School It

The First Amendment in Schools: An Overview

NCAC presents the following collection of materials on the topic of censorship in schools for the use

of students, educators, and parents everywhere. This information is not intended as legal advice. If

you are embroiled in a censorship controversy, we hope you will consult the resources below for guid-

ance if you need additional assistance, please contact us at ****@****.***.

Contents

Introduction 2

a) The purpose of this resource guide

b) Free speech, public education, and democracy

I. The First Amendment and Public Schools

a) The First Amendment 3

b) The Public Schools 4

II. Censorship

a) Understanding Censorship 5

b) Distinguishing Censorship from Selection 6

c) Consequences of Censorship 7

III. How Big a Problem is Censorship?

a) The Numbers 9

b) What Kind of Material is Censored?

c) What Does Age-Appropriate Mean? 10

d) Who Gets Censored? 11

IV. Roles and Responsibilities in Promoting First Amendment Values at School

a) School Officials, Boards, and State Mandates 12

b) Principles Governing Selection and Retention of Materials in Schools

c) Complaint Procedures 13

d) Practical Considerations of Dealing with Censorship Controversies 15

V. Censorship Policies Adopted by Major Educational Organizations 16

For information on a specific censorship topic in schools, visit the collection of fact sheets presented

in Censorship in Schools: NCAC on the Issues

Introduction

A. Purpose of the Resource Guide

The First Amendment safeguards the right of every American to speak and think freely. Its promise

of freedom of expression and inquiry is central to the educational process and equally important to

educators and students. The First Amendment protects educators ability to exercise their judgment

in accordance with professional standards, and provides the latitude to create learning environments

that effectively help young people acquire the knowledge and skills needed to become productive,

self-sufficient, and contributing members of society.

This document describes in practical terms what the right to freedom of expression means for the

public schools. We hope it provides National Education Association (NEA) staff, as well as teachers

and administrators around the country, with a deeper understanding of their constitutionally guaran-

teed rights and responsibilities, as well as renewed respect for the power of free expression to en-

hance the educational experience.

B. Free Speech, Public Education, and Democracy

Our founders recognized that public schools are one of the vital institutions of American democracy.

But education, they also knew, involved more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. Education in a

democratic society requires developing citizens who can adapt to changing times, decide important

social issues, and effectively judge the performance of public officials. In fulfilling their responsi-

bilities, public schools must not only provide students with knowledge of many subject areas and

training in essential skills, but must also educate students on core American values such as fairness,

equality, justice, respect for others, and the right to dissent.

Rapid social, political, and technological changes have escalated controversy over what and how

schools should teach. Issues like sexuality and profanity have raised questions for generations of

parents and educators, but they are even more complicated now, when most school communities are

made up of individuals with differing cultural traditions, religions, and often languages. With stu-

dents and parents bringing a range of expectations and needs to the classroom, educators frequently

face a daunting task in balancing the educational needs of an entire student body while maintaining

respect for the individual rights of each member of the school community.

The First Amendment establishes the framework for resolving some of these dilemmas by defining

certain critical rights and responsibilities of participants in the educational process. It both protects

the freedom of speech, thought, and inquiry, and requires respect for the right of others to do the

same. It requires us to adhere to Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wise counsel to resort to

"more speech not enforced silence" in seeking to resolve our differences.

The First Amendment and Schools

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or

abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition

the government for a redress of grievances. - First Amendment of the United States Constitution ratified

December 15, 1791.

A. The First Amendment

The first provision of the Bill of Rights establishes the rights essential to a democratic society and

most cherished by Americans: the right to speak and worship freely, the right to assemble and

petition government, and the right to a free press. It embodies human rights that are celebrated

throughout the world. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, in fact,

that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to

hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through

any media and regardless of frontiers." Few other countries, however, provide the level of protection

for free speech that the First Amendment to our Constitution guarantees.

The potential for tyranny by the state and abuse of government authority particularly worried framers

of the Bill of Rights. In a letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787, Thomas Jefferson argued, a

bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or par-

ticular, and what no just government should refuse or rest on inference." Thus, before enumerating

rights, the language of the First Amendment begins by prohibiting certain government conduct that

would obstruct certain rights i.e., "Congress shall make no law respecting These strictures, like

most aspects of the Constitution, control only what the government may do, and have no effect on

private individuals or businesses, which can do many things government officials cannot do.

Since public schools and public libraries are public institutions, they are bound by the obligations

imposed by the First Amendment as well as many other provisions of the Constitution. However, as

this manual will make clear, the First Amendment applies somewhat differently in schools than it

does in many other public institutions.

