Artifact 2

Running head: EDU 210 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT #2 1
EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #2
Jessica Brooks
CSN Online Campus

In an American high school filled with predominantly black students and staff a new
teacher has been hired on, Ann Griffin. Mrs. Griffin has been recommended for dismissal based
on the administrative staff’s concern of her ability to treat students fairly based on her statement
that she has always “hated all black folks”. The administration is also questioning her judgement
and competency as a teacher. Principal Freddie Watts, an African-American fear's that this Mrs.
Ann Griffin will not be able to treat students with color in an appropriate manner.
Mrs. Ann Griffin is not in any way affiliated with a group or in membership with others
that show a direct hatred for African-Americans. Mrs. Ann Griffin should not be discriminated
against based on one claim that she gave in a heated conversation with another teacher. In the
court case Melzer v. Bd. Ed. Of the City Sch. Dist. Of the City of N.Y., Mr. Melzer was a
teacher who had been terminated on his active membership and participation in the North
American Man/Boy Love Association. Mr. Melzer showed the school board that there was a
reason for suspicion and that his actions would make the student uncomfortable and that his
public views on the such issues would make him less effective at his job. Mrs. Ann Griffin on the
other hand has shown that she is not part of any organization that shows discrimination to
colored students and has proven through her years of teaching that she can still show all her
students the same and equal treatment that a teacher should. By Mrs. Ann Griffin not associating
herself with any negative memberships she should not be dismissed from the high school.
Although Mrs. Griffin is now known for her discriminatory comment, her speech was not
meant to sway others in her opinions and that her speech was not to the entire school. Unlike the
court case Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, the student Matthew Fraser had made a
speech to the school that had been full of obscenities and innuendoes that were inappropriate to
be said at school. When Fraser went to court against the school, the Court had deemed that he
spoke offensive views about the students and was advocating his unpopular views in the
classroom. Fraser has shown that his views failed the “substantial disorder” part of the Tinker
test and therefore should have him dismissed from the school, Mrs. Griffin on the other hand did
not voice her opinions of her hatred of a race to the entire school, nor in the classroom. Mrs.
Griffin spoke in confidence to another teacher about her opinions on race. This shows that Mrs.
Griffin should not be dismissed from the school on the fact that her speech was not voiced in a
public arena and she was not trying to persuade any other faculty or students to believe in her
point of view. Mrs. Griffin still shows socially appropriate behavior towards the staff and other
students and this should be considered of her speech that has only been spoken once to another
teacher.
However, in a similar case to Mrs. Ann Griffin and the high school has also been in the
Supreme Court before in the Loeffelman V. Board of Education of the Crystal City School
District. In the Loeffelman case the teacher, Ms. Loeffelman, who was also a tenured teacher,
had been terminated from her indefinite contract based on her opinions on biracial relationships
and biracial children. During a class discussion, a student asked on Ms. Loeffelman’s opinion on
biracial relationships, where she answered that she disproved of them and continued to voice her
opinion on why they were not in her favor. Later that evening Ms. Loeffelman called the
student’s mother that she opposed interracial relationships and that the females in the
relationship should be “fixed” to not have children. Ms. Loeffelman was then terminated from
her contract based on her inappropriate, unprofessional and discriminatory remarks. Both Ms.
Loeffelman and Mrs. Ann Griffin had willfully violated the Board Policy 1300 and the Board
Policy 2130. Under the First Amendment teachers do have the right to freedom of speech:
however, they should not direct their comments towards a specific group that they directly work
with. Mrs. Ann Griffin should be dismissed based on her discrimination and disruptive speech
towards students and other staff.
Mrs. Griffin has shown that she has a hatred for all black people. This speech should not
go untouched as it is directed at a group of individuals that make up most the school student and
staff population. In the Supreme Court case Pickering v. Board of Education, Marvin Pickering
had been terminated from the high school for writing a letter that criticized the superintendent
and the school board in the misuse of the schools funding. The Supreme Court had later
overturned the dismissal of the teacher because his speech was not directed at the people in
which he normally worked with and that is was not disruptive to the school’s operation, unlike
Mrs. Griffin’s speech that has been directed at a specific group of people who she did directly
work with. Mrs. Griffin should be dismissed from the school on the fact that her speech did
disrupt the everyday operations of the school and caused discrimination towards the students of
the school.
Furthermore Mrs. Griffin has shown that she is a capable teacher that has made a
mistake in her speech to another educator. No one is perfect and we should consider the speech
that was said between the two educators and proceed with the hearing on the accounts that Mrs.
Griffin did voice her opinions to another educator regarding race, but has not shown any other
sign of discrimination towards the staff and students of the high school. I believe that Mrs.
Griffin should not be punished based on one piece of a conversation. I believe that as educators
we make mistakes and those mistakes are misrepresented and twisted by others. As a school, the
staff should not dismiss Mrs. Griffin unless she poses more unfavorable behavior and speech
towards the students and staff of color.

Reference
Reuters, Thomas. “FindLaw's United States Supreme Court Case and Opinions.” Findlaw,
Thomas Reuters, 1986, caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/478/675.html.
Webb, L.D ((2006). School Law for Teachers Concepts and Applications. New Jersey: Pearson
Education, Inc.

Artifact 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artifact 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artifact 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: EDU 210 PORTFOLIO ARTIFACT #2 1

EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #2

CSN Online Campus

towards students and other staff.

towards the students and staff of color.

Thomas Reuters, 1986, caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/478/675.html.

You might also like