The two sides in the battle against censorship in schools has taken a drastic turn for the worst. From school committees seeking the "best interests" of students, it has morphed into a custody battle between parents and curriculum creators. And neither side is letting up.
Based on historical court cases in defense of free speech, it is evident the use of censorship in schools has been an ongoing debate in this country.
In the U.S. District Court case Right to Read Defense Committee v. School Committee of the City of Chelsea, a Massachusetts School Committee tried to ban an anthology of poems-Male and Female under 18- due to one particularly "offensive" and "damaging" excerpt, "The City to a Young Girl." In response, the court ruled that, "The library is 'a mighty resource in the marketplace of ideas.' [...] The student who discovers the magic of the library is on the way to a life-long experience of self-education and enrichment. That student learns that a library is a place to test or expand upon ideas presented to him, in or out of the classroom. The most effective antidote to the poison of mindless orthodoxy is ready access to a broad sweep of ideas and philosophies. There is no danger from such exposure. The danger is mind control" (ALA 2017).
This case came after a running list of court cases in defense of students' right to read. While the movement has picked up steam today, the problem with censoring literary works goes back to 20th, even 19th centuries in this country. The best place to start is by looking at how freedom of speech and publication is protected in the First Amendment of the Constitution.
The most effective antidote to the poison of mindless orthodoxy is ready access to a broad sweep of ideas and philosophies.
The First Amendment declares: "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." This expands into the classroom setting, especially in schools owned and financed by the government. The government may be able to pour money into educational institutions, but they draw the line at preventing content or instructional materials.
 |
| Figure 1 |
Based on Figure 1, the biggest arbitrators of challenging books as parents (50%). Obviously, parents are putting their kids through school to get the most out of their education. They want to be involved in their children's formation and development, and that includes the materials they use in the classroom. They hope to keep a minimal amount of exposure to explicit or mature ideas, with the intention of upholding their personal, religious, and moral values. And books play a major role in shaping the mind of a child.
There are several cases across the span of American history that demonstrate the effectiveness of the judiciary system in upholding the First Amendment, yet at times the lines get blurred as to what is "constitutional" or not. For instance, in Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. (1982), the court ruled that, "Local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books and seek by their removal to prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion" (ALA 2017). Additionally, the ALA argues that "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
Other cases were ruled in defense of questionable texts and materials being allowed in schools, on the basis that schools did not have to accommodate religious beliefs and other presuppositions.
Likewise, educators are expected to uphold the National Committee of English Teacher's Students' Right to Read- a movement that has sparked nationwide interest as the number of challenged books grows. It's two sections include a letter from the NCTE to parents on the defense of freedom in reading materials. They argue that the right to free speech begins by accumulating ideas, which comes from reading. Schools are entrusted to providing credible and meritorious works that engage and inspire students. By taking away books at a whim, they also take away the freedom to learn and the right to expression. After all, if you've never been exposed to an idea, you don't know what to believe. In fact, it's as if the schools are imposing their beliefs onto the students by the books they choose to include in their curriculum.
This is evident in another case: Evans v. Selma Union High School District of Fresno County, which determined that, "The mere act of purchasing a book to be added to the school library does not carry with it any implication of the adoption of the theory or dogma contained therein, or any approval of the book itself, except as a work of literature fit to be included in a reference library" (ALA 2017).
No parent wants to learn after the fact that their child read a book in school that they may not promote in their own household. The lines are blurry where exactly a school can interject their policies regarding content and reading material that also challenges parents' preferences for their idea of bringing up their children. But one thing is certain: schools do not necessarily have clearance to promote just any idea they want. It may seem necessary to include more modern selections in their curriculum, but ultimately it is the decision of the child to read books containing controversial ideas. The key here is that books, in general, should not be banned, but rather left to the decision of the individual- if they so choose to read it. Schools should not tamper with the parents' right to their children's education. Next post, though, we will look into the repercussions of too much intervention that is borderline counterproductive.
Comments
Post a Comment