Practice the First Amendment –
and join FAPFA winners who do
Earlier today, JEA, Quill and Scroll and the National Scholastic Press Association announced this year’s 11 First Amendment Press Freedom Award schools.
The award recognizes public high schools that actively support, teach and protect First Amendment rights and responsibilities of students and teachers, with an emphasis on student-run media where students make all final decisions of content.
Roughly, here’s a sample of what the judging committee looks for in determining FAPFA recipients:
• No prior review or restraint by school faculty for all student media.
• Student staffers make all final decisions of content for all student media.
• Establish policies at all student media and school system levels or both as public forums for student expression.
• Remove Internet filters for student journalism use
• Students, advisers and administrators agree on First Amendment practices, philosophy and application across platforms.
As in previous years, schools competed for the title by first answering questionnaires submitted by an adviser and at least one editor; those who advanced to the next level were asked to provide responses from the principal and all media advisers and student editors, indicating their support of the First Amendment. In addition, semifinalists submitted samples of their school and media online or printed policies.
These schools will be honored April 14 at the opening ceremony of the JEA/NSPA Spring National High School Journalism Convention in Los Angeles.
First round applications are due annually by Dec. 15. Downloadable applications for 2017 will be available on the JEA website in the fall.
Learn who the 11 FAPFA schools are here.
Save this link and apply next fall.
This is the 16th year for the award.
Read MoreMaking points; not just giving them
by Stan Zoller, MJE
A recent series of posts on the JEA Listserv piqued my interest more than others.
The topic was news quizzes.
What intrigued me was the discussion about not the quality of the news quizzes, where they are available and how they are being used. There was also discussion about using them as a graded assignment as well as where teachers can find alternative quizzes to those posted by Candace Perkins Bowen.
Bowen, if you are not familiar with her, has done more for JEA than just write weekly news quizzes. She currently serves on the JEA Board as past president, having served as president from 1993 – 1997. She is currently associate professor of journalism and director of the Center for Scholastic Journalism at Kent State University. A little transparency is in order here; not only have I worked with Candace for a number of years on various projects, I am also a huge fan of the news quizzes.
But I don’t give them.
Instead I use them to generate class discussion. I know — it’s not rocket science. But rather than focus on what students know about the news, I use the news quizzes to find out how students found out about a specific news story, why the read the news story, what they thought of the story and what molded their opinion about a specific story.
[pullquote]I am often amazed by what stories resonate – or don’t – with college students. The awareness, or lack of, adds challenges to the discussion. Tease to a sports story and they’ll know it. A story about the Kardashians or Beyoncé and they’ll know it. A story about international affairs and you may get a series of blank stares.[/pullquote]
Like Bowen, I am often amazed by what stories resonate – or don’t – with college students. The awareness, or lack of, adds challenges to the discussion. Tease to a sports story and they’ll know it. A story about the Kardashians or Beyoncé and they’ll know it. A story about international affairs and you may get a series of blank stares.
For those stories that receive a lion’s share of coverage, there’s a good chance there will be some familiarity with the issue.
For example, late last semester and, unfortunately into this semester, a story that continues to rear its ugly head is the continued fatal aggressiveness by the Chicago Police Department toward young African-American males.
The ongoing investigation and release of new videos documenting excessive force by Chicago cops gives students a chance to do more than say something like “yeah, I saw the story” or “that really sucks.”
It gives them a chance to debate the nature of today’s journalism, with many ethical questions being raised and discussed.
Among some of the discussion points that have been raised and discussed include:
- Should broadcast media outlets have shown the entire video of the shooting of Laquan McDonald? Was it too sensitive for general television audiences?
- Was the repetitive showing of the McDonald video in both the long and short form essential to follow-up reporting, or has it been done to generate viewers and website hits?
- Is it more effective to have an African-American reporter assigned to the story? If so, can they be objective?
In addition to ethical issues, issues of legal matters can filter into the conversation. For example,
- Was the Chicago Police Department within its right to deny FOIA requests for release of the dash-cam video of the McDonald shooting within the realm of the law?
- Were the minutes of the Chicago City Council meeting when a $5 million settlement with McDonald’s family readily available after the meeting?
- Why was another FOI request required to have the audio on the dash came included?
- How much of the information posted on social media was verified?
