Scholastic Journalism

Home » Scholastic Journalism

Ancillary: Rubrics

Posted by John Bowen on Jan 5, 2016 in Blog, Legal issues, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Media Manual Statement

	10	8	6	4	2
Knowledge of Morse	Media statement demonstrates deep knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism	Media statement demonstrates knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism	Media statement demonstrates some knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism	Media statement demonstrates little knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism	Media statement does not demonstrate knowledge of Morse and its implications for student journalism
Addresses potential limitations	Media statement superbly anticipates and addresses limitations Morse could have on the program	Media statement adequately anticipates and addresses limitations Morse could have on the program	Media statement attempts to anticipate and address limitations Morse could have on the program	Media statement does not adequately anticipate or address limitations Morse could have on the program	Media statement does not anticipate or address limitations Morse could have on the program
Addresses circuit decisions	Media statement addresses the implications of decisions from our circuit (if applicable)		Media statement mentions decisions from our circuit but does not address their implications (if applicable)		Media statement does not mention decisions from our circuit (if applicable)
Administrator Concerns	Media statement fully anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board	Media statement anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board	Media statement somewhat anticipates and addresses potential issues with school administration and/or school board	Media statement anticipates potential issues with school administration and/or school board but does not address them	Media statement does not anticipate or address potential issues with school administration
Writing	Media statement demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics	Media statement demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes)	Media statement’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes)	Media statement’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes)	Media statement’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes)

Group Project (Broadly Interpreted Cases)

	10	8	6	4	2
Knowledge of case	Project demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates some knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates little knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism	Project does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected case and its implications for student journalism
Factors leading to a broad interpretation	Project utilizes multiple sources to list all factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse	Project utilizes multiple sources to list multiple factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse	Project utilizes one source to list some factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse	Project utilizes one source to a few factors that led to a broad interpretation of Morse	Project does not address factors leading to a broad interpretation of Morse
Addresses potential issues	Project superbly anticipates and addresses how to avoid a similar situation	Project adequately anticipates and addresses how to avoid a similar situation	Project anticipates but does not address how to avoid a similar situation	Project does not adequately anticipate or address how to avoid a similar situation	Project does not anticipate or address how to avoid a similar situation
Presentation	Presentation dynamically teaches the staff about this topic in full detail	Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in full detail	Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in some detail	Presentation lacks detail	Presentation does not provide relevant details related to the case
Writing	Project demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics	Project demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes)	Project’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes)	Project’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes)	Project’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes)

Roleplaying Scenario

	20	16	12	8	4
Portrayal of Role	Student demonstrates excellent understanding and portrays his/her role superbly	Student demonstrates solid understanding and portrays his/her role well	Student demonstrates adequate understanding and portrays his/her role adequately	Student demonstrates little understanding and portrays his/her role unconvincingly or inaccurately	Student inaccurately depicts his/her role
Quality	Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by quality research and sources	Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by research and sources	Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by some research and sources	Student’s portrayal of role is backed up by little research and sources	Student’s portrayal of role is not backed up by research or sources

	10	8	6	4	2
Presentation	Presentation dynamically teaches the staff about this topic in full detail	Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in full detail	Presentation teaches the staff about this topic in some detail	Presentation lacks detail	Presentation does not provide relevant details related to the case

Teaching Model

	10	8	6	4	2
Knowledge of subject matter	Project demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates some knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Project demonstrates little knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Project does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism
Medium	Students carefully selected the best medium for accomplishing their task	Students selected an appropriate medium for accomplishing their task	Students selected a somewhat appropriate medium for accomplishing their task	Students selected a somewhat inappropriate medium for accomplishing their task	Students selected an inappropriate medium for accomplishing their task
Purpose	The teaching model fulfills its intended purpose superbly	The teaching model fulfills its intended purpose adequately	The teaching model somewhat fulfills its intended purpose	The teaching model does not accomplish one of its intended tasks	The teaching model does not accomplish its intended tasks
Audience	The teaching model has a clearly defined audience	The teaching model has an adequately defined audience	The audience is not clearly defined	The teaching model has no clear audience	The teaching model lacks an audience
Writing	Teaching model demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics	Teaching model demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes)

Letter

	10	8	6	4	2
Knowledge of subject matter	Letter demonstrates deep knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Letter demonstrates knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Letter demonstrates some knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Letter demonstrates little knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism	Letter does not demonstrate knowledge of the selected cases and their implications for student journalism
Purpose	The letter fulfills its intended purpose superbly	The letter fulfills its intended purpose adequately	The letter somewhat fulfills its intended purpose	The letter does not accomplish one of its intended tasks	The letter does not accomplish its intended tasks
Audience	The letter has a clearly defined audience	The letter has an adequately defined audience	The letter is not clearly defined	The letter has no clear audience	The letter lacks an audience
	20	16	12	8	4
Writing	Teaching model demonstrates excellent grammar and mechanics	Teaching model demonstrates adequate grammar and mechanics (1-2 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics need work (3-4 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are poor (5-6 mistakes)	Teaching model’s grammar and mechanics are unacceptable (7+ mistakes)

Ancillary: Supreme Court case facts

Posted by John Bowen on Jan 5, 2016 in Blog, Legal issues, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Supreme Court Case Facts

