Running head: VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 1

Viewing Religion and Public Schools

Evelyn Morales-Ramirez

College of Southern Nevada

May 03, 2016

VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2

Abstract

This paper will address a case where a teacher decides to no longer participate or lead certain

activities in her classroom due to her new affiliation with a religion and as a result is dismissed

for not meeting the needs of her students. Both sides of the case will be discussed and in the end

a decision must be made determining with her dismissal was just.

VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 3

Viewing Religion and Public Schools

When being a teacher there are specific guidelines one must follow. There are also

certain extents to which one can observe and practice their religion in the school or classroom. In

Karen White’s case, a situation is seen where a teachers’ religion may have too much

entanglement with her teaching duties and impede her from providing the adequate teaching to

her students. She was a kindergarten teacher who informed her parents and students that she

could no longer carry out specific activities or projects because of their religious meanings. She

informed them that she could no longer carry out or participate in these activities due to her new

affiliation with the Jehovah’s Witness. Due to this new religious affiliation she could no longer

decorate her classroom for holidays or organize gifts exchanges during the Christmas season.

There were various other activities she could no longer carry out such as singing “Happy

Birthday” or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. As a result of all of these sudden changes, parents

decided to protest and the principal, Bill Ward, recommended she be dismissed as she was seen

as no longer effectively meeting the needs of her students.

One case that would support the plaintiff, Karen White, would be Goss v. Lopez. In this

case public high school students were suspended for ten days without being given hearings either

before or after their suspension. Ohio law did not require the school to give the students a

hearing, but the principal’s actions were questioned and challenged. It was believed that the

students’ rights had been violated due to the fact that they were not given a hearing. The Court

found that their Due Process rights granted by the Fourteenth Amendment had been violated and

that the students’ should at minimum be given a notice before suspension and offered some type

of hearing either before or after the suspension (Oyez). In Karen White’s case it is not mentioned

that she was given a hearing before her dismissal or granted any due process rights. If Karen
VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 4

White was recommended dismissal during her contract period she has a right to due process. In

the textbook Legal Rights of Teachers and Students by Cambron-McCabe, McCarthy and Eckes

it states, “Both tenure and employment contracts establish a property interest entitling teachers to

full procedural protection. Beyond the basic constitutional requirements of appropriate notice,

and an opportunity to be heard, state laws and school board policies often contain detailed

procedures that must be followed (p. 286).” That means that she has a right to a hearing where

they could possibly rule the principals recommended dismissal may not be seen as the proper

action to be taken.

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette is another case that could be used to

defend Karen White. In this case the West Virginia Board of Education required the flag salute

to be part of the program of activities for all of the public schools. All students and teachers were

required to honor the flag and those who chose not to would be considered insubordinate and

possibly face the punishment of expulsion and charges of delinquency (Oyez). The Court ruled

that requiring students to salute the flag was unconstitutional. This case relates to Karen White’s

situation because she too, has the right to opt out of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance and any

activities and holiday celebrations that might offend her religion or she cannot carry out due to it.

Moving over to the defendants’ side, Palmer v. Board of Education is a case that would

support the defendants’ side and would not think that the principal was wrong in recommending

the dismissal of Karen White. In this case, Joethelia Palmer, who is a kindergarten teacher,

objected to participating in certain patriotic aspects of the required curriculum as a result of her

affiliation with the Jehovah’s Witness. She saw teaching patriotism as a form of idolizing and her

religion did not permit her to participate in things such as reciting the Pledge of Allegiance or

singing songs dealing with patriotism. She also could not participate in the celebration of certain
VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 5

national holidays. Throughout the year there were many complaints from parents saying that

their children were not receiving the same instruction as other classes. After Palmer was hired

and before the start of the school year she let the principal know her situation and the principal

gave her certain accommodations such as a student teacher and volunteer parents that could help

with the patriotic teachings she could not carry out. Although the principal was willing to

accommodate to the teachers’ needs he found that it was still not enough for her to successfully

teach the students the required curriculum and dismissed her (Curriculum Law Palmer v. Board

of Education, 1979). When Palmer claimed that her dismissal denied her due process law the

Court found that it did not and ruled in favor of the school board. The Court stated that although

Palmer had the right to her own religion she could not submit others such as the children to her

observances also and deny them from activities they could otherwise enjoy. This case is fairly

similar to Karen Whites’ case in several aspects. It is known that teachers have the right, just as

everyone else to practice any religion of their choice, but that does not allow for them to neglect

their duties as a teacher. They cannot refuse to follow the given curriculum and give the students

the adequate instructional lessons they would receive in a typical kindergarten due to their

religion.

Another case that would support the principals’ decision in recommending the dismissal

of Karen White would be Florey v. Sioux Falls School District. In the 1970’s the School Board

of Sioux Falls was concerned about how schools would go about dealing with religious holidays

in schools. To address the issue a committee came together to figure out a solution and keep state

and church separate. As a result, the committee came up with a set of policies which allowed

schools to observe religious holidays with certain boundaries and restrictions. The teaching of

anything that could be related or associated with religious roots could be permitted as long as
VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 6

they were part of the educational efforts of the school and the general classroom instruction.

Teaching students of the historical and cultural roots of religious holidays was allowed, but not if

the manner it was taught in would endorse or disagree with that specific holiday or religion. In

this case, Roger Florey who was an atheist parent objected to these policies, filed suit and

claimed that the set of policies were unconstitutional and violated his rights (Florey v. Sioux

Falls School District). The Court ruled that previous procedures that the schools would carry out

were unconstitutional, but the new set of policies acceptable and did not violate anyone’s’ rights.

This case supports the idea that teaching or carry out certain activities that may be affiliated to a

certain religion do not necessarily endorse that certain religion and the same goes for holidays.

When Karen White refuses to participate in these teachings and is strictly enforcing her religion

onto her teaching she is putting her relationship with parents in jeopardy and possibly effectively

carrying out instructional time to her students.

In conclusion, from viewing the several court cases and both sides of the case I would say

that the Court would side with principal, Bill Ward, and agree that Karen White’s dismissal was

appropriate. Due to Karen observing her religion she is performing unsatisfactory work ethic and

impeding the learning of cultural differences among her students. When a teacher allows their

religion to have as much influence on their teaching styles it can be portrayed as something else

by other such as parents. Parents might feel that such a strong observance of the teachers’

religion may be brought onto their kids. The teachers’ religion also must not affect her teaching

style and prevent her from teaching items that might be on the curriculum due to the fact that it

offends her religion; there must also be a separation of religion and her required duties as a

teacher.
VIEWING RELIGION AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS 7

References

Cambron-McCabe, N. H., McCarthy, M. M., & Eckes, S. E., (2014). Legal Rights of Teachers

and Students. New Jersey: Pearson.

Goss v. Lopez. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1974/73-989.

West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved from

https://www.oyez.org/cases/1940-1955/319us642

Florey v. Sioux Falls School District (1990). (2016). About Agnosticism/Atheism. Retrieved from

http://atheism.about.com/library/decisions/holydays/bldec_FloreySiouxFalls.htm