These are just a few questions that could be asked from one news story, albeit a major one. Instead of just citing a topic, I find coverage of a specific story and use it as an example. Careful deconstruction of the stories in a news quiz can cover not only the journalistic fundamentals, but also ethic and legal issues.
Bowen goes above and beyond in providing news quizzes for JEA member students. Are there others out there? Sure. But odds are most are not ready for use in your classroom.
Using these news quizzes should do more than give points.
They should make points.
Read MoreIntroduction to Morse v Frederick lessons
Introduction
by Peter Barringer
Students’ First Amendment rights were explicitly established through the Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case in 1969, and those rights have only diminished since. The amount of literature relating to the courts’ applications of Morse is even more abundant, but cogent analysis and quality teaching resources related to these cases are difficult to find.This project, a set of unit plans and ancillary materials for journalism classes, is meant to help advisers and student journalists clarify how the courts have interpreted Morse v. Frederick, the most recent landmark Supreme Court case related to students’ freedom of expression.
[pullquote]Peter Barringer is a teacher from Evansville, Indiana. He holds a BS in English Education from the University of Evansville and an MJE from Kent State University. Peter enjoys reading, playing guitar, and playing board games in his spare time. You can contact him at phbarringer@gmail.com.[/pullquote]
Scope and sequence
Before you begin working through this document, I’d first like to thank you for trying this unit in your classroom. This unit’s main emphasis is on customization because every media program is different. You may find that all the activities in these units are applicable to your media program, or you may find them none of them are applicable. Above all, make sure each aspect of your lesson is relevant to your staff.
Just as importantly, this unit can only improve if I receive feedback from teachers who try it in their classrooms. Please email me at peter.barringer@evsc.k12.in.us with any feedback, including (but not limited to):
- Timing of the activities
- Relevance of the activities
- Suggestions for improvement regarding the topics
- Better videos, handouts, or other materials
You can also use the Feedback form
To continue with the Scope and Sequence, go here.
Instructor’s background info
The Morse Decision (2007)
In 2002, a high school in Juneau, Alaska, allowed its students to leave class to watch the Olympic Torch Relay as it proceeded in front of the school building (Kozlowski et al., 2009). Kozlowski et al. (2009) stated that during the ceremony, student Joseph Frederick displayed a large banner proclaiming, “BONG HiTS [sic] 4 JESUS” (pg. 140). The principal of the school forced Frederick to remove the banner, and later suspended him for ten days (Kozlowski et al., 2009). Frederick believed his First Amendment rights were being violated, so he sued the principal, winning at the Court of Appeals level before the Supreme Court reversed the decision (Kozlowski et al., 2009).
Some may read the words “Bong HiTS 4 JESUS” and fail to distinguish any real message promoting drug use, but the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling saw it differently. The scholarly literature has concluded that the Morse decision created a third exception to the Tinker ruling: speech encouraging illegal drug use (Kozlowski, 2011; Azriel, 2008; Kozlowski et al., 2009). The Morse case is certainly the fourth landmark Supreme Court ruling related to students’ free expression rights. However, interestingly, the Morse case itself is not quite as significant to the scholarly literature as the manner in which its precedent has been applied in the seven years since.
The teaching units
Five-day unit
Ancillary materials (contains all lesson pieces)
Read More
District & Appeals Court Decisions Citing
Morse v. Frederick (2007)
(above) U.S. Circuit Court map
[pullquote]
Key
RED: Only broad interpretations of Morse
YELLOW: Both broad and narrow interpretations of Morse
GREEN: Only narrow interpretations of Morse
BLUE: Incidental interpretations of Morse
GRAY: No interpretations of Morse
[/pullquote]
Narrow, Broad, or Incidental?
The following chart summarizes fifteen student First Amendment cases that cited Morse v. Frederick. In cases with narrow interpretations of Morse, the judge(s) specifically chose not to extend Morse past illegal drug use. In cases with broad interpretations, the judge(s) extended Morse past illegal drug use to include speech advocating other illegal actions. In cases with incidental interpretations of Morse, the judge(s) mentioned Morse but did not apply it in the ruling.