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1968/1968_21/

Bethel v. Fraser (1986): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1985/1985_84_1667

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1989): http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1987/1987_86_836

Ancillary: Teaching student First Amendment rights

Posted by John Bowen on Jan 5, 2016 in Blog, Legal issues, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Teaching Student First Amendment Rights

Determine the best method of teaching either Morse or all four major Supreme Court cases dealing with first amendment rights. The staff could create a handout, a website, a podcast, or an editorial or other feature for the publication itself. To determine the best medium, consider the following questions:

Who is our intended audience?
- Administrators
- School board
- Legislators
- Judges
- The public
- Other students
What is our purpose?
- Inform
- Persude
What information is most important?
- Just Morse?
- All four Supreme Court cases?
Which medium will best accomplish all these tasks?

The editor-in-chief of the publication should divide the class into groups. Each section editor could oversee one group. If the class decided to teach about all four cases, simply divide the groups by court case. If the class decided to teach about Morse, simply find a way of organizing the class into appropriate groups by task (research, design, writing, etc.).

The staff should work together in small groups to create whatever teaching model they chose. Ask the editor-in-chief to roam about the class helping groups in whatever capacity they require. Students should spend the vast majority of the class period properly researching and fact-checking (utilizing the SPLC and other reliable sources) as they create their assigned sections of the project in whatever medium they chose.

Come back together as a class and test the teaching model. Reiterate the original intentions set forth at the beginning of class:

Intended audience
Purpose
Most important information
Medium that best accomplishes the task

Ancillary: Articles for broadly interpreted cases

Posted by John Bowen on Jan 5, 2016 in Blog, Legal issues, Scholastic Journalism, Teaching | 0 comments

Articles for Broadly Interpreted Cases

Miller v. Penn Manor School District (2008)

Case decision: http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/08D1173P.pdf
SPLC analysis:
- http://www.splc.org/blog/splc/2009/12/beverly-hills-speech-cop-ii-surprise-youre-suspended
- http://www.splc.org/article/2014/11/due-process-claims (No Fair Notice section)

Ponce v. Socorro Independent School District (2007)

Case decision: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-5th-circuit/1146285.html
SPLC analysis:
- http://www.splc.org/article/2007/11/5th-circuit-upholds-texas-schools-punishment-of-student-who-wrote-violent-story
- http://www.splc.org/multimedia/278 (Podcast)

Nuxoll v. Indian Prairie School District #204 (2008)

Boim v. Fulton County School District (2007)

Case decision: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-11th-circuit/1181023.html
SPLC analysis:
- http://www.splc.org/article/2007/08/court-rules-against-student-who-wrote-violent-dream-story

Ancillary: Limits on scholastic journalism

Posted by John Bowen on Jan 5, 2016 in Blog, Legal issues, Projects, Scholastic Journalism | 0 comments

Limits on Scholastic Journalism

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969)

The Tinker case stemmed from several students wearing black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. The school suspended the students for violating the dress code, which had recently been changed to keep students from wearing armbands in protest. The Supreme Court ruled that students could legally protest the war under the First Amendment by wearing the armbands. Justice Abe Fortas stated in Tinker, “students nor teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” The Court denoted one major limitation to students’ First Amendment rights: teachers and administrators can censor any speech that could cause a serious disruption at school or invades the rights of others.

Bethel v. Fraser (1986)

Matthew Fraser delivered a speech for a friend who was running for student government. The speech was laced with innuendo and double meanings. Fraser was suspended, and he subsequently sued the school for having violated his First Amendment right to free speech. However, the Supreme Court decided against Fraser, ruling that, while students can advocate political and other controversial viewpoints, the school maintains the ability to censor vulgar or indecent speech. This case created the first of several exceptions to the Tinker decision: Under Bethel v. Fraser, vulgar or offensive speech inside the school building can be censored.

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988)

The Hazelwood case began at Hazelwood East High School in Missouri. The student newspaper staff wrote articles about teen pregnancy and divorce, and the school’s principal decided to eliminate them from the publication. The students sued, but they lost their case at the Supreme Court level. The Court’s decision caused Knight (1988) to write that schools had regained control of publications created as part of a curriculum. Knight went on to explain that individual students’ rights still fell under the Tinker precedent, but that any and all “school-sponsored or even school-related” speech could now be regulated by the school. This decision created a second exception to the Tinker holding: in the words of Justice Brennan, “legitimate pedagogical concerns” can outweigh students’ First Amendment rights if the speech is school sponsored. Troublingly, several researchers pointed to the Hazelwood case’s wording, which invoked the schoolhouse gate passage in Tinker to defend its decision against student First Amendment rights.

Thus, after the monumental Tinker decision affirmed students’ First Amendment rights in school, the next two decades saw the Supreme Court use the wording of the Tinker decision to justify two further exceptions to student free expression rights. From 1988 until 2007, students could express themselves under the First Amendment, provided the speech was not seriously disruptive or invasive (Tinker), vulgar, (Bethel) or school-sponsored (Hazelwood).

Key note for teachers and students: Administrators (and courts) are not required to censor any type of unprotected student speech—they simply have the ability to. Just because they can censor a type of speech (including the type you’ll see in the Morse case) does not mean they have to.