The Columbus Dispatch

Keep students safe, not censored

-

These are difficult days for schools as they try to figure out how and when to discipline students for misbehavio­r, disruption, bullying and other actions. Social media has further complicate­d the matter, blurring the lines between behavior on campus, where schools clearly can set rules, and behavior off campus. As unclear as the lines might be, though, several recent cases show a disturbing willingnes­s among schools to leap over them:

In Houston, a student was suspended last fall for refusing to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s been accepted for decades that students should not be compelled to participat­e in the pledge against their will. The student is suing, and we hope she’ll win.

In Nevada, a high school student used foul language during a phone call to a congressma­n’s office to argue for stronger gun control. The office then complained to his school, and the boy was suspended. But what right does the school have to punish a kid for speaking his mind, even rudely, on a public policy issue when he’s not in school?

In New Jersey, a school district banned students from being in possession of guns — off campus as well as on. But really, shouldn’t it be obvious even to strong supporters of gun control that a school can’t punish students for engaging in a perfectly legal activity — such as going to a firing range with their parents — after school hours?

Schools (and occasional­ly courts) appear to need repeated reminders that students have a right to express their opinions, including unpopular ones, in school and out.

It can get complicate­d because schools do have a right to step in when the language is truly threatenin­g or disruptive.

But school administra­tors too often have confused controvers­y with disruption. Some students might not like what they see on another student’s T-shirt. They might even find it offensive. But they don’t need to be sheltered from controvers­y or offense. Chances are they’ll talk about it, debate it, argue over it — and that’s a good thing.

Even more dicey are situations in which students misbehave off campus. A Bay Area high school rightly discipline­d students for being involved in racist posts in which photos of students at their school, all female and almost all people of color, were shown with nooses drawn around their necks. These images go beyond expressing opinions or simply being offensive; even though they were created off campus, they are intimidati­ng, if not downright threatenin­g, to people at the school.

But it’s difficult to believe that the New Jersey school district mentioned above thought it had the right to regulate students’ target shooting off campus under completely legal circumstan­ces. Or that the Nevada school believed it could punish teenagers for using foul language outside of class that was not directed toward anyone at the school.

There are certainly difficult decisions to be made from time to time about free speech on school campuses, but these cases weren’t complicate­d.

School officials have a responsibi­lity to keep their students safe and learning on campus, but no one hired them to be the police of controvers­ial personal expression or of student morality.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States