Portfolio Artifact #6 1

EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #6

Shelby R. Olson

College of Southern Nevada

Portfolio Artifact #6 2

Abstract

After becoming a Jehovah’s witness, Ms. White clarified for her students and parents that

she would no longer be engaging in what she considered to be religious activities. These

included holiday decorating, gift exchanges, singing happy birthday and reciting the pledge of

allegiance. This upset parents and caused her principle to recommend that she resign based on

not providing the students a quality education.

EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #5

Ms. White’s Argument

It has been clarified numerous times in the Supreme Court that schools can not support

religious practices unless protected under the Free Exercise Clause. In the case of Lemon v

Kurtzman, the supreme court reviewed laws created to supplement salaries for teachers only

teaching religiously motivated courses. It was concluded that, “if the purpose or effect of [a]

display is an apparent endorsement of religion, it violates the Establishment Clause”

(Underwood, Webb 2006 p. 215). In Ms. White’s case, it can be argued that she is well within

her right to refuse to partake in holiday activities since she is not endorsing any specific religion

in doing so.

Additionally, in Engel v Vitale, the courts analyzed under which circumstances prayer is

acceptable in schools. It was concluded that schools can not compel students to recite prayers,

however students as well as employees do maintain a right to individual prayer. Thusly, in

relation to Ms. White’s case, she is not imposing her beliefs on the students in any way, simply

omitting certain non-required practices. She is not subjecting her students to prayer or other

religious action, she is simply upholding her right to her own individual religion.

Mr. Ward’s Argument

Portfolio Artifact #6 3

Students are entitled to the best education possible. Due to parent backlash in accordance

with Ms. White’s new religious ideology, Mr. Ward was well within his right to investigate and

suggest possible resolutions. In Wigg v Sioux Falls Sch. Dist., a principle declined in allowing a

teacher to participate in an after school religious club meeting. His decision was later overturned

by the court, however his intent remains that he simply wanted to protect the school from

possibly being considered endorsing a religion.

In addition, in Engel v. Vitale it is stated that even though students and teachers maintain

their rights to individual prayer, it can not result in the endorsement of the religion by the school.

Mr. Ward clearly was concerned about the parents of his students thinking that his school was in

some way endorsing Ms. White’s religion.

Final Opinion

I believe that the court would ultimately rule in favor of Ms. White because she is not

imposing her religion in the classroom, simply not taking part in certain traditions which she

maintains the right to do or not. I believe it can be argued that the parents are requiring her to

deliberately refute the constitution by decorating for Christmas or planning gift exchanges in

relation to Christmas since it is a religious holiday. She is not allocating time for prayer, or

displaying religious posters and symbols. It can not be upheld in court that anything she is doing

is in violation of the Establishment Clause.

References

Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971)

Underwood, J. L., & Webb, D. L. (2006). School Law for Teachers Concepts and Applications.
Portfolio Artifact #6 4

Wigg v. Sioux Falls School Dist. 49-5, 259 F. Supp. 2d 967 (D.S.D. 2003)