You can find your court circuit on the map above. The federal court system contains 94 district courts, twelve appeals courts, and the Supreme Court. Parties can choose to appeal decisions made in the district courts; these cases then move to the appeals court level. Parties can also appeal decisions made at the appeals court level, but the Supreme Court chooses which cases it will hear each year. Read the following chart to see how lower federal courts have interpreted Morse in your circuit and in other circuits. Please note, however, that some circuits have not applied Morse. We can only infer what these circuits might do based on the other courts’ decisions.
| CASE NAME | DESCRIPTION | NARROW, BROAD, OR INCIDENTAL? | CIRCUIT & LEVEL |
| Doninger v. Niehoff (2008) | A student was suspended from school and banned from running for student government after publishing an angry blog post about the principal, who canceled an event the student helped plan. | INCIDENTAL—The judges sided with the school, but did so under the Tinker standard. They referenced and summarized Morse, but did not extend its interpretation past illegal drug use. | 2nd Circuit—Connecticut (Appeals Court) |
| R.O., et al., v. Ithaca City School District (2011) | Students published a political cartoon satirizing the ineffectiveness of the school’s sex education courses. The cartoon was censored from a school publication and from an independent student publication. | INCIDENTAL—The judges sided with the school, but did so under the Tinker standard. They referenced and summarized Morse, but did not extend its interpretation past illegal drug use. | 2nd Circuit—New York (Appeals Court) |
| Wisniewski v. Board of Education of the Weedsport Central School District (2007) | A student’s AOL buddy icon on his home computer depicted his English teacher being shot, with a caption about killing the teacher. He was suspended. | INCIDENTAL—The judges upheld the student’s suspension, stating that “As in Morse, the student in the…case was not disciplined for conduct that was merely ‘offensive,’ or merely in conflict with some view of the school’s ‘educational mission.’” Thus, Morse did not apply to the ruling. | 2nd Circuit—New York (Appeals Court) |
| Layshock v. Hermitage School District (2010) | From home, a high school senior created a Myspace profile mocking his principal. The student was suspended. |
NARROW—The district judge directly cited Alito’s concurring opinion in Morse, which states that Morse only applies to illegal drug use. The judge denied the school district’s claim that the student undermined the school’s educational mission. This case’s outcome was updated with a 3rd Circuit Appeals Court en banc decision. The initial ruling was overturned, and the judges again cited Alito’s concurring opinion in a narrow holding. |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| B.H. v. Easton Area School District (2013) | Two middle school students wore bracelets proclaiming “I (heart sign) boobies” for Breast Cancer Awareness Day. The school suspended the students. | NARROW—The judges sided with the students and cited Morse 117 times in the holding. | 3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (Appeals Court) |
| Miller v. Penn Manor School District (2008) | A student wore a shirt with the image of a handgun and the words “terrorist hunting permit” on it. |
BROAD—The judge ruled against the student’s ability to wear the shirt, stating, “Based upon Morse, speech that promotes illegal behavior may also be restricted.” |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| Depinto v. Bayonne Board of Education (2007) | Two students wore buttons with the words “No School Uniforms” imposed over a Hitler Youth background photo. | NARROW—The judge warned the Morse should not be interpreted broadly to mean all offensive speech, but just speech regarding illegal drug use. | 3rd Circuit—New Jersey (District Court) |
| J.S. v. Blue Mountain School District (2009) | A student created a fake Myspace profile for her principal, on which she indicated his interests in pornography and pedophilia. |
NARROW—In siding with the school, the district court handed down a broad interpretation, stating that the student’s fake Myspace profile “is also akin to the speech that promoted illegal actions in the Morse case.” This case’s outcome was updated with a 3rd Circuit Appeals Court en banc decision. The initial ruling was overturned, and the appeals court judges cited Alito’s concurring opinion in a narrow holding. |
3rd Circuit—Pennsylvania (District Court) |
| Hardwick v. Hayward (2013) | A South Carolina school banned T-shirts depicting the Confederate flag from its dress code. | NARROW—The judges upheld the school’s dress code, but they did so under the Tinker standard and expressly rejected the district courts’ broad interpretation of the Morse ruling. | 4th Circuit—South Carolina (Appeals Court) |
| Kowalski v. Berkeley County Schools (2011) | High school students were punished for creating an online Myspace group targeting another student with sexually-charged insults. | NARROW—The judges sided with the school, but using the Tinker standard. The Court mentioned Morse several times, but specifically did not extend its reach beyond illegal drug usage. | 4th Circuit—West Virginia (Appeals Court) |
| Ponce v. Socorro Independent School District (2007) | A high school student wrote numerous violent entries in a diary. The student claims the entries were works of fiction, but the school recommended placing the student in alternative school. | BROAD—The Court of Appeals applied Morse to cases of speech that endangers the safety of students. | 5th Circuit—Texas (Appeals Court) |
