# data[].attributes.headline
Slide #13  LRecommendations / Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide #13  LRecommendations / Best Practices for Compliance

# data[].attributes.body
Freedom of Speech in the educational setting is interesting because this is the one arena in which diversity of thought is important to critical thinking about various topics that impact society.  Often times there is a question of what the educator can say and not say during discussions,, especially when they do not agree with a decision made, have an opinion on a topic, or feel a certain way.  The First Amendment has given citizens the right to speak on topics that concern them public matters, as well as, private matters.  Due to the right to free speech, there have been challenges by employers such as the government to limit and discipline the use of the rights.  The Pickering and Garcetti case established boundaries to which the school district can and cannot limit and discipline communications by educators.  Due to educators being government employees, they are limited to contracted hours but still should be mindful of their impact on students in their posts, communications, and any area covered under free speech.  Below are some recommendations to help schools and districts with free speech compliance.

●       Create and present a presentation on the laws and policies concerning Free Speech and in/out school communications. Faculty and staff need to sign an acknowledgment of the receipt of the training and that they have read the handbook.

●       Create a plan of action when faculty and staff for reports by parents of posts or communications to determine when items are actionable.

●       Ensure that teachers are mindful to not use their opinions or thoughts on controversial topics in class. Teachers will be trained to become facilitators of conversations to moderate communications.

●       Faculty and Staff must be reminded to maintain privacy on their social media, not friend students.

●       Communications with stakeholders must be professional.

●       Reminder to faculty and staff that they are meteors and representatives of the school, district, and state.

●       Create opportunities for teachers to communicate with administrators when they have a challenge that they need to discuss.

●       Remind the faculty and staff of the mission and core values of the school and district.  They must focus on student learning and achievement not only in school but ethically as well.

●    Campus administrators must be willing to listen to faculty and staff when dealing with challenges that impact them in education including school boards.

# data[].attributes.body
Teachers’ Social Media Use and Its Legal Implications provide another opportunity for instructional leaders and educators to understand the implications of various communication platforms and landmark cases used to define protections of the First Amendment. (2023)  The review provides perspective on the usage for stakeholders and the issues that come along with it such as out-of-school communications between teachers and students on the platforms.

Crockett, Martha; Henry, Lavare; McGuire, Stephanie; and Gurdal, Ayse (2023) "Teachers’ Social Media Use and Its Legal Implications," The William & Mary Educational Review: Vol. 8: Iss. 1, Article 4. Available at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/wmer/vol8/iss1/4

# data[].attributes.body
Standard 7(c) Establish and sustain a professional culture of engagement and commitment to a shared vision, goals, and objectives about the education of the whole child; high expectations for professional work; ethical and equitable practice; trust and open communication; collaboration, collective efficacy, and continuous individual and organizational learning and improvement.

This ethical standard reminds and reinforces the ethical ideals of professionalism in communications that are associated with and in education.  Instructional Leaders must ethically ensure that faculty and staff understand they are public employees and represent the school, as well as, the government.

National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2015). Professional Standards for Educational

Leaders 2015. Reston, VA: Author

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide #10 Policy or Rule from a School or Institution - Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide #10 Policy or Rule from a School or Institution - Administrative Law

# data[].attributes.body
Spring Branch ISD Employee Handbook includes provisions for employee communications which are controversial topics in class, social media posts, and other emails from teachers to students.  The sections pose limitations of the topics and place the responsibility of the teacher to control their social media platforms.  SBISD Employee Handbook policy titled “Personal Use of Electronic Communications” states that as district employees, teachers are “role models” for students.  (2023) This policy covers the use of blogs, email, social media, wikis, and other network sites teachers use to communicate.  The policy reminds the employee that they are responsible for what is posted and are “responsible for maintaining privacy on the sites.

Spring Branch ISD (2022. July). 2022-2023 SBISD Employee Handbook.
https://www.springbranchisd.com/staff-portal/talent/employee-handbook

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide #9 Original Source Law: Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide #9 Original Source Law: Constitutional Law

# data[].attributes.body
●       U. S. Constitution, First Amendment

●       U.S. Const. Art. amend. I

●         https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-constitution/#:~:t ext=The%20First%20Amendment%20provides%20that,for%20a%20redress%20of%20g  grievances.

