Freedom of expression is considered a significant human right which is vital for a society to be democratic. It is generally the right of people and companies to exchange information without fear of censorship or consequence. This paper will take a closer look at the various benefits and abuses of free speech in an academic setting. It will also focus on censorship and consider the role of teachers and parents in developing students’ understanding of the proper use of free speech. The paper will determine if censoring serves as an illustration of legitimate evaluation and criticism which students can learn from.
Discussion
Freedom of expression as a right incorporates the expression of opinions and notions, imparting information, seeking out information, being an audience for it, and receives it. Freedom of expression can only be limited for very severe reasons. For instance, it can be limited if one individual violates the rights of another or the values of the community as a whole (Badley, 2009). On the other hand, intellectual freedom provides liberal availability to all expressions of ideas through which all sides of a question, movement, or cause may be explored.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Libraries are considered a source of information and concepts which allow individuals to inform themselves. According to the First Amendment, a public school has no power to limit expression because of its subject matter, content, message, or concepts (Abrams, 2017). This means that a teacher’s right to freedom of speech is controlled by the wide authority that the courts and legislature have allowed school boards to not only determine curriculum, but also manage teacher speech in a classroom.
As already indicated, the First Amendment tends to limit the right of a public institution to control expression on all kinds of topics and in all forms of environments (Amsden, 2011). Academic liberty addresses rights within the educational setting of learning, research, and teaching both internally and outside the classroom, for individuals at public and private institutions. Ethically speaking, faculty members are specially positioned to determine suitable teaching techniques.
The Code of Ethics states that educators should not give offense to the political, morals, and religious principles of students (Gelber, 2011). Therefore, courts may limit teachers’ independence when judges perceive teaching techniques to cross the line from pedagogical option to sexual harassment or techniques considered irrelevant to the subject matter at hand ( Schimmel Fischer & Stellman, 2008). Most scholars, lawmakers, and judges are continuously struggling with balancing firm speech protections with the necessity of upholding a peaceful community. Notably, Balkin (2016) explains that the unique features of the school setting allow elementary and secondary public school administrators to control classroom speech and school-supported speech to a higher extent, than allowed on public college universities.
Similar to dress codes, non-disciplinary dialogues that result in cooperative compliance are much better than prohibiting speech that does not pose a practical threat or is impartially disruptive or injurious. Interestingly, Schimmel Fischer and Stellman (2008) point out that private school learners are not safeguarded by the First Amendment and are thus subject to clearly expressive speech prohibitions. Amsden (2011) emphasizes that safeguarding fellow learners from harassing or prejudice conduct is an important government interest, but offensive social media posts may be restricted only if they lead to an actual threat or impair the educational setting.
Some of the benefits of free speech in an academic setting include the fact that it enables students to learn how to utilize rights in the democratic system, and generally have a right to express themselves. Also, given that teachers have prohibited rights of expression or speech, student journalists get the opportunity to represent vital sources of information relevant to school reform ( Strike & Soltis, 2015 ). Notably, most learning institutions, especially college campuses have become echo chambers for like-minded persons to continually believe what they believe without necessarily having to face any difference of thought (Badley, 2009). Therefore, free speech in academic settings allow for more academic diversity.
On the other hand, there are a few abuses of free speech, for instance, the absence of hard-lining on hate speech may result in the speech turning into something more serious. According to Schimmel Fischer and Stellman (2008), h ate speech and free speech are not always easily differentiated, which is why allowing for all kinds of free speech in academic settings means recognizing that hate speech can also be tied together (Balkin, 2016). Free speech may be abused when used to hurt others. It is not always that individuals express their perspectives with respect or consideration for others. Furthermore, one person’s views may ignite another’s anger leading to disagreements. This is quite common on the political arena particularly where citizens support distinct parties.
Censorship takes place when expressive materials such as magazines, books, works of art, or films are eliminated from public access. In academic settings, censorship is generally directed at controversial materials which discuss sexuality, race, ethnicity, and religion ( Strike & Soltis, 2015). Some individuals believe that academic institutions are wrong in allowing dialogues about sexual orientation in family life classes or sex education.
More pressure for censorship emerges from parents who are not comfortable with concepts or language that is different from or affront their individual values and perspectives (Gelber, 2011). Parents who believe that the present state of the society and communications make it hard to safeguard their children must find a way of coping with what they see as reality within the family context. If a student borrows something from a library which the parent believes is controversial or inappropriate, the parent must return the item and locate other preferable materials for the child.
Conclusion
The issue of the right to freedom of expression particularly in academic settings is quite broad, but has restrictions and can be limited. As indicated in the discussion above, freedom of expression is considered to be a significant human right which is vital for a society to be democratic. Notably, censorship requires teachers to balance First Amendment standards and obligations against other ethical concerns such as addressing deeply preserved beliefs in students and members of the society.
References
Abrams, F. (2017). The soul of the First Amendment . New Haven: Yale University Press.
Amsden, B.S. (2011). ‘Student advocacy and the limits of (action-) free speech: Figurationso f materiality in Tinker, Bethel, and Hazelwood.’ Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies , 8, no. 4. Pp. 353 – 375.
Badley, G. (2009). ‘A place from where to speak: The university and academic freedom.’ British Journal of Educational Studies , 57, no. 2. Pp. 146 – 163.
Balkin, J.M. (2016). ‘Free speech foundations symposium: Cultural democracy and the First Amendment.’ Northwestern University Law Review , 110. Pp. 1053 – 1095.
Gelber, K. (2011). Speech matters: Getting free speech right . Queensland: University of Queensland Press.
Schimmel, D., Fischer, L., & Stellman, L. (2008). School law: What every educator should know : a user-friendly guide . Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Strike, K., & Soltis, J. F. (2015). Ethics of Teaching . New York: Teachers College Press.