| Lowery v. Jefferson County Board of Education (2007) | Four high school football players circulated a petition to have their coach replaced. | NARROW—The judges provided a lengthy interpretation of Morse, specifically quoting Alito’s concurring opinion that Morse only extends to illegal drug use. | 6th Circuit—Tennessee (Appeals Court) |
| Barr v. Lafon (2008) | Complications and fighting arose after the school dress code was updated to ban the Confederate flag and other racially divisive symbols. | NARROW—The Court sided with the school, but under the Tinker standard. The judges leaned heavily on Alito’s concurring opinion that Morse only extends to illegal drug use. | 6th Circuit—Tennessee (Appeals Court) |
| Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie School District #204 (2008) | Two students wished to wear anti-gay T-shirts that read, “Be Happy, Not Gay.” | BROAD—The Court relied on the Tinker standard in ruling against the students, but they did so by using Morse as justification: substantial disruption, according to the judge, can be psychological, not just physical. | 7th Circuit—Illinois (Appeals Court) |
| Boim v. Fulton County School District (2007) | A high school student transcribed a violent dream sequence (involving her shooting her math teacher on school grounds) into her personal notebook. Administrators discovered the notebook and suspended her. | BROAD—The judge in this case directly quoted Morse and went on to assert that the same justification for censoring speech that promotes illegal drug use can be applied to speech that threatens violence at school. | 11th Circuit—Georgia (District Court) |
Sources: SPLC.org (legal analysis), and caselaw.findlaw.com (case information)
Image: http://tallytaxman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/circuit_map.gif
Read MoreScope & Sequence: Morse Teaching Units
Introduction
Before you begin working through this document, I’d first like to thank you for trying this unit in your classroom. This unit’s main emphasis is on customization because every media program is different. You may find that all the activities in these units are applicable to your media program, or you may find them none of them are applicable. Above all, make sure each aspect of your lesson is relevant to your staff.
Just as importantly, this unit can only improve if I receive feedback from teachers who try it in their classrooms. Please email me at peter.barringer@evsc.k12.in.us with any feedback, including (but not limited to):
- Timing of the activities
- Relevance of the activities
- Suggestions for improvement regarding the topics
- Better videos, handouts, or other materials
Which unit should I choose?
Four different unit models are available. They’re based on 90-minute block scheduling class periods, so modification will be necessary for teachers on a traditional bell schedule. As you attempt to determine which unit to choose, keep the following factors in mind:
- How much time do you have?
- If you’re teaching a media class, you will have less time than if you’re teaching intro to journalism classes
- How much time does this court case deserve?
- If you’re in one of the circuits that has narrowly interpreted Morse, you may wish to devote less time to it
- If your circuit has interpreted Morse broadly or hasn’t interpreted it at all, more time may be needed
- If your program has encountered issues regarding student free expression, especially if it related to illegal drug use or illegal activities, consider selecting a longer unit
- Does your media manual contain a statement regarding Morse and/or student free speech?
- If not, consider modifying the one-day unit or simply teaching one of the longer units
- If so, consider skipping this activity or choosing the one-day unit
- Is illegal drug use a common topic for your program?
- Are “illegal activities” a common topic for your program?
- In some circuits, Morse has been broadly interpreted to justify the censorship of expression advocating topics besides illegal drug use
Breakdown of topics:
One-Day Unit
- Bellringer: Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- CNN YouTube video explaining Morse
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Group project: analyze broadly interpreted lower court cases
- Closing: Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
Two-Day Unit
- Bellringer: Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
Three-Day Unit
- Bellringer: KWL chart about Supreme Court cases and anticipation guide (survey regarding Morse)
- Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Case Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
- Bellringer: Students and adviser pick one of three culminating activities (role-play a scenario, draft a persuasive letter, or teach Morse and its applications to a group)
- Complete the culminating activity (detailed directions can be found on the three-day unit or five-day unit)
Five-Day Unit
- Bellringer: KWL chart about Supreme Court cases and anticipation guide (survey regarding Morse)
- Tinker, Hazelwood, and Fraser review
- Teacher’s YouTube video explaining Morse and its decision
- SPLC article about the Morse decision and its implications
- Handout describing lower courts’ narrow, broad, and incidental interpretations of Morse in each circuit
- Closing/Homework: Start group project (analyzing broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Bellringer: Examine lower court cases with narrow interpretations
- Student presentations (broadly interpreted lower court cases)
- Discuss Morse’s applications to scholastic media
- Create a media manual statement regarding Morse
- Bellringer: Role-playing introduction and instructions
- Read case details and split into groups
- Groups prepare for the scenario (prepare arguments, review cases, etc.)
