Running head: A Teacher’s Right 1

A Teacher’s Right to Choose: Religious Freedom

EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #6

Elizabeth McDonald

College of Southern Nevada

Running head: A Teacher’s Right 2

A Teacher’s Right to Choose: Religious Freedom

EDU 210 Portfolio Artifact #6

Can a teacher make the decision on what she will or will not do? What if her denial of

duties stem from her personal religious beliefs? According to Underwood and Webb (2006), “In

cases involving the teachers’ right to free exercise of religion, the teacher must teachers’ right to

a belief must be balanced against the school’s interest (p. 52). In a scenario where kindergarten

teacher Karen White becomes affiliated with Jehovah’s Witness, she decides she will be making

changes as a teacher. She informs both her student’s and their parent’s that she will no longer

decorate the classroom for holidays, plan Christmas gift exchanges, sing “Happy Birthday” or

recite the pledge of allegiance. Her decision for no longer leading these specific projects or

activities is because they are religious in nature and go against her own personal religious beliefs.

After complaints from parents to principal Bill Ward, he recommends Karen White be dismissed

from her teaching position due to her inability to meet the needs of her students. While there are

U.S. court cases that are both for and against her dismissal, it is my opinion that the court would

rule in favor of the school.

While teachers have protected religious rights under the First Amendment, not all

religious acts are protected. In U.S. Supreme Court Case Palmer v. Board of Education of City of

Chicago (1979) the court ruled that a teacher did not have a religious right to refused to teach

classroom curriculum. In this case kindergarten teacher named Joethelia Palmer met with the

principle, Florence Paskind, of the school she was employed with and advised her that she no

longer would be leading activities that involved, "anything having to do with love of country, the
Running head: A Teacher’s Right 3

flag and other patriotic matters" (1979). More specifically, Palmer would no longer lead

activities related to holidays like Columbus Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas.

While the principal tried to accommodate Palmer by using older students, parents, and even team

teachers to come in and teach and lead activities that Palmer would not, it did not work. After

complaints from parents, principal Paskind advised Palmer that she would indeed need to lead

and teach her class according to the school curriculum. Although Palmer’s refusal response

stated her Jehovah Witness belief would interfere with meeting the school standards, she was

advised that her teaching contract would be terminated. When Palmer filed suit, the Court ruled

that although Palmer’s refusal to lead the pledge of allegiance was protected under the First

Amendment, the refusal to follow school curriculum was not, and that kindergarten aged

children needed a teacher to lead them to avoid chaos in the classroom.

Another case that supports the dismissal of Karen White is Peloza v. Capistrano Unified

School District (1992). In this case high school teacher John E. Peloza files suit claiming that his

constitutional right of freedom of religion was violated when he refused to teach the theory of

evolution in his science class as a fact when according to him, evolution is a religious theory. As

a result of his refusal to teach the curriculum as is, the high school is seeking to dismiss him as a

teacher. In this case the court ruled that the teacher had no case as no teacher has the right to

decide what parts of the state mandated curriculum he or she will or will not teach. The court

stated, “The high school students at Capistrano High School have a right to be taught biology

without the added comments and religious biases of plaintiff” (1992).

Even teachers are protected under the First Amendment. In Court case Tinker v. Des

Moines Independent Community School District (1969) students wore black armbands to protest
Running head: A Teacher’s Right 4

the United States Government policy in Vietnam. This was a silent protest that did not disrupt

the school which they were attending. It was the personal belief of the students and even though

there was interference with learning because of it, the school banned the wearing of the black

armbands and sought discipline for those who did abide. Although the above scenario with

Karen White appears to have nothing in common here, I choose this case because this is where

the court made the ever so powerful ruling in favor of the students and included teacher’s rights

as well stating, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional

rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate” (1969). This case is cited in

many other court cases since it upholds the First Amendment rights of teachers in addition to

students.

Another case that approves of the dismissal of teacher Karen White is Epperson v.

Arkansas (1968). In this case Arkansas public school teacher, Appelant Epperson filed suit

claiming it illegal for the school to tell him he could only teach evolution in his class. Not only

did he believe his religious beliefs prohibited him from teaching evolution, but also that he had

the right to teach outside of the school set curriculum. The court in this case ruled that, “The

State Supreme Court, expressing no opinion as to whether the statute prohibits "explanation" of

the theory or only teaching that the theory is true, reversed the Chancery Court. In a two-

sentence opinion, it sustained the statute as within the State's power to specify the public-school

curriculum” (1968). This related to the scenario because although Karen White did not agree

with what she was teach, and her religious views would not allow her to teach certain subject and

activities, does not mean, as a teacher, she has the right to refuse teaching and leading state

regulated curriculum.
Running head: A Teacher’s Right 5

While there are court cases that are both for and against the dismissal of scenario teacher

Karen White, it is my opinion she does not have a case and the court will rule in favor of the

school. I come to this conclusion based off the court case Case Palmer v. Board of Education of

City of Chicago (1979). This case made it clear that a teacher cannot refuse to teach or lead a

subject or activity based off his or her religious beliefs. While the First Amendment offers some

protections for a teacher’s religious rights, there still must be a balance with school interest and

what is best for the students. Because teachers are also viewed as public service employees, they

must be aware that there is a fine line between their own personal beliefs and how others may be

influenced by them.
Running head: A Teacher’s Right 6

References

Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968)

Palmer v. Board of Ed. of City of Chicago, 466 F. Supp. 600 (N.D. Ill. 1979)

Peloza v. Capistrano Unified School Dist., 782 F. Supp. 1412 (C.D. Cal. 1992)

Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)

Underwood, J., & Webb, D.L. (2006). School Law for Teachers Concepts and Application.