Case Study #41 Censorship or Parents Right
See case study #41 (Gorton pp.337-341) Censorship? or Parents' Rights? Analyze the Case
The only explanation I can provide for the principle not reading the book, he was not aware the department head approved it for an assignment…lack of communication. I believe the teacher intentions were good and academically the book was based on a learning tool for the students to apply their experience using problem base learning (PBL) style to understand, decision maker and come to a solution (conclusion) of the interpretation they were comfortable based on the assignment but unfortunately, some parents disagreed. The principle lacked communication skills and jeopardize his leadership in his role as being a principle. First of all, he should have read the book before approaching and making a drastic decision and siding with the parent, second, he should have acknowledge to the parents, that he is aware and he’s looking into the situation and he would get back to them, thirdly, I think he jumped the gun by sending out the memo and lastly, his decision to withdraw the book was a little premature. The English department saw this as a learning tool from the explanation from the teacher and approved his request. They thought it would help broaden the student knowledge because it dealt with adolescent children everywhere. The three main factors are: communication, ethics and decision making. Discuss the Larger Issues
The self-censorship (also called stealth censorship) in order to avoid possible problems and parental complaints, some educators quietly remove a book from a library shelf or a course of study. Teachers practice the same sort of self-censorship when they choose not to teach a topic or not to discuss a difficult issue. On the other hand, parents have the fundamental right to direct the education and upbringing of their own children. Parental rights are fundamental to the family and a healthy culture. If no...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document