Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Artifact #2
Teachers Rights and Responsibilities
Angel Gutierrez
College of Southern Nevada
February 12, 2015
ARTIFACT #2 TEACHERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Freddie Watts and Jimmy Brothers both African American principle and assistant
conversation with one of the white tenured teachers named Ann Griffin, who works at the
high school there becomes a point where the conversation begins to heat up. At this point,
Ann Griffin states that she hated all black folks. After this incident word gets leaked
about her statement and creates a very tense and negative reaction between both white and
black colleagues at the high school. The principle Mr. Watts recommends that Ann Griffin
be dismissed due to the concerns that her ability due to the statement of her hating all black
people would result in her not treating students fairly and her competency as a teacher. The
question that we have here is whether the court will rule in favor or against Ann Griffin.
In favor of Ann Griffin, she may tell the courts that she has property rights to
continued employment. Due to the fact that Ann Griffin is under the contract of being a
for teachers, Once a teacher is granted tenure, the teacher is said to have a property right
to continued employment, which cannot be taken away without due process. (2006). In
this case the Principle Freddie Watts did recommend that she be dismissed. Ann Griffin
can tell the courts that the comment she made was not enough reason to be recommended
for dismissal. Ann Griffin can state that this is her right to freedom of speech under the
Belyeu V. Coosa County Bd. Of Education will be the first case I will
present to argue against tenured teacher, Ann Griffin. The argument will be that the
comment she made was in fact not under protection of the First Amendment, freedom of
speech. In the case of Belyeu V. Coosa County Bd. Of Education, a teachers aide
ARTIFACT #2 TEACHERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
mentioned that the school did not rehire her due to her making a suggestion at a PTA
meeting about racial issues without prior approval from the principle. The suggestion she
made was that the school should adopt a program in order to commemorate Black History
month. In this case the teachers aid won the case due to the fact that she clearly touched
up on an issue of public concern. With Ann Griffin she did not touch up on the subject of
public concern when she spoke about hating black people. Instead her remark due to its
racial division isnt protected by the first amendments teachers rights to freedom of
speech. As mention by the Eleventh Circuit when discussing the case of Belyeu v. Coosa
County Bd. Of Education, Her remarks did not disrupt the school systems function by
enhancing racial division, nor based on the nature or context of her remarks, was her speech
likely to do so. In the case of Ann Griffin not only did the context of her remarks suggest
an enhancement of racial division but it also caused a disruption of the schools system
The following case Pickering v. Board of Education is a second case that argues
against Ann Griffin. In this case a high school teacher was terminated after writing a letter
to a newspaper complaining and criticizing the superintendent and the school board
because of the way they were handling the school funds. The Supreme Court in this case
ruled in favor of teacher in the fact that teachers as citizens have the right to make
comments about public concern; this is a freedom of speech. The only way that this can be
coworkers. Unless the public expression undermines the effectiveness of the working
relationship between the teachers and the teachers superior or coworkers. (Underwood
& Webb, 2006). With the case of Ann Griffin she would fall into the category of freedom
ARTIFACT #2 TEACHERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
of speech that is not protected. Her statement about hating black people undermines the
working condition due to the fact that as mentioned before it caused negative reactions
among colleagues both black and white. There are specific speeches that do not have any
protection rights under the first amendment. As opposed to speech on matters of public
concern, speech that involves purely personal concern is not protected, examples include
Webb, 2006). Another reason her comment is not considered a protected freedom of
speech is due to the fact that her administrators are both African American and what she
said was of personal concern and can be understood as a personal attack on her
administrators during their heated conversation. Overall Ann Griffins comment was not for
comment. The fact that Ann Griffin is a tenured teacher at an all-black high school this can
cause negative work environment and it will place a damper on the effectiveness of the
school environment. Ann Griffin did not have a protected freedom of speech right under
the first amendment. Instead as mentioned in the cases of Belyeu v. Coosa County Bd. Of
Education and Pickering v. Board of Education, the comment she made while being on the
school grounds was not protected by the freedom of speech due to the comment not being
for the greater public good but rather could be taken as a tactic to offend her administrators.
Her argument that she is a tenured employee and has a property right can be revoked with
due process due to her comment made that was not in the guidelines of protected speech.
ARTIFACT #2 TEACHERS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
References
http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/faq.aspx?id=12820.
Underwood, J. & Webb, L. (2006). Teachers rights. In School Law for Teachers. Upper Saddle