- Role playing scenario
- Judges deliberate and decide a winner, using Tinker, Hazelwood, Fraser, or Morse as precedent
- Closing: Discussion (protecting against issues and the role of the media manual statement)
- Bellringer: Decide whom to write to and what to write about
- Split into groups
- Groups work on individual sections of the letter
- Editors lead a group discussion: how to streamline and improve the letter
- Closing/Homework: Finalize the letter. Editor-in-chief takes it home to unify the writing style.
- Bellringer: Discuss whom to inform about Morse (or student First Amendment rights in general) and the best way to teach them about it
- Split into groups.
- Create the teaching model in small groups using approved resources
- Initial check of the teaching model’s quality
Justification:
Without lively and open discourse, society weakens. Students’ First Amendment rights were explicitly established through the Tinker v. Des Moines Supreme Court case in 1969, and those rights have only diminished since. Current literature offers an abundance of analysis on pre-Morse v. Frederick (2007) court cases related to student First Amendment rights. The amount of literature relating to the courts’ applications of Morse is even more abundant, but cogent analysis and quality teaching resources related to these cases are difficult to find.
The goal of this project—a set of unit plans and resources—is to help scholastic journalists and media advisers develop a working understanding of the courts’ interpretations of Morse. Not every adviser has the time to read through scholarly literature to create original lesson plans regarding this case, and little has been published so far. Some lesson plans and materials are available on sites such as jea.org; however, the plans that are readily available simply provide a basic understanding of the case and its possible effects, rather than an understanding of how it has actually been applied. This project could help advisers and students develop a current understanding of Morse—how it has been applied, and how those applications could affect student media.
Objectives
- Students will demonstrate knowledge of the facts of the Morse decision and how it fits with previous Supreme Court decisions. (1, 2, 3, and 5)
- Students will analyze recent lower court cases, and use outside sources to determine why the judges interpreted Morse broadly. (1, 2, 3, and 5)
- Students will utilize discussion outcomes regarding potential limitations the Morse decision could place on student journalists in order to create an effective statement for the program’s manual. (2, 3, and 5)
- Students will complete culminating activities reinforcing Morse’s applications to their media program. (3 & 5)
Key Common Core Standards
The first three standards are addressed in all four unit plans. The fourth standard is only addressed in the 2, 3, and 5-day units. The final three standards are all addressed in the 5-day unit; one of the three (staff’s choice) is addressed in the 3-day unit.
| Standard Number | Description |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1 | Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on grades 11-12 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.2 | Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.5 | Make strategic use of digital media (e.g., textual, graphical, audio, visual, and interactive elements) in presentations to enhance understanding of findings, reasoning, and evidence and to add interest. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.11-12.1.A, B, C, D, and E | CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.A
Introduce precise, knowledgeable claim(s), establish the significance of the claim(s), distinguish the claim(s) from alternate or opposing claims, and create an organization that logically sequences claim(s), counterclaims, reasons, and evidence. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.B Develop claim(s) and counterclaims fairly and thoroughly, supplying the most relevant evidence for each while pointing out the strengths and limitations of both in a manner that anticipates the audience’s knowledge level, concerns, values, and possible biases. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.C Use words, phrases, and clauses as well as varied syntax to link the major sections of the text, create cohesion, and clarify the relationships between claim(s) and reasons, between reasons and evidence, and between claim(s) and counterclaims. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.D Establish and maintain a formal style and objective tone while attending to the norms and conventions of the discipline in which they are writing. CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1.E Provide a concluding statement or section that follows from and supports the argument presented. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.7 | Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question (including a self-generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. |
| CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1 | Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. |
Please note, there are sample rubrics available in the Ancillary Materials folder of each unit.
Read More