The Schoolhouse Gate: Public Education, The Supreme Court, and The Battle for The American Mind. By Justin Driver. New York: Pantheon Books, 2018. Pp. 564. Cloth, $19.30.

Dew, Spencer

doi:10.1111/rsr.13801

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken together, these statements form a set of beliefs about education, a sort of unarticulated philosophy of education, spanning multiple decisions covering an array of constitutional questions. Few, however, have attempted to piece together these statements to uncover underlying trends or any threads of coherence that would provide what Justin Driver (2018) has called a "holistic" analysis of the Court's educational arguments (p. 15). From our perspective, a holistic approach to the Supreme Court's educational thought involves two elements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

At the Very Apex: What the Supreme Court’s Student Speech Cases Have to Teach Us About a Constitutional Right to Education

Warnick

Thomas

2023

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Context: In the 1973 Rodriguez decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Constitution does not guarantee a substantive federal right to education. So far, this holding has not been adequately contextualized with many other statements the Court has made concerning the nature of education in the constitutional order. For example, since the 1969 Tinker decision, the Court has repeatedly justified curtailing student free speech by appealing to important educational goods, but the necessity of providing these educational goods has not been harmonized with the Court’s denial of a federal right to education. Purpose/Objective/Research Question or Focus of Study: Is the Court’s denial of a constitutional right to education consistent with how education is formulated in the Court’s other decisions related to education, particularly as found in the student speech cases? Research Design: A “holistic analysis” is employed to examine the Supreme Court decisions related to education. This approach interprets the different strands of the Court’s decisions related to education in light of one another (a “dialogic task”) and places the Court’s decisions into a larger context of educational thought (a “contextual task”). Specifically, with respect to the dialogic task, the focus is on reading the Court’s decisions related to a federal right to education in light of its jurisprudence related to student speech; with respect to the contextual task, the focus is on clarifying the Court’s statements related to educational goods by putting them into context with educational philosophy and theory. Conclusions/Recommendations: The holistic analysis leads to three observations. First, the authors find that the Supreme Court has endorsed a range of goods associated with education, including both public and private goods. Second, the Court has framed these educational goods as being closely associated with constitutional norms and the democratic order. Third, in the student speech cases, the Court has argued that these public and private educational goods are so critical that they justify the curtailment of student speech rights under the First Amendment. Bringing these observations together, it is concluded that, because education is being linked to constitutionally relevant private individual goods, and because the attainment of those goods is critical enough to overcome student speech rights, then the attainment of those goods should itself be considered a substantive, individual, constitutional right.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

At the Very Apex: What the Supreme Court’s Student Speech Cases Have to Teach Us About a Constitutional Right to Education

Warnick

Thomas

2023

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet Tinker permits school officials a range of admissible responses to student protest. Indeed, the Supreme Court often has sided with school officials on subsequent cases (Driver, 2018). Additionally, although Tinker affirms the importance of political expression in schools, it provides little guidance for education officials on how to support student engagement in contentious issues while also minimizing the chance of hostile exchange.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principals’ Responses to Student Gun Violence Protests: Deter, Manage, or Educate for Democracy?

Kwako

Rogers

Earl

et al. 2023

Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context: School-based student protests have received little scholarly attention, yet they have the potential to impact the school community, students’ civic development, and larger social movements. Principals are key actors in responding to school-based student protests. As school leaders, principals’ actions affect the outcome of student protests and shape many students’ first experiences as activists. Purpose: This study examines U.S. public high school principals’ responses to school-based student protests in 2018, a year of heightened protest activity in response to gun violence in schools. The purpose of our study is to understand how a national sample of principals responded to student protests and to quantify general trends in their responses. Research Design: Using a mixed methods approach, we surveyed 491 principals during the summer of 2018; follow-up interviews were conducted with 38 principals. Analyses are grounded in the Deter-Manage-Educate framework, a new conceptual framework that we develop in this paper, organized around the three broad goals principals pursue when responding to student protests. Using this framework, we determined how and how many principals deterred, managed, and educated. Results: Findings show that very few principals outright deterred student protests. Nearly all principals managed by setting parameters around protests in an effort to balance students’ right to free speech with concerns for order and safety. A majority of principals also educated, using student protest as an opportunity to encourage civic development. Our findings suggest that an important distinction exists between principals who channel students toward (or away from) a particular manner of protest and principals who facilitate reflection to help students realize their own vision of civic engagement. Implications: This study has implications not only for principals, but also for district leaders and educational leadership organizations: Although many principals receive support for managing the logistical (and legal) challenges of responding to student protests, more attention needs to be directed toward helping principals leverage the educative opportunities that student protest can provide.