B. The Public Schools

Public schools are the institution which in some respects most embody the goals of the First Amend-

ment: to create informed citizenry capable of self-governance. As many commentators have observed,

a democracy relies on an informed and critical electorate to prosper. As Noah Webster observed in

1785: "It is scarcely possible to reduce an enlightened people to civil or ecclesiastical tyranny." And

on the eve of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Benjamin Rush stated that to conform the

principles, morals, and manners of our citizens to our republican form of government, it is absolute-

ly necessary that knowledge of every kind should be disseminated through every part of the Unites

States." Not surprisingly, universal access to free public education has long been viewed as an essen-

tial to realize our democratic ideals. According to the Supreme Court in Keyishian v. Board of Educa-

tion, 1967:

The classroom is peculiarly the "marketplace of ideas." The Nation s fu-

ture depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust

exchange of ideas which discovers "truth out of a multitude of tongues,

[rather] than through any kind of authoritative selection"

Schools must, of course, convey basic and advanced skills and information across a range of subject areas and

activities, and they must do so for students of different backgrounds and abilities. They must also help students

learn to work independently and in groups, and they must accomplish all of this in a safe environment that pro-

motes learning. Given the complexity of these responsibilities, school officials are generally accorded consider-

able deference in deciding how best to accomplish these goals.

Recent Supreme Court decisions have made clear, the right to free speech and expression can sometimes be

subordinated when necessary to achieve legitimate educational goals. (See discussions of Hazelwood School

District v. Kuhlmeier and Bethel School District v. Fraser, in NCAC on the Issues, Fact Sheet 4.) A school is not

comparable to a public park where anyone can stand on a soapbox, or a bulletin board on which anyone can

post a notice. While students and teachers do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or

expression at the schoolhouse gate (Tinker v. Des Moines), speech is not quite as free inside educational institu-

tions as outside.

This does not mean that students and teachers have no First Amendment rights at school. Quite the contrary.

But it means that within the educational setting, the right to free speech is implemented in ways that do not

interfere with the schools educational mission. Students cannot claim, for instance, that they have the right to

have incorrect answers to an algebra quiz accepted as correct, nor can teachers claim a right to teach anything

they choose. The following discussion and Fact Sheets illustrate in far more detail how the First Amendment

applies to schools in actual practice.

Censorship

A. Understanding Censorship

Censorship is not easy to define. According to Webster s Dictionary, to "censor" means "to examine

in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable." Its central characteristic is the sup-

pression of an idea or image because it offends or disturbs someone, or because they disagree with

it. In many countries, censorship is most often directed at political ideas or criticism of the govern-

ment. In the United States, censorship more often involves social issues, and in school is commonly

directed at so-called "controversial" materials.

Advocates for censorship often target materials that discuss sexuality, religion, race and ethnicity whether

directly or indirectly. For example, some people object to the teaching of Darwin s theory of evolution in

science classes because it conflicts with their own religious views. Others think schools are wrong to allow

discussion about sexual orientation in sex education or family life classes, and others would eliminate The

Adventures of Huckleberry Finn from the English curriculum because of racial references.

Most pressures for censorship come from parents who disapprove of language or ideas that differ

from or affront their personal views and values, but demands can emerge from anywhere across

the religious, ideological, and political spectrum. The range of "controversial" topics appears to be

limitless: religion, science, history, contemporary and classical literature, art, gender, sexuality, "one-

worldism," health, multiculturalism, and on and on. Many demands appear motivated by anxiety

about changing social conditions and traditions. Feminism, removal of prayer from schools, the

emergence of the gay rights movement, and other trends with implications for family structure and

personal values, have all generated calls for censorship.

Censorship demands require educators to balance First Amendment obligations and principles

against other concerns - such as maintaining the integrity of the educational program, meeting state

education requirements, respecting the judgments of professional staff, and addressing deeply held

beliefs in students and members of the community. Challenging as these circumstances may be, ed-

ucators are on the strongest ground if they are mindful of two fundamental principles derived from

the Supreme Court s First Amendment decisions: 1) educators enjoy wide latitude in exercising their

professional judgment and fulfilling their educational mission if their decisions are based on sound

educational and pedagogical principles and serve to enhance the ability of students to learn; and 2)

the decisions that are most vulnerable to legal challenge are those that are motivated by hostility to

an unpopular, controversial, or disfavored idea, or by the desire to conform to a particular ideological,

political or religious viewpoint.

Pursuant to these principles, lower courts generally defer to the professional judgments of educators.

