And speaking of difficult decisions, the Mascoutah, Illinois school system has had to determine when hugging is appropriate in schools.
Megan Coulter, a Mascoutah, Ill., eighth-grader, served two after-school detentions last week. Her offense? Hugging two friends and therefore violating the Mascoutah Middle School’s ban on public displays of affection.
Coulter’s case drew dozens of newspaper headlines and landed her on NBC’s Today Show. But it also illustrates a key challenge facing America’s schools: When is a hug inappropriate — or “extreme,” as its been dubbed by some administrators? And, more broadly, how far should schools go in policing the behavior of a generation that often takes its social cues from Paris Hilton and Britney Spears?
Thankfully, we have not seen this issue crop up in Franklin, but you can view the full report on Megan Coulter in TIME by clicking here.
School committees face difficult decisions on a daily basis. In 2005, a Dover, Pennsylvania School Board faced questions rooted in the very essence of the origin of the species. At issue was the theory of evolution versus intelligent design. The debate led to a six week trial in a federal court which determined that intelligent design could not be part of the science curriculum in the Dover High School.
The 2005 trial of Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al. was the latest major bout in a long-standing legal battle over the teaching of evolution in U.S. public schools. The crux of the case was Dover’s newly implemented policy requiring biology teachers to read to students a disclaimer purporting that “gaps” exist in Darwin’s theory of evolution, and moreover, that there is an alternative scientific explanation called intelligent design (ID). The disclaimer suggested that students learn more about ID through a book called Of Pandas and People, 60 copies of which were available in the school library. (To read the statement in full, click here.)
Was Dover’s ID policy a covert way to introduce religion into a public school, and therefore in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution? That is what Dover parent Tammy Kitzmiller and her co-plaintiffs claimed. Following six weeks of testimony from some of the country’s leading biologists, as well as arguments from the nation’s most ardent supporters of intelligent design, U.S. District Court Judge John Jones issued a 139-page ruling on the case on December 20, 2005. The judge ruled that it is unconstitutional to teach intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom. To view the full opinion, click here.
PBS’s NOVA produced a two hour special on the case – entitled Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial — which aired for the first time on November 13, 2007. You can view the show online by clicking here. PBS has a website devoted to the topic which can be viewed by clicking here. The site includes more detailed information on the case, the players involved, and links to additional resources on the issues.
It’s a question we all ask. The movie studio MGM, in an effort to publicize Lions for Lambs, which opened November 9th, developed a contest to provoke people to think about an answer. The studio launched a “What Do You Stand For?” contest on YouTube, calling for 90 second videos on the social issues people care most about. The videos submitted included impassioned pleas to adopt an animal shelter, recycling, preserving wildlife, and allowing same-sex marriage.
On November 9, Youtube announced the winner of the video contest. It was a “Tolerance PSA” called Dear Parents which you can watch by clicking here or clicking on the embedded video. If you would like to see more about the movie and how this video fits with the theme, click here.
The video is both provocative and inspirational. It serves as a great message to we parents and the education of our children.
