Academic Freedom: Where Do Teachers Stand?

Educators in New Mexico and Vermont are punished for bringing anti-war views into the classroom.

Photo by Dave Winans

The Iraq war has rekindled the debate over whether teachers should be allowed to express their political opinions in class. Opponents argue that students are a captive audience who should not be subjected to a teacher's undue influence. Proponents counter that teachers are citizens who retain their right to freedom of speech.

In cases from New Mexico and Vermont, the debate is now being played out in real life.

Carmelita Roybal, a ninth-grade English teacher in Albuquerque, was suspended on the eve of the war in March after she disobeyed her principal's order to remove a poster declaring "No War Against Iraq" from her classroom.

Two colleagues joined Roybal on suspension for refusing to remove similar anti-war materials. All three were reprimanded and docked two days' pay.

On April 18, these teachers filed suit in federal court claiming that the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) violated their free speech rights.

The school district argued that the plaintiffs violated APS's "Controversial Issues" policy, which requires teachers to be "impartial moderator[s]" and prohibits them from attempting "to limit or control the opinion of pupils on controversial issues." Roybal told Education Week that her "No War" sign was intended to balance the "pro-military message" promoted by her school's ROTC program and the frequent presence of military recruiters in the school.

A ruling in the case is not expected until later this year.

Even before the Iraq war broke out, NEA member Tom Treece was well known in his Barre, Vermont, high school for his pacifist views. Following the terrorist attack of 9/11, a group of ROTC students marched down the hall chanting, "Make war, not peace, we hate Mr. Treece."

Treece's recent troubles began when he posted a message referring to President Bush as "the idiot boy king" on a hallway current events "dialogue board" for teachers. A letter to the local newspaper describing the posting prompted a citizen's group to accuse Treece of imposing his anti-war views on students, a charge he flatly denies.

"It may be my point of view, but that doesn't matter," this history teacher argues. "It's necessary to bring balance to the classroom discussion."

To gather evidence against Treece, local police officer John Mott gained access to the teacher's locked classroom one April morning at 1:30 a.m. There he photographed students' projects, some of which had anti-war themes.

At a contentious school board meeting in May, teachers and students spoke out on Treece's behalf, attesting to his even-handed approach to teaching controversial issues. In an admitted effort to quell the public furor, the superintendent removed Treece as the teacher of the "Public Issues" course at the high school.

Treece's local union has filed a grievance challenging the reassignment on the grounds that the district lacked just cause and violated the academic freedom clause of the bargaining agreement. A hearing has not yet been set.

So, is it a First Amendment violation to prohibit teachers from expressing personal views in the classroom? Many legal scholars believe that the Supreme Court answered that question "yes" in 1969 when it ruled in the famous Tinker case that "[n]either students [n]or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

And soon after Tinker, a federal appeals court upheld the right of teachers to wear black armbands in class in protest of the Vietnam War.

More recent lower court cases have held that teachers do not have a right to academic freedom. And two state courts in California and New Jersey have ruled that teachers don't have the right to wear political buttons in the classroom.

These courts reason that, while engaged in teaching activities, teachers are speaking on behalf of the school district and can be prohibited from expressing personal viewpoints or otherwise straying from the prescribed curriculum. Until the Supreme Court renders a definitive ruling on the issue, however, there likely will continue to be disagreement among the lower courts.

--Michael D. Simpson
NEA Office of General Counsel