As discussed in Fact Sheet #8, this sometimes means that the courts will uphold a decision to re-

move a book or to discipline a teacher, if it appears to serve legitimate educational objectives, includ-

ing administrative efficiency. However, administrators and educators who reject demands for censor-

ship are on equally strong or stronger grounds. Most professional educational organizations strongly

promote free expression and academic freedom as necessary to the educational process. Access to

a wide range of views and the opportunity to discuss and dissent are all essential to education and

serve the schools legitimate goals to prepare students with different needs and beliefs for adulthood

and participation in the democratic process. It is highly improbable that a school official who relied on

these principles and refused to accede to pressures to censor something with educational value would

ever be ordered by a court of law to do so.

There are practical and educational as well as legal reasons to adhere as closely as possible to the

ideals of the First Amendment. School districts such as Panama City, Florida and Hawkins County,

Tennessee have been stunned to find that acceding to demands for removal of a single book escalated

to demands for revising entire classroom reading programs. The school district in Island Trees, New

York encountered objections to 11 books in its library and curriculum, including Slaughter House

Five by Kurt Vonnegut, Black Boy, by Richard Wright, and The Fixer by Bernard Malamud. Other

jurisdictions have been pressed to revise the science curriculum, the content of history courses,

sex education, drug and alcohol education, and self-esteem programs. Experience has shown far

too many times that what appears to be capitulation to a minor adjustment can turn into the open-

ing foray of a major curriculum content battle involving warring factions of parents and politicians,

teachers, students and administrators.

B. Distinguishing Censorship from Selection

Teachers, principals, and school administrators make decisions all the time about which books and

materials to retain, add or exclude from the curriculum. They are not committing an act of censor-

ship every time they cross a book off a reading list, but if they decide to remove a book because

of hostility to the ideas it contains, they could be. As the National Council of Teachers of English

(NCTE) and International Reading Association (IRA) note, there is an important distinction between

selection based on professional guidelines and censorship: Whereas the goal of censorship is to

remove, eliminate or bar particular materials and methods, the goal of professional guidelines is to

provide criteria for selection of materials and methods.

For example, administrators and faculty might agree to take discussion of evolution out of the second

grade curriculum because the students lack sufficient background to understand it, and decide to intro-

duce it in the fourth grade instead. As long as they were not motivated by hostility to the idea of teaching

about evolution, this would not ordinarily be deemed censorship. The choice to include the material in the

fourth grade curriculum tends to demonstrate this was a pedagogical judgment, not an act of censorship.

Not every situation is that simple. For example, objections to material dealing with sexuality or sexual

orientation commonly surface in elementary schools and middle schools when individuals often

parents or religious leaders demand the material s removal with the claim that it is not age ap-

propriate for those students. On closer examination, it is clear their concern is not that students will

not understand the material, but that the objecting adults do not want the students to have access to

this type of information at this age. If professional educators can articulate a legitimate pedagogical

rationale to maintain such material in the curriculum, it is unlikely that an effort to remove it would

be successful.

Of course, hardly anyone admits to censoring something. Most people do not consider it censor-

ship when they attempt to rid the school of material that they think is profane or immoral, or when

they insist that the materials selected show respect for religion, morality, or parental authority. While

parents have considerable rights to direct their own child s education (see Fact Sheet #9), they have

no right to impose their judgments and preferences on other students and their families. School

officials who accede to demands to remove materials because of objections to their views or content

may be engaging in censorship. Even books or materials that many find objectionable may have

educational value, and the decision about what to use in the classroom should be based on profes-

sional judgments and standards, not individual preferences. Efforts to suppress a disfavored view or

controversial ideas are educationally unsound and constitutionally suspect.

The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right,

coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. - Pierce v. Society of

Sisters, 268 U.S. at 535 (1925).

C. Consequences of Censorship

What s so bad about getting rid of materials containing profanity? Many people don t want their chil-

dren using that kind of language even if they do it themselves, and many parents believe that seeing

profanity in books or hearing others swear encourages youngsters to do the same, especially if the act

goes unpunished. Yet profanity appears in many worthwhile books, films and other materials for the

same reasons many people use it in their everyday language for emphasis or to convey emotion. As

Shakespeare s Hamlet says to the players, the purpose of drama is to hold, as twere, the mirror up

to nature.

Works containing profanity often contain realistic portrayals of how an individual might respond in

a situation, and some teachers intentionally select such materials to remove the allure from cursing.

But even minor use of profanity has not shielded books from attack. Katherine Paterson s award-win-

ning book Bridge to Terabithia contains only mild profanity, but it has been repeatedly challenged on

that ground, as have long-acknowledged classics like Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck. Profanity,

however, is only one of many grounds on which books are challenged. Almost every classic piece of

literature -- including The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, The Diary of Anne Frank, and

Shakespeare s Romeo and Juliet -- has been for some reason, in some place, at some time.