●    U.S. Constitution is the original law that set out the fundamental rights of all citizens; in certain circumstances, they cannot be deprived of those rights without due process.  Freedom of speech consists of the right to say what one feels is important to say but without consequences.  (U.S. Const. Art. amend I)  The U.S. Constitution allows citizens to discuss, post and speak about all topics.  (U.S. Const. Art. amend I)   The only time Freedom of Speech is not a permissible excuse is if it creates mayhem.  Educators have this freedom in their personal lives.  As educators, in school during their contract hours, or at a school-sponsored event that freedom is placed within a boundary that the constitutional law has determined.  Educators' freedom of speech is not a total freedom to discuss any topic with students due to the missions, core values, and ethical considerations that they have to be mindful of.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide #8 Original Source Law: Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide #8 Original Source Law: Statutory Law

# data[].attributes.body
●       Texas Senate Bill 3

●       S.bill 3 §3, 88th Legislature (2023)

●       https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB3/2023URL

●    Senate House Bill 3 (S.B. 3) sets restrictions on the use of controversial topics such as politics and race in the public school system and employee handbooks. (2023)  S.B. 3(2), which is addressed in the SBISD Employee Handbook, limits the amount of bias that a teacher can use when discussing sensitive topics. (2023)   They must allow students to participate in the discussion “without giving deference to anyone's perspective.”  Moreover, S.B. 3(4), addressed the limitation of teaching, training, or administrating any information concerning or dealing with race, slavery, or the 1619 Project. (2023) A topic such as this one is limited on campus due to the policy set in place by agents of the state and district employees.  Although the handbook does not cover this area, educators are still required to restrict communication in this area in the classroom.

# data[].attributes.headline
Slide #7 Original Source Law: Judicial law

# data[].attributes.subject
Slide #7 Original Source Law: Judicial law

# data[].attributes.body
●       Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)

●       https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/391/563/

●       Pickering v. Board of Education, dissenting opinion created the rule of law in which education freedom of speech is tested. (1968)  Pickering's case created a test to determine whether an educator's published communication concerning the school board's actions was protected by his first amendment rights.  (1968) The court determined that:

○    An individual who is a public employee cannot be subject to any “conditions” or restrictions on their rights.  Just because they are publicly employed does not mean that they are stripped of all rights provided to them by the Constitution. (Pickering v. Board of Education, 1968)

○    The court quoted Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U. S. 589, 385 U. S. 605-606 (1967). “The teacher's interest as a citizen in making public comment must be balanced against the State's interest in promoting the efficiency of its employees' public services.” (Keyishian v. Board of Regents 1967) This established that there is a balancing test must occur which is, is the freedom of speech protected text, email, post, blog or discussion as a person is more important or the school’s interest in restricting the public employee's correspondence as a private citizen more important?

●    The right to free speech protects educators who make public statements about education or other topics as private citizens.  It is their right to speak their minds without fear of repercussion.

# data[].attributes.headline
  Slide #6 Original Source Law: Judicial Law

# data[].attributes.subject
  Slide #6 Original Source Law: Judicial Law

# data[].attributes.body
●       Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006)

●       https://www.thefire.org/supreme-court/gil-garcetti-et-al-v-richard-ceballos

●    Garcetti v. Ceballos is a case that set the standard for when an individual's freedom of speech may be restricted.  The court determined that “statements made by public employees according to their official duties may be disciplined by their employer.” (Garcetti v. Ceballos, 2006) Garcetti v. Ceballos is used in a freedom of speech case involving a teacher who has created a social media post, sent a letter to a public form, or any correspondence used by a teacher that is personal. (Garcetti v. Ceballos, 2006) Garcetti is used as case precedence to show that a teacher on duty can be disciplined in the form of a written reprimand, suspension, or termination for not following the Employee Handbook, S.B. 3, or the Texas Education Code.  Educators ethically must follow the policies and procedures of the position that they are contracted for.  When not following this in the line of duty they must prepare for consequences.

# data[].attributes.body
Slide #5 Current News Articles

Controversial Social Media Posts by Public School Employees Raise Interesting Free-Speech Questions

●       Not all social media posts are protected as Free Speech and can “lead to discipline” by the district.

●       “Public employees retain rights as citizens to comment on matters of public importance, but those rights are balanced against school districts’ interests in avoiding disruption of their operations.”

●       The article displayed examples of posts from teachers making “derogatory comments” concerning Black Lives Matter.

●       Pickering v Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563 (1968)

○       Marvin Pickering wrote a letter to the local newspaper criticizing the school boards concerning “paying too much on athletics at the expense of academics.”

○       Pickering was fired because the school boards stated the letter was “detrimental to the operation of the school.”

○       The court stated that there must be a balance between the interest of the teacher as a citizen and the as an employee of the government.

●       Speech by a public employee as public concerns are covered by Free Speech under the Pickering analysis.

●       Public Employee social media posts about students or parents may not be protected if they are racist or highly offensive.

●    “Government employers have authority to control their employees during their employment,” wrote Justice Nels Peterson.

Hudson, David. (2023) Controversial Social Media Post by Public School Employees Raise Interesting

Free-Speech Questions. https://www.freedomforum.org/controversial-social-media-posts-by-public-school-employees-raise-interesting-free-speech-questions/

# data[].attributes.body
What are the free speech rights of public school teachers?  Shreveport Times

●       Waskom, Texas, Patrick Durbin, a teacher was disciplined for a post on social media.

