone involved. We’re going to find out what the facts are. At this point I don’t know if my students were involved.

“These are minors at our school and this is a student paper that still must practice complete accountability,” he said.

Given the nature of the situation, Judson said, “it was certainly my judgment to take those pictures down.”

Chronicle Video: Students Rally in Support of ‘Jena 6’

Washington — Students from Howard, George Washington, and Georgetown Universities gathered on the National Mall yesterday to support six African-American high-school students in Jena, La., who have been charged with violent crimes amid racial tensions in the town. The university students were among undergraduates at more than 100 colleges who protested on Monday.

Have I blogged this before? I think so, but it’s good to review these issues periodically.

Here’s a great analysis of the anti-Barry Bonds media frenzy from Rouge Forum member Steven Strauss, who is currently musing about the Baltimore Orioles of 2008.

Freedom Socialist • Vol. 28, No. 5 • October-November 2007
The anti-Barry Bonds slugfest

The Vancouver Sun: District gives teacher a black mark

A letter of discipline goes into educator’s file for refusing to administer test
Published: Friday, September 28, 2007

VICTORIA – A Langford elementary teacher won’t be suspended but has been issued a letter of discipline for refusing to give a required reading comprehension test to her Grade 3 class last spring.

A notice to Kathryn Sihota from the Sooke school district said the letter will be placed in her personnel file and the B.C. College of Teachers will be informed

.

The district also said her refusal to follow her principal’s direction to issue the test constituted insubordination, and that further misconduct could mean more discipline “up to and including dismissal.”

Kathryn Sihota, who refused to give her Grade 3 class a reading test, has been told to administer the test next year.

The district said it expects Sihota, who teaches at Millstream elementary, to administer the disputed test — called the District Assessment of Reading Team or DART test — when it comes up again next year.

The decision by the Sooke board of education followed a hearing Tuesday, in which more than 100 teachers from Victoria and other parts of the province staged a rally.

While district officials would not discuss the decision, the information was released by the Sooke Teachers’ Association, a local affiliate of the B.C. Teachers’ Federation. The association is filing a grievance about the disciplinary action.

Sihota, co-president of the Sooke teachers’ group, said she was still considering her options with respect to the test.

“Spring’s a long way away. I haven’t decided what I’ll do next. I’m kind of hoping that the support that was here the other day from across the province may sway the board’s decision about making the test mandatory.”

In many other districts using DART, the test is not required, Sihota said. “It’s a tool that’s available for teachers, but it’s not a mandatory test.”

The teachers’ association has said it is concerned about how the district uses information gathered from DART. The district maintains the test yields valuable data on how students are faring and how the education system can respond to their needs.

Sihota said she did what she felt was best for her students. “I feel that I’m standing up to protect my kids.”

© The Vancouver Sun 2007

ZNet Commentary
Canadian Foreign Policy and Iran
September 27, 2007
By Yves Engler

It appears that the US is planning an attack against Iran and Ottawa is pitching in to help.

Earlier this year, then Foreign Affairs Minister Peter McKay said, “Canada is deeply concerned with the direction that Iran is headed. The regime in Tehran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.” McKay’s comment was made in Israel, a regional rival of Iran that already possesses nuclear weapons.

Referring to “genocidal” Iran a few months later, Jason Kenny (a federal cabinet minister) told a pro-Israel conference that Canada “will pursue every possible avenue in concert with our allies to ensure that [Iran] does not come into possession of nuclear weapons, which could unleash unimaginable violence.” Kenny concluded that, “He [Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] must be stopped by the civilized world.”

Later MacKay released a statement claiming that “maintaining a relationship with Iran tests the bounds of diplomacy…peace is Canada’s goal and we support the United States’ effort to engage all regional partners in supporting the Iraqi government’s attempts to bring safety and security to the area.”
http://www.turning.ca/
Canada has also worked to de-legitimate Iran at the UN, putting forward a resolution condemning Iran’s human rights record. In an embarrassing outcome for Canadian officials, the motion barely passed (77-75). Iran’s UN representative responded to the resolution by saying, “Canada and other sponsors of this resolution [against Iran] are themselves implicated in serious rights violations for which they must be held accountable.” He specifically cited Canada’s horrendous treatment of Aboriginal people.

Canada has also been accused of spying for the US. Late last year, members of the Iranian parliament claimed the Canadian embassy in Tehran was a “den of spies.”

While progressives should oppose Iran’s human rights violations, its role in Iraq and its desire to develop nuclear energy or weapons, it is hypocritical for the Canadian government to use this as a justification for supporting a US attack.

Canada hasn’t opposed the US invasion/occupation of Iraq, which is certainly a war crime under international law, and the main cause of the current instability in that country. In fact, Canadian forces provided logistical support for the American-led invasion and relieved US troops from Afghanistan so they could redeploy to Iraq. In addition, Canadian companies continue to supply armaments for the US war.

At least the hypocrisy has been consistent.

Throughout the 1970s, the Canadian government’s Defence Programs Bureau had a representative in Tehran, which sold about $60 million worth of arms to Iran during the decade. This was during the same period that Amnesty International reported “no country in the world has a worse record in human rights than Iran.” The Shah’s brutal SAVAK intelligence forces killed tens of thousands, which prompted no condemnations from Canadian officials.

Nor did Canada protest when in 1953 the US and Britain overthrew Mohammed Mossadegh, Iran’s elected prime minister. Instead, it followed the lead of the UK and the US in doing business with a dictator and Canada opened an embassy six years later. By the time the Shah was overthrown in 1979, there were 850 Canadians in Iran (along with thousands of Americans), most working for foreign owned oilrigs, power projects etc. Not happy with the Shah’s departure, Canada closed its embassy in 1980 and did not reopen it until 1988.

Canadian hypocrisy is on full display regarding Iran’s drive to develop nuclear energy or atomic weapons. When the Shah was in power, Canada was prepared to sell Iran nuclear reactors. More broadly, after selling (or attempting to sell) nuclear reactors or uranium to at least 25 countries from Argentina to Romania, Canada has no right to criticize a country’s desire for nuclear power.

Some say that Iran’s push to get the bomb dates back to 1974 when India exploded a nuclear bomb. Canada provided the reactor that India, Iran’s regional competitor, used to develop the bomb. And Canada aided another of Iran’s regional rivals, Pakistan, in its successful program to build nuclear weapons.

In fact, Canadian uranium from Great Bear Lake was used in the only two nuclear bombs ever to be dropped on a human population. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki Prime Minister Mackenzie King declared: “It gives me pleasure to announce that Canadian scientists played an important role, having been intimately connected, in an efficient manner, to this great scientific development.” By 1959, Canada had sold $1.5 billion worth of uranium to the US bomb program. Today, Canada is the world’s largest exporter of uranium.

If Canada is to have any credibility regarding nuclear non-proliferation perhaps it should begin by getting its own house in order. Then, it would make sense to criticize its allies when they build weapons of mass destruction or break international laws and treaties. Only after doing all that would Ottawa have the authority to condemn Iran’s nuclear program.

Yves Engler is the author of two books: Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority (with Anthony Fenton) and Playing Left Wing: From Rink Rat to Student Radical. Both books are published by RED/Fernwood and available at www.turning.ca