As these examples illustrate, censorship based on individual sensitivities and concerns restricts the

world of knowledge available to students. And that world could get smaller and smaller. Based on per-

sonal views, some parents wish to eliminate material depicting violence, others object to references to

sexuality, others to racially-laden speech or images. Some parents oppose having their children exposed

to fiction that doesn t have a happy ending, teach a moral lesson, or provide noble role models. If these

and other individual preferences were legitimate criteria for censoring materials used in school, the cur-

riculum would narrow to including only the least controversial and probably least relevant material. It

would hardly address students real concerns, satisfy their curiosity, or prepare them for life.

Censorship also harms teachers. By limiting resources and flexibility, censorship hampers a teacher s

ability to explore all possible avenues to motivate and reach students. By curtailing ideas that can

be discussed in class, censorship takes creativity and vitality out of the art of teaching. Instruction is

reduced to bland, formulaic, pre-approved exercises carried out in an environment that discourages

the give-and-take that can spark a student s enthusiasm for learning. To maintain the spontaneous

give and take of the classroom setting, teachers need latitude to respond to unanticipated questions

and discussion, and the freedom to draw on their professional judgment and expertise, without fear of

consequences if someone objects, disagrees, or takes offense. When we strip teachers of their professional

judgment, we forfeit the educational vitality we prize. When we quell controversy for the sake of congeniality,

we deprive democracy of its mentors Gregory Hobbs, Jr (dissenting in Board of Education of Jefferson

County School District R-1 v. Alfred Wilder)

Censorship chills creativity and in that way impacts everyone. In a volume entitled Places I Never Meant To Be,

author Judy Blume, whose books are a common target of censorship efforts, has collected statements of censored

writers about the harms of censorship.

According to one frequently censored author, Katherine Paterson:

When our chief goal is not to offend someone, we are not likely to write a book that will deeply affect anyone.

Julius Lester observed:

Censorship is an attitude of mistrust and suspicion that seeks to deprive the human experience of mystery and

complexity. But without mystery and complexity, there is no wonder; there is no awe; there is no laughter.

Norma Fox Mazur added:

...where once I went to my writing without a backward glance, now I sometimes have to consciously clear my

mind of those shadowy censorious presences. That s bad for me as a writer, bad for you as a reader. Censor-

ship is crippling, negating, stifling.. It should be unthinkable in a country like ours. Readers deserve to pick

their own books. Writers need the freedom of their minds. That s all we writers have, anyway: our minds and

imaginations. To allow the censors even the tiniest space in there with us can only lead to dullness, imitation,

and mediocrity.

Censorship represents a tyranny over the mind, said Thomas Jefferson a view shared by founders

of our nation and is harmful wherever it occurs. Censorship is particularly harmful in the schools

because it prevents youngsters with inquiring minds from exploring the world, seeking truth and

reason, stretching their intellectual capacities, and becoming critical thinkers. When the classroom

environment is chilled, honest exchange of views is replaced by guarded discourse and teachers lose

the ability to reach and guide their students effectively.

How Big a Problem is Censorship

A. The Numbers

Censorship occurs every day in this country. Sometimes it s obvious even if no one uses the "C"

word. Sometimes it s invisible when a teacher decides not to use a particular story or book or when

a librarian decides not to order a particular magazine because of fears about possible complaints. No

one can quantify this kind of "chilling effect" and its consequences for education.

The American Library Association (ALA), which tracks and reports censorship incidents, records a

problem of significant magnitude, and they estimate that for each incident reported, there are four

or five that go unreported. ALA states that between 1990 and 1998, 5,246 challenges were reported

to or recorded by its Office for Intellectual Freedom. During the 1995-1996 school year alone, there

were 475 challenges to educational materials, according to People for the American Way (PFAW).

Both PFAW and ALA report challenges from all regions of the country and most states.

B. What Kind of Material Is Attacked?

Almost 70 percent of the demands for censorship are directed at material in school classrooms or

libraries. Most of the remainder are aimed at material in public libraries. Parents lodge 60 percent

of the challenges. The American Library Association offers an instructive analysis of the motivation

behind most censorship incidents:

The term censor often evokes the mental picture of an irrational, belliger-

ent individual. Such a picture, however, is misleading. In most cases, the

one to bring a complaint to the library is a concerned parent or a citizen

sincerely interested in the future well being of the community. Although

complainants may not have a broad knowledge of literature or of the

principles of freedom of expression, their motives in questioning a book

or other library material are seldom unusual. Any number of reasons are

given for recommending that certain material be removed from the library.

Complainants may believe that the materials will corrupt children and ado-

lescents, offend the sensitive or unwary reader, or undermine basic values

and beliefs. Sometimes, because of these reasons, they may argue that the

materials are of no interest or value to the community.

