Equal access for all students: A reply to Commons and Rodriguez

Moshman, David

doi:10.1016/0273-2297(90)90018-y

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Any criterion that would justify distin guishing adolescents from adults with respect to basic intellectual rights could equally jus tify invidious discrimination among normal adults [Moshman. 1990b: for a critique of this view, see Commons & Rodriguez, 1990; for a reply, see Moshman, 1990c],…”

Section: A D O Le Sc E N T Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescent Reasoning and Adolescent Rights

Moshman¹

1993

Human Development

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two recent cases, the United States Supreme Court addressed the authority of public secondary schools to exercise control over student publication in the school newspaper and student meetings on school premises. The Court ruled for substantial school authority with respect to the content of the school newspaper but upheld students’ right of equal access with respect to student meetings. These two decisions reflect inconsistent assumptions about the intellectual competence of adolescents. Moreover, such inconsistencies are common far beyond the American legal context. A more consistent approach would be based on either (a) a rebuttable presumption of adolescent immaturity, or (b) a rebuttable presumption of adolescent maturity. Current psychological evidence is more consistent with the latter presumption. The analysis is extended to (a) the general issue of intellectual freedom in public secondary schools, (b) broader issues of governmental contraints on adolescents, and (c) family issues.

show abstract

Section: A D O Le Sc E N T Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%