“I have a friend who recently told me he was gay, and I kind of wrote it for him. I thought that students would talk about it, but we’ve had gay students at school, and it’s never caused any disruptions before.”
– Megan Chase, a 15-year-old sophomore whose opinion piece in her school newspaper about accepting homosexuality has sparked a regional debate about freedom of speech in high schools.
“It’s not the topic of the article. It’s the content of the article in terms of its level of its appropriateness and its balance. You have seventh- and eighth-graders who are far less mature than 11th- and 12th-graders.”
– Andy Melin, East Allen County (Indiana) Schools assistant superintendent, voicing objection to Chase’s commentary.
Megan Chase, a sophomore at Woodlan Junior-Senior High School in East Allen County, Indiana, believes that society should be more tolerant of homosexuals. So, on Jan. 19, 2007, under the supervision of Woodlan’s journalism advisor of four years, Amy Sorrell, she shared her thoughts on the matter with the entire Woodlan student body, specifically students in grades 7—12.
“I can only imagine how hard it would be to come out as homosexual in today’s society,” she wrote in her very first editorial for the school’s newspaper, The Tomahawk. “It is so wrong to look down on those people, or to make fun of them, just because they have a different sexuality than you.”
Chase also addressed why she believes homosexuality is not a choice (“It’s not a disease, or something that you catch from someone else; it’s something that they don’t have control over”); her views on “the religious aspect to the argument” (“I wouldn’t want to believe in something that would condemn me over something that I didn’t even choose”); and statistics on the dropout and suicide rates of gay teens and young adults (“I don’t understand why we would put so much pressure on those people, that they would feel that they have to end their lives because of their sexuality”).
And finally, in closing, she wrote this: “Being homosexual doesn’t make a person inhuman, it makes them just a little bit different than the rest of the world. And for living in a society that tells you to always be yourself, it’s a hard price to pay.”
Chase’s sincere and delicate plea for acceptance of gay people is no more offensive or subversive than an essay on the golden rule, but little did she know her commentary would give her an opportunity to learn firsthand about the intricacies and side effects of free speech – and that writing about homosexuals can be as contentious as being a homosexual. And she’d learn these lessons from her principal, Edwin Yoder.
After reading the commentary, Yoder sent a letter to Chase, Sorrell and the entire newspaper staff, ordering that they submit all future issues of the newspaper to him for review prior to publication.
If you’re thinking that Yoder’s command came after a barrage of complaints by concerned parents, think again. Local papers reported that as of Feb. 20, a full month after publication of Chase’s views, no one voiced an objection – except Yoder.
Curious? Sure, but don’t cry foul … yet.
Yoder’s instruction is not beyond the scope of his position; the school board’s policy allows him to review articles. In addition, thanks to a 1988 Supreme Court ruling (Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier), Yoder isn’t the only educator in the country allowed to audit speech in school: “Educators do not offend the First Amendment by exercising editorial control over the style and content of student speech in school-sponsored expressive activities so long as their actions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.”
That said, Yoder’s request is rare. A principal usually trusts his journalism advisor to make judgment calls with respect to content in the school newspaper, much in the same way he trusts his science advisor not to allow students to build dirty bombs at the science fair.
Yoder’s job sure would be easier if the journalism students at Woodlan would just write about their favorite colors rather than homosexuality, but as Yoder is discovering, the business of free speech isn’t always pleasant, and it’s rarely cut and dry.
It’s clear that Yoder has the power to review articles, and also that Sorrell is aware of that. The Fort Wayne News Sentinel reported that Sorrell said, “I do realize that prior review is allowable under the school-board policy, but I don’t think this subject warranted prior review.”
And the Associated Press reported, “Sorrell said she brought Yoder a piece on teen pregnancy that appeared in the same issue and did not think Chase’s editorial would be a problem.” But does the power to review also give Yoder cause to censor?
That’s exactly what Sorrell and her staff wanted to know.
For answers, they contacted the Student Press Law Center in Arlington, Va., an advocacy group for student free-press rights that provides free advice and legal assistance to students and their advisors. The SPLC advised Sorrell to appeal the decision.
According to its website: “If a student publication is a public forum for student expression, then students are entitled to stronger First Amendment protection [than offered by the Hazelwood decision]. School officials are only allowed to censor forum publications when they can show the publication will cause a ‘material and substantial disruption’ of school activities.”