Of more than 5,000 challenges recorded by the ALA over the past eight years, 1,299 challenges al-

leged the materials content was "sexually explicit;" 1,134 objections concerned "offensive language"

in the material; 1,062 alleged the material was "unsuited to age group;" 744 complained about an

"occult theme or promoting the occult or Satanism;" and 474 concerned objections about homo-

sexual issues or "promoting homosexuality." Other reasons for objecting to materials included nudity

(276), racism (219), sex education content (190), or anti family sentiments (186).

While demands for censorship can come from almost anyone and involve any topic or form of

expression, most incidents involve concerns about sexual content, religion, profanity, or racial lan-

guage. Many incidents involve only one complaint, but nonetheless trigger a review process that can

become contentious. Often, the parents who support free expression do not step forward to partici-

pate in public discussions to the same extent as those seeking to remove materials, leaving school

officials and teachers relatively isolated. It is then their task to assess the pedagogical value of the

materials carefully to avoid simply giving in to angry demands that could undermine educational

objectives, send students and colleagues the wrong message, and invite additional challenges in the

future.

C. What Does Age Appropriate Mean?

One of the most common demands for censorship involves the claim that certain school materials

are not age appropriate. The term is often used to mean that students of a particular age shouldn t

be exposed to the material, not that they are too young to understand it. The objection usually comes

up when the material concerns sexuality and usually reflects a fear that exposure to this subject mat-

ter undermines moral or religious values. Since many non-objecting parents support informing even

young children about sexual matters, it is clear that the content of the material as much as the age

of the child lies at the heart of the objection. Acceding to pressure to censor in this situation can be

tantamount to endorsing one moral or religious view or morality over another.

Educators generally use the term age appropriate when they mean the point at which children have

sufficient life experience and cognitive skills to comprehend certain material. Education proceeds

in stages, with increasingly complex material presented as students gain the intellectual ability and

knowledge to understand and process it. For this reason, young children usually do not learn phys-

ics or read Shakespeare. Similarly, educators may decide that detailed scientific information about

human reproduction might not be age-appropriate for six-year-olds, but would be appropriate for 12-

year-olds who have been introduced to basic biology.

According to high school teacher Vicky Greenbaum, writing in The English Journal (vol. 86, #2,

Feb.1997, pp. 16 - 20), the term comes from psychological concepts defining age-appropriate be-

haviors. She observes, however, that the rationale for psychological descriptions of the age at which

certain behaviors generally occur has limited relevance to the selection of educational materials and

literature in the classroom. If students understand the sexual allusions in Hamlet, she believes the

discussion of it is age-appropriate. In contrast,

[a]dults who cling to this vision of youth [as innocent] have a corresponding

vision of what s appropriate, hoping perhaps that if youth are unexposed to

certain elements in the world, they will remain pure, and the world will be

a better place. Indeed, for such adults a pristine vision of youth often forms

a wall between themselves and any adolescents they happen to know. Youth

are people already possessing knowledge and vulnerabilities in ways akin to

adults, and their greatest need may be for thoughtful consideration or guid-

ance, while making sense of a vast, difficult, not always appropriate world.

Responding to questions about age appropriateness, the National Council of Teachers of English

noted that materials should be suited to maturity level of the students, and that it is important

to weigh the value of the material as a whole, particularly its relevance to educational objectives,

against the likelihood of a negative impact on the students That likelihood is lessened by the expo-

sure the typical student has had to the controversial subject

D. Who Gets Censored?

In 1998, ALA and PFAW found the most frequently challenged authors were Robert Cormier, Lois

Lowry, John Steinbeck, R. L. Stine, Maya Angelou, Judy Blume, Robie Harris, James Lincoln Collier

and Christopher Collier, and Katherine Paterson. In the 14-year period between 1982 and 1996, the

most frequently challenged authors were Judy Blume, Alvin Schwartz, Stephen King, John Steinbeck,

Robert Cormier, J.D. Salinger, Roald Dahl, Maya Angelou, Mark Twain, and Katherine Paterson.

