Portfolio Artifact #2 1

Artifact #3

Teachers’ Rights and Responsibilities

Stanley Koslowski

College of Southern Nevada

April 6th, 2018

Portfolio Artifact #2 2

At a predominantly black high school Freddie Watts, principal, and Jimmy Brothers,

assistant principal, are African-American administrators and got into a heated conversation with

Ann Griffin, a white tenured teacher. In the heated conversation Ann said she “hated all black

folks” which is a tremendously huge mistake. When the word got out around the school about

the conversation the reactions were negative by both other white and black teachers. The

principal, Freddie Watts, recommended Ann be dismissed based on the concerns regarding he

ability to treat students fairly and her judgement and competency as a teacher.

Daniels vs Quinn (1986) will support Watts decision to dismiss Ann Griffin. In 1982,

Carmalita Daniels was a teacher’s aide and cuts led to her position and 33 other aide’s positions

to be cut. She was not rehired later while most of the other aides did. She made comments to a

member of the Board of Education that she did not receive materials for one of her classes. These

comments made it to the principal and he told her to bring up such inquiries though

administrative channels. When it came to rehire, the principal did not recommend her to get

rehired and neither did Superintendent Quinn. Daniels argued that she was not rehired because

the incident with the other Board member. The Supreme Court said teachers can’t be fired for

using their First Amendment rights but in the case of Daniels because of her comments that led

to her not getting rehired are not the kind shielded from adverse employer action. In the case of

Ann, her comments also don’t