With no evidence to support that Chase’s piece would cause “material and substantial disruption,” it appears that Sorrell’s decision to run the piece without first showing it to Yoder was not a mutinous act or even a dereliction of duty. In fact, an argument could be made that Sorrell not only exhibited due diligence, but also that her questioning of Yoder’s attempt to use Chase’s piece as precedent for censoring similar articles in the future is warranted.
It seems to me that Yoder owes Sorrell and her students an explanation as to why an article on teen pregnancy is OK with him, but commentary on homosexuality isn’t. Instead of an explanation, however, Yoder issued Sorrell a written warning for insubordination and not fulfilling her duties as a teacher. He accused her of exposing Woodlan students to inappropriate material and said that if she did not comply with his orders, she would be disciplined and could be fired.
While it’s obvious that Yoder is eager to exercise his power, he’s not in any rush to exercise his tongue and talk face to face with reporters about what’s going on at his school. Taking the media heat for him is Andy Melin, assistant superintendent of East Allen County Schools.
Melin, who in an appalling expression of indifference admitted to not reading Chase’s commentary, said: “It’s not the topic of the article. It’s the content of the article in terms of its level of its appropriateness and its balance. You have seventh- and eighth-graders who are far less mature than 11th- and 12th-graders.”
According to Melin, not only are seventh- and eighth-graders too young to read commentary about acceptance of homosexuality, but also Sorrell was supposed to find a student willing to go on record with an opposing view to balance Chase’s piece — a view in favor of looking down on and making fun of gays and lesbians, and one that supports the idea that homosexuality is a disease and that homosexuals are inhuman.
Regardless of the preposterousness of his argument, let’s pretend for a second that what Melin said is true — that it’s not the topic he and Yoder object to, but the content. Let’s make believe that Chase wrote about some other issue that’s constantly in the news and the subject of recent movies, videos, talk shows, conversations at bus stops, etc., and that has, for whatever reason, weaved its way into the lives of teenagers. Pick something. Anything. I don’t care what it is. It doesn’t matter.
Now let’s agree that because the staff of the paper is comprised of only high school students — who are, as Melin pointed out, by virtue of their ages and experiences more mature than, say, half of the readers they serve — they are not only going to want to write about issues important to them and their peers, they also, as journalists, have an obligation to do so.
Accordingly then, Melin, Yoder and anyone else with an interest in the journalism department at the school have to acknowledge that it’s by design, not disrespect, that from time to time some articles that appear in the paper will be inappropriate for younger kids.
It’s not the fault of Sorrell or her students that the way the news is disseminated at Woodlan isn’t working for everyone; it’s the fault of the architects of the poorly planned junior-senior megaschool blend. I suppose there are economic reasons for throwing hundreds of kids of six different ages in one school, but regardless of the rationale, Woodlan is still a school, not a large daycare center or impenetrable bubble. Every student is there to expand her mind, not to have her learning experience censored or curbed for the sake of students who are younger or less mature.
Threatening Sorrell with termination is not the answer to Woodlan’s problem, and neither is attempting to silence young journalists. So after receiving her written warning from Yoder, Sorrell, along with 10 of her students, attended an East Allen County Schools board meeting on Feb. 20 to ask members to put the issue on the agenda for the next meeting.
The board’s answer: No. Superintendent Kay Novotny denied their request and suggested they meet with Melin instead.
Sorrell and her students also asked the board to clarify its policy on tolerance of gays and lesbians, but the board refused. According to the Journal Gazette, “Melin said there is no policy and didn’t think the board should have to go as far as to write one.”
The good news is that if we are to believe Melin when he says that it’s not the topic of Chase’s piece that he and Yoder have a problem with, it’s the appropriateness of content for students in the lower grades, the answer to the problem is incredibly simple: Give the younger students their own newspaper.
The bad news is that given the poor arguments in opposition to the commentary, and the board’s refusal to address the issue and institute a policy on gay tolerance, it’s extremely difficult for any reasonable person to believe that the topic of Chase’s commentary has nothing to do with the negative reaction to it.
How this will pan out in the days ahead remains to be seen, but it would benefit all involved to consider the words of Adam Goldstein, an attorney at the Student Press Law Center, who told the Journal Gazette, “If students are not being taught tolerance in the classroom, their problem is much larger than this particular incident.”