The books targeted by censors included both popular and classic titles, affecting choices made by

almost every age group. PFAW s list of most challenged books from 1982-1996 includes:

John Steinbeck, Of Mice and Men

J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye

Robert Cormier, The Chocolate War

Maya Angelou, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

Alvin Schwartz, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark

Mark Twain, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Alvin Schwartz, More Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark

Anonymous, Go Ask Alice

Katherine Paterson, Bridge to Terabithia

Roald Dahl, The Witches

Two years later, many of these works were still prime targets of censorship demands. According to

the ALA, the most frequently challenged books in 1998 included:

Robert Cormier, The Chocolate War

John Steinbeck, Of Mice and Men

R. L. Stine, Goosebumps Series and Fear Street Series

Maya Angelou, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings

Lois Lowry, The Giver

Luis Rodriguez, Always Running

Jane Leslie Conly, Crazy Lady

Judy Blume, Blubber

Roles and Responsibilities

Promoting First Amendment Values at School

A. School Officials, Boards and State Mandates

The school board s role is to define an educational philosophy that serves the needs of all its students

and reflects community goals. In this process, most districts see a role for parents and other com-

munity members. Educational advisory boards can also assist educators in discerning the needs and

perspectives of the community. Open school board meetings can keep the public informed about the

school district s educational philosophy and goals, encourage comments, questions and participation,

and increase community support for the schools. Although public debate about the educational sys-

tem provides opportunities for community input and can assist educators in developing materials to

meet students needs and concerns, actual curriculum development and selection are tasks uniquely

suited to the skills and training of professional educators.

While curriculum development relies heavily on the professional expertise of trained educators, it is

also controlled by state education law and policy. Educators choices are influenced by factors such as

competency standards, graduation requirements, standardized testing, and other educational deci-

sions made at the state level.

B. Principles Governing Selection and Retention of Materials in Schools

Sound curriculum development requires that educators with professional expertise decide which

materials are educationally appropriate, consistent with the school district s educational philosophy

and goals and state education law. School officials also have the constitutional duty to ensure that cur-

riculum development and selection decisions are not made with the aim of advancing any particular

ideological, political, or religious viewpoint.

Many professional educational organizations, and individual school systems, have articulated the

principles that should ideally govern selection and retention of materials in schools, and these state-

ments and policies uniformly emphasize reliance on the expertise of professional educators in devel-

oping materials that will best serve the needs of students. NEA Resolutions state that

quality teaching depends on the freedom to select materials and techniques. Teachers and librarians/

media specialists must have the right to select instructional material/library materials without cen-

sorship or legislative interference

Similarly, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) policy on textbook selection emphasizes

that its "first commitment" is "preservation of the student s right to learn in an atmosphere of aca-

demic freedom," and that "[s]election of materials will be made by professional personnel through

reading, listening, viewing, careful examination, the use of reputable, unbiased, professionally pre-

pared selection aids The National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading

Association advise selecting curricular materials that 1) have a clear connection to established educa-

tional objectives, and 2) address the needs of the students for whom they are intended. Significantly,

the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) cautions that "professional

judgment must not be completely subservient to the popular will. Educators primary allegiance must

be to the integrity of knowledge and the welfare of students materials must never be removed or

restricted for the purpose of suppressing ideas."

Policies governing school libraries and classroom resource materials reflect the priority placed on

inclusion of a wider range of materials, because of the libraries traditional role to offer choices for all

readers. The American Library Association Library Bill of Rights, first adopted in 1948, recognizes

the library s essential role in providing resources to serve the interest, information, and enlighten-

ment of all people of the community. With minor modifications, these principles also apply in the

school setting.

The considerations specifically relevant to school libraries are identified by NSBA guidelines:

To provide materials that will enrich and support the school s curricula...

To provide materials that will stimulate knowledge, growth, literary appreciation, aes-

thetic values, ethical standards, and leisure-time reading;

To provide information to help students make intelligent judgments;

To provide information on opposing sides of controversial issues so that students may

develop the practice of critical reading and thinking; and

To provide materials representative of the many religious, ethnic, and cultural groups

that have contributed to the American heritage.

As is true with curricular materials, the ALA cautions that library materials should not be proscribed

or removed because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval.

C. Complaint Procedures

Many school districts adopt formal policies and procedures for responding to complaints about mate-

rials, and for good reason. They simplify the functioning of the schools by clarifying how complaint

processes work; help faculty, staff, and administration fulfill their legal obligations; let parents and

students know what criteria are used for removing materials and how they are applied; provide op-

portunities to understand more about community perspectives and values; and protect the academic

freedom of teachers.

When materials are challenged, schools with well-articulated processes for handling complaints and

reviews are more likely to resist censorship pressures than districts that lack such guidelines. Hav-

ing policies in place, and following them scrupulously, ensures that complainants will receive due

process, and that challenged materials will be judged on educational merits rather than personal

opinion. It is important for teachers and administrators to be familiar with these policies and under-

stand their significant function. Armed with this knowledge, schools officials are less likely to submit

to pressure or react with unilateral decisions to remove books.