○       The teacher reported a student who made a threat to shoot him.

○       The teacher then posted on social meeting due to feeling that the administration did not manage the situation with “urgency or concern.”

○       The teacher was placed on administrative leave.

○       Court decided that the teacher was posting as a citizen about a public concern which was school shootings.

○       The teacher was then reinstated.

●       Teachers are public employees.

●       Free Speech is limited to public employees.

●       “First Amendment rightly protects teachers and other public employees from discipline or termination for speech on public issues.”

●       Court factors that are reviewed are:

○       “Is the speech a matter of “public concern”?

○       Was the employee speaking as a citizen or as an employee?

○       “How does the free speech interest of the employee as a citizen weigh against the interest of the government, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public school it runs?”

●       Speech that is not protected:

○       Highly Disruptive to normal school operations.

Alexander, Royal (2023, February 12) What are the free speech rights of public school teachers?

https://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/opinion/2023/02/12/what-are-the-free-speech-rights-of-

public-school-teachers/69889559007/

# data[].attributes.body
Slide #3 Professional Association:

National Education Association (NEA) is an educational professional association that guides topics that concern educators.  NEA provides resources for professional development, great public school, and conference for educators and staff.  NEA’s article titled The First Amendment - Protections for Educators provides guidance for educators about  “what you need to know as an employee of a public school.” (NEA, 2023)  The article provides information on the ability of the government to limit speech when an educator is on the clock and limit speech that impacts the “workplace” when it is outside of contract hours. (NEA, 2023)

National Education Association (2023) The First Amendment-Protection for Educators.

https://www.nea.org/resource-library/first-amendment-protections-educators

# data[].attributes.body
Slide #2 Summary of Topic:

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

― S.G. Tallentyre, The Friends of Voltaire (Goodreads, n.d.)

This topic is becoming more prevalent because in 2023 there are so many topics in the public arena that polarizing.  Abortion rights changes, LGBTQ community concerns, Critical Race Theory, faith-based belief challenges, and other hot topics are affecting citizens.  Not only this hot topic but ones that affect the community and schools such as the TEA takeover of Houston Independent School District.  Many educators are using their voices on social media to discuss these topics as well as many others.  Additionally, students who have access to social media and news apps they read them and are curious about the topics and eager to discuss them.  Parents are feeling the pressure to protect their children from up-and-coming topics in school.  Legislatures are making laws to limit courses and discussions on issues such as Critical Race Theory.  Due to all of these emerging issues and topics, the limit of speech and expression has become more prevalent in the classroom.

Freedom of Speech and Expression is very important due to the implicit and explicit influence educators have on students.  Educators are often asked questions by curious students on controversial and noncontroversial topics.  Educators have the opportunity to discuss their opinions when talking to students.  An educator has the right to the freedom to discuss how they feel, but as a representative of the school, district, and state there are times they do not represent themselves.  (Garcetti v. Ceballos, 2006).  Meanwhile, they are on social media discussing the same issues and expressing their opinions.  They are using their freedom as a private citizen to discuss public concerns.  In cases such as these, they are not public servants.

Goodreads (n.d.) Freedom of speech quotes.
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/freedom-of-speech

Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006)

# data[].attributes.body
Slide #1 Professional Perspective:

Principals have challenges in all areas of education.  The ultimate goal is to make sure that students are engaged, learning, and achieving.  Principals have other responsibilities such as promoting a positive school culture, providing for professional development, and budgeting for the school year.  Principals' commitment to their goals and expectations come with issues that surface through emails, phone calls, social media picture, and video.  These issues deal with teachers' personal opinions, thoughts, life experiences, and lifestyles.  Teachers have so much influence over the students that they teach.  They are mentors, parental figures, sisters, brothers, and friends to students all of which emanate their profession.  These relationships ended when the teacher is off the clock.  Then starts their personal life.  Teachers have thoughts and emotions that they speak about, write about, post on social media, and discuss with government figures.  Teachers sometimes discuss controversial topics or subjects not meant for young ears.  So the question is does a teacher have the right to unlimited or unrestrained speech?

Principals have the task of communicating federal, district, and state laws and policies dealing with restrictions of speech and expression for faculty and staff.  They receive emails, posts, and pictures from stakeholders complaining or showing private thoughts of teachers.  How does a principal handle these situations?  How do principals handle letters sent to the community by the teachers on a controversial issue?

This subject is important because as a future campus principal, I have to first understand that stakeholders watch and even research educators through social media and other resources.  Additionally, educators have their voices that deserve to be heard. I must use legal and ethical resources to determine what is covered under the 1st Amendment of freedom of Speech.  I must acknowledge the limits of teacher freedom.  Moreover, I have to have the ability to communicate to educators what they are allowed to discuss with students and what is off-limits.