Artifact 6 1

EDU 210 Artifact #6

Richard L Tipton

College of Southern Nevada

 2

In our situation we have a kindergarten teacher, Karen White who recently joined a new

religion and became a Jehovah’s Witness. Due to her new religious beliefs she could no longer

celebrate holidays or pledge allegiance to the flag. She brought these beliefs into her classroom

which caused parental concern. Due to these concerns Bill Ward, the school’s principal, called

for White’s dismissal. This brings into question how the first amendment may protect a teacher,

but we must look at court cases to make this determination.

We must first look at the endorsement test that was established by Lemon v. Kurtzman.

This test makes us look at two main factors, is the purpose to endorse religion, and does it

entangle government and religion. Karen is obviously not looking to endorse her religion just

practice it. She is however, an employee of the school, which is government funded, however

she is not necessarily entangling the two. By this analysis she passes the endorsement test and

should be safe.

Next, I turn to Wisconsin v. Yoder, which determined that the state could not interfere

with the free exercise of religion, unless it could show a compelling state interest. Karen is not

interfering with the classroom by choosing to not host gift exchanges or display holiday themed

decorations in her room. She also never stated the students could not recite the pledge, just that

she would not recite it. She also never said students could not celebrate their own birthdays, just

that she would not sing happy birthday. Through this court case she should be protected due to

her not directly interfering in her student’s instruction.

On the other hand, if we look at Engle v. Vitale, we find a case that determines religious

practice must not be imposed in the classroom. This case determined prayer cannot be led in the

classroom, or be school sponsored. By keeping Karen in the classroom this could be considered

as endorsing her religious views by allowing her to ignore standard student practices such as the
 3

pledge of allegiance. By allowing her to ignore such things as birthdays or holidays it may also

leave the wrong impressions on students that young. It could inadvertently discourage them from

wanting to celebrate such things that they had come accustomed to celebrating.

Stone v Graham gave us the ruling that the ten commandments being displayed in a

classroom was unconstitutional. This ruling was made under the basis that promoting a religious

belief had the probable effect of endorsing religion. By not leading celebrations, it could be

considered that Karen was endorsing her own religion. This is also made concerning due to her

teaching such young students that are by nature more impressionable. Teachers of students so

young must be aware of how every action they make could leave an impression on them that

lasts a lifetime.

In this situation I believe the court would not uphold the decision of releasing Karen,

however it may be suggested that she teach a higher grade level. She is not imposing her

religion on the students by choosing to not participate in certain celebrations. This would be an

infringement of the first amendment, however moving her to teaching slightly older students

would be a proper solution. Young students are like sponges, they will absorb what they observe,

especially kindergarten students. This could inadvertently sway their beliefs, in a way that say a

4th grader may not be swayed since they have had more time to be rooted in traditions.
 4

References

Underwood, J.D, Webb, L.D, Upper saddle River, NJ, Columbus OH, School law for

teachers, concepts and applications, Pearson Merril Prentice Hall