Different school systems implement complaint procedures in different ways, but most provide that:

Complaints must be made in writing;

Complainants should identify themselves both by name/address, and by their interest

in the material (i.e., as a parent, student, religious leader, etc.);

Complainants must have read/seen the entire work objected to;

The complaint must be specific about the reasons for the objection;

Complaints should request a specific remedy (i.e., an alternative assignment for an indi-

vidual, or removal/exclusion affecting the entire school community); and

Complaints, standing alone, will not be considered grounds for disciplining teachers or

librarians.

It is advisable for policies to contain a statement supporting intellectual and academic freedom, and an

explanation of the importance of exposing students to a wide variety of material and information, some

of which may be considered "controversial." Policies should also clearly indicate that certain kinds of

objections do not provide a legally permissible ground for removal, exclusion or restriction. Disagree-

ment with a specific idea or message, and personal objections to materials on religious, political or social

grounds, are the most common grounds for challenges and the most suspect. Such concerns may justify

a parent s request that his or her child be assigned alternate material, and if shared more widely they may

suggest the need for discussion about how teachers and school officials can better explain the educa-

tional value of the material, and ways in which any perceived harms can be alleviated, perhaps through

inclusion of additional materials or otherwise. But such personal viewpoint-based concerns, standing

alone, rarely justify removal of a book or other material, and may raise First Amendment issues.

A committee - often composed of instructional staff, library staff, and administrators, and sometimes

including students and parents - ordinarily processes complaints. Their recommendation is usually

subject to a review process, but the judgment of such a committee made up by professionals, with

or without lay members, is entitled to deference if grounded in sound educational and pedagogical

principles. Its decision should only be reversed for compelling educational reasons. Materials should

never be removed unless the complaint procedures are followed, and materials should never be re-

moved prior to completion of the complaint process.

These principles, if uniformly and consistently implemented, protect students whose right to learn

about something should not be limited to conform to some other individual s or family s preferences.

They also protect educators in the exercise of their professional judgment, and help insulate them

and the school district from legal challenge and community pressure.

D. Practical Considerations of Dealing with Censorship Controversies

School administrators and teachers should work together to develop an understanding about

how they will respond if material is challenged, recognizing that it is impossible to predict what

may be challenged.

Educators should always have a rationale for the materials employed - regardless of

whether they think something is potentially controversial.

In approaching material that may be controversial, keep parents advised about what

material students are using and why it has been selected.

Encourage parents to raise questions about curricular materials directly with their

child s teacher, and encourage teachers to be willing and available to discuss concerns

with parents.

Schedule regular meetings for parents. In one innovative program in South Carolina,

called Communicate through Literature, librarian Pat Scales invited parents to the

library once a month, without students, to discuss contemporary young adult books

that their children might be reading, to understand how the books helped their children

grow intellectually and emotionally, and to encourage parents to use the discussion of

books to spark conversation with their children. She never had a censorship case, but

had many calls from parents asking her to recommend books for their children to ad-

dress troublesome issues. (Pat Scales book, Teaching Banned Books (American Library

Ass n, 2001) describes this program in detail.)

Involve members of the community in any debate over challenged materials. Broaden-

ing the discussion usually reveals that only a small number of people object on the same

material, or on the same ground, but that if one person s preferences are taken into

account, others will expect the same treatment - making almost everything vulnerable to

challenge.

Support the value of intellectual and academic freedom. Conscientious teachers who

are unlucky enough to get caught in the middle of a censorship dispute - and it could

happen to anyone - deserve support from their colleagues and the community if their

choices are justifiable educationally. Without such trust and some latitude, teachers will

stick only to the tried and true, or the bland and unobjectionable.

Censorship Policies

Major Educational Organizations Take a Stand for the First Amendment

Many national and international organizations concerned with elementary and secondary education

have established guidelines on censorship issues as a service for their constituents. Based on their

goals, values, and constituencies, each organization addresses censorship a little differently, but each

is committed to free speech and recognizes the dangers and hardships imposed by censorship. The

organizations couple their concern for free speech with a concern for balancing the rights of stu-

dents, teachers and parents. Many place heavy emphasis on the importance of establishing policies

for selecting classroom materials, as well as procedures for addressing complaints. The following

listing summarizes the censorship and material selection policies adopted by leading national and

international educational organizations.

National Education Association (NEA)

The NEA is America s oldest and largest organization committed to advancing the cause of public ed-

ucation. Its 2.5 million members work at every level of education. Elected representatives from across

the country are responsible for setting policy, which includes resolutions on selecting and developing

education materials and teaching techniques. The resolutions embody NEA s belief that democratic

values are best transmitted in an atmosphere free of censorship and deplore "pre-publishing censor-

ship, book burning crusades, and attempts to ban books from the...curriculum." Taking a proactive

position, the NEA encourages its members to be involved in developing textbooks and materials and

to seek the removal of laws and regulations that restrict selection of diverse materials.

