Pregnancy. Divorce. Drugs. Alcoholism. Anorexia.
Bulimia. With an addition so many more, these ingredients are what make up our everyday atmosphere. Our everyday society. Flick on the tube and turn to Channel 3 news… “Divorce rate has shot up into a ravishing 50%!” … “Another drug bust just prevailed at our local high-school…
.” … “Just in at 12: 30 am, a five car pile up due do drunk teenage driver!” These are phrases we hear everyday screaming at us. It’s on the news, why shouldn’t we read and / or learn about it in school? ! Is it not a place of education and prevention? Prevention. That’s what we all learn in our health classes before we can take the responsibility of owning a car. Cars.
Everything mentioned above can be achieved through a teenager owning a car. So if these circumstances were right at the tip their noses, and can be achieved so easily, why would a Supreme Court want to steal that knowledge away from us? Knowledge that is being given to us second hand from our own peers. Think, who will you hearken to more when it comes to controversial topics such as divorce or pregnancy… a grouchy old teacher or your cool note pass’n buddy? We all know the answer to that. The Supreme Court ruling for the Hazelwood East High School case of (1983) heard in 1988 was totally uncalled for. They never once thought about what really was going on.
The reason the two pages were deleted in the first place is the lack of translation of knowledge. How could that have been prevented… you got it Sherlock, through responsibility to inform on a certain individual’s part. The principal didn’t really want to delete the pages, just make them not as formal and retract the names of the father in the divorce page. Yet, since he underestimated the real impact that the students, they were unsuccessful in achieving what could have been an incredible impingement.
The Term Paper on Children Of Divorce
Abstract Currently, 50% of today’s children are affected by parental divorce. Court dockets across the country are rife with angry parents embroiled in contentious divorce proceedings that are often protracted by custody and child support disputes. Children of these broken and failed marriages are stuck in the midst of a traumatic event. Whatever parental strife existed prior to divorce is now ...
Disruption of class. When has a school newspaper ever disrupted a class? None that comes to mind. And how can an article written about, and with the consent of, three young pregnant ladies, and the topic of divorce be reputed? Even back in 1983, pregnancy was starting to prevail, and since the young ladies gave their consent, who could be more offended then them. No one. And when divorce was chugging uphill, a student wanted to express how it’s like walking in their shoes.
Why should these very pertinent information be reputed? Because the Supreme Court labeled them to be non “legitimate pedagogical concerns.” The Supreme Court stated that a school need not tolerate speech that is inconsistent with its “basic educational mission.” What the hell were they thinking? A school-newspaper is fabricated by the students, the students writing to inform their about current events. School events, fashion, extra-curricular activities. Funny how these are all subjects of education. When students actually choose to express a certain topic that for once is not superficial or expendable; yet thought provoking, personal, and pertinent to everyday life, the Supreme Court suppresses it and supports the administration for deleting such “preposterous” and “derogatory” content. The Supreme Court also goes on to flap that the Journalism II class is a “laboratory situation” in which students apply the skills they have learned in journalism. Yes, the students are using their skills and applying them.
The got the OKAY from the teacher, he would not have put it in had their skill not been up to parr. A skill is how you write, but what you write is all up to you, the student, the reporter. If a student can set a paper up correctly and gather his / her information, they have done their Scientific Method, and presented their paper in a “laboratory” manner… they are set to fly. The Court can not condemn students for making not only their students think, but better yet their administers. What a concept.
Parents For Public Schools
Parents for Public Schools Today, the push for more accountability of student performance changed how assessment will be measured and judged in public schools. Not only will students be assessed through test scores, but also through attendance, school work, and observations. Parents hold the schools responsible for the advancement of their students' knowledge. Different tests are given to measure ...
Instead of the teachers making the students think, the students are making the teachers think. It’s a no lose situation, the teachers think and the students are sophisticated enough to do so. Yes, there should be rules and there should be restrictions. Yes, there should be some supervision and guidance, and editorial control over school newspapers. No, there should not be drastic decisions based on one principal’s ignorance and shallowmindness that his student body should not be informed about real life matters. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the administration because if they did not, they would be shunned upon by more than a majority.
There was bias thinking on their part that they should always rule for the higher, “more intelligent”, respectable man. I beg to differ my friend. If looked at on a deeper level, the students are the ones with the mature, thought provoking minds. They are the individuals who made us utilize an amazing machine we have within. Top Story of the local newspaper reads…
.” A High School student has just entered and acquired a spot in the AJC to write about the issues and controversies in which our teenagers live through each day.”.