show abstract

“…Finally, Chief Justice Warren emphasized that "to separate [Black children] from others of similar age and qualification solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone" (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483,494,1954). According to Driver (2019), Brown v. Board of Education was the first case that "conceived of the constitutional deprivation at issue as belonging primarily to the students themselves, rather than as some previous cases had--belonging more to their parents" (p. 249). This sociological argument worked to reshape constitutional law in the United States, and it helped to lay the foundation needed to dismantle century-old practices set forth by Jim Crow (Tushnet, 1994).…”

Section: The Historical Context: the Making Of Schools As Predominant...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although Brown v. Board of Education helped establish a new precedent that "separate but equal" was unconstitutional and that Black children had a constitutional right to the same educational privileges as white children (Driver, 2019;Dingus, 2006& Tushnet, 1994, many felt that the Supreme Court decision did not consider that Black schools run by Black educators and leaders were seen as beacons in their communities, equal in personnel, education, community partnerships and care (Dubois, 1935;Tillman, 2004& Dingus, 2006. Dubois (1935) argued that Black children were receiving a level of education and care that he did not feel they would receive once enrolled in integrated schools: "The proper education of any people includes sympathetic touch between teacher and pupil; knowledge on the part of the teacher, not simply of the individual taught, but of his surroundings and backgrounds, and the history of his class and group" (p. 328).…”

Section: Black Schools Prior To Brown V Board Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As massive resistance swept over the South, the Black community suffered even more. Driver (2019) notes that "Segregationists would respond to an adverse decision in Brown by marshaling arguments that would endorse 'voluntary' segregation, gerrymandered district lines to avoid integration, and other efforts to minimize the decision's effects" (p. 251).…”

Section: K-12 Schools After Brown V Board Of Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“What Makes YOU So Strong, Black Woman?” A Phenomenological Qualitative Study of the Importance of Mentorship In Navigating the Principalship In Our Anti-Black Schools

Morris-Washington

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This qualitative phenomenological study explores how Black female principals use the tool of mentorship to navigate the dynamics of the principalships as well as the culture of their anti-black school sites. Kram (1985) states that mentorship offers support in two primary domains: the career and the psychosocial. Thus, mentorship may help create networks of support in which Black female principals can safely learn how to navigate our American education system successfully. Therefore, this study argues that mentorship is a necessary tool in supporting Black female principals, certainly since Brown v. Board of Education which, ironically, worked to expel Black female educators and leaders from the field of education and dispel the support system inherent in the Black educational community. This study argues that since the desegregation of K-12 schools, the familial support that Black female educators and leaders would have naturally received has been diminished by the prevalent anti-black culture embedded within our nation’s history and within the foundation of our current K-12 education system.

show abstract

The Schoolhouse Gate: Public Education, The Supreme Court, and The Battle for The American Mind. By Justin Driver. New York: Pantheon Books, 2018. Pp. 564. Cloth, $19.30.

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

At the Very Apex: What the Supreme Court’s Student Speech Cases Have to Teach Us About a Constitutional Right to Education

At the Very Apex: What the Supreme Court’s Student Speech Cases Have to Teach Us About a Constitutional Right to Education

Principals’ Responses to Student Gun Violence Protests: Deter, Manage, or Educate for Democracy?

“What Makes YOU So Strong, Black Woman?” A Phenomenological Qualitative Study of the Importance of Mentorship In Navigating the Principalship In Our Anti-Black Schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About