The National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association (NCTE/IRA)

The NCTE "supports intellectual freedom at all educational levels." A 80,000-member organization

devoted to improving the teaching and learning of English and the language arts, the NCTE offers

support, advice, and resources to teachers and schools faced with challenges to teaching materials

or methods. The NCTE has developed a Statement on Censorship and Professional Guidelines in

recognition that English and language arts teachers face daily decisions about teaching materials

and methods. The IRA has 90,000 members worldwide, working in a variety of educational capaci-

ties. Its goal is to promote high levels of literacy by improving the quality of reading instruction and

encouraging reading as a lifetime habit. The IRA supports "freedom of speech, thought, and inquiry

as guaranteed by the First Amendment."

The NCTE and IRA have issued a joint statement on intellectual freedom: "all students in public

school classrooms have the right to materials and educational experiences that promote open inquiry,

critical thinking, diversity in thought and expression, and respect for others." Their mutual policy

sets out four principles aimed at translating the ideals of the First Amendment into classroom reality:

(1) to actively support intellectual freedom; (2) to foster democratic values, critical thinking and open

inquiry; (3) to prepare for challenges with clearly defined procedures; and (4) to ensure educational

communities are free to select and review classroom curricula to meet student needs.

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)

The ASCD is an international organization of professional educators committed to excellence in edu-

cation. Its mission is to forge covenants in teaching and learning for the success of all learners. In

its statement on censorship, the ASCD recognizes the importance of balancing the rights and needs

of students, teachers and parents while maintaining freedom of expression.

When challenges arise, school officials should bear in mind that education

is governed by the public . . . [Educators] should recognize the value of citi-

zen participation and respect the right of parents to shape their children s

schooling. At the same time, educators should insist that, as in other fields,

professional judgment must not be completely subservient to the popular

will. Educators primary allegiance must be to the integrity of knowledge

and the welfare of students.

The ASCD stresses the importance of establishing complaint procedures and affirms that materials

are never to be restricted for the purpose of suppressing ideas.

American Library Association (ALA)

The ALA, "the voice of America s libraries," is dedicated to providing leadership for the "develop-

ment, promotion and improvement of library and information services...in order to enhance learning

and access to information for all." The ALA has a widely emulated Bill of Rights affirming all librar-

ies as forums for information and ideas. The ALA s policies stipulate that libraries should provide

materials from all points of view; challenge censorship; cooperate with free speech groups; grant

access to all regardless of origin, age, background or views; and provide exhibit space on an equitable

basis. Drawing on the United Nation s Declaration of Human Rights, the ALA emphasizes the impor-

tance of free speech:

We know that censorship, ignorance, and limitations on the free flow

of information are the tools of tyranny and oppression. We believe that

ideas and information topple the walls of hate and fear and build bridges

of cooperation and understanding far more effectively than weapons and

armies.

National Association of Elementary School Principles (NAESP)

Dedicated to assuring that every American boy and girl receives the world s best elementary and middle school

education, NAESP sets policy on curriculum and instruction. In its statement on censorship and academic freedom,

"NAESP affirms the right of the student and teacher to use a wide variety of curriculum and literary materials and

to explore divergent points of view." NAESP also emphasizes the importance of establishing procedures to address

selection of materials and challenges to selections. These procedures are to be carried out, "professionally and equi-

tably" according to established professional criteria, and the values and needs of the community.

National School Board Association

The National Education Policy Network of the National School Boards Association (NEPN/NSBA) Textbook Selec-

tion and Adoption policy states, among other things, that "The Board s first commitment in selecting and adopting

textbooks will be the preservation of the student s right to learn in an atmosphere of academic freedom. Secondly,

the Board will support the teachers right to exercise professional judgment in their work; but, at the same time,

will require teachers to balance this right with an awareness of their responsibility to meet the educational foals and

objectives of the school system. Thirdly, the Board recognizes the rights of parents to influence the education of their

children. The Board will not, however, allow the wishes of an individual parent to infringe upon the rights of the

majority of students in any class."

National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC)

Founded in 1974, NCAC is an alliance of 51 national non-profit organizations, including literary, artistic, religious,

educational, professional, labor, and civil liberties groups, united in their support of freedom of thought, inquiry,

and expression. NCAC works with teachers, educators, writers, artists, and others around the country dealing with

censorship debates in their own communities; it educates its members and the public at large about the dangers of

censorship and how to oppose them; and it advances policies that promote and protect freedom of expression and

democratic values.

Contact this candidate