A recent ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit in Cincinnati concluded that teachers' in-classroom curricular decisions are not protected by the First Amendment.? This decision is the latest in the saga created by a lawsuit Shelley Evans-Marshall, an English teacher from Tipp City, Ohio, brought against her district after she was terminated from her job for having students read controversial books such as Siddhartha and Heather Has Two Mommies.
The U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the district's termination of Evans-Marshall was legitimate, on the grounds that:
?Only the school board has ultimate responsibility for what goes on in the classroom, legitimately giving it a say over what teachers may (or may not) teach in the classroom.?
The Court went on to describe school boards' authority over teachers' speech in general:
?Expression is a teacher's stock in trade, the commodity she sells to her employer in exchange for a salary. And if it is the school board that hires that speech, it can surely regulate the content of what is or is not expressed, what is expressed in other words on its behalf.?
While we can question whether or not it was ?appropriate? for Evans-Marshall to have her students read these books, the message of the Appeals Court was loud and clear: teachers must fall into line with the views of the school board, and any deviation from the board's views could result in controversy or termination, as in the case of Evans- Marshall.? This ruling is yet another hard hit to teachers seeking to innovate in the classroom.
-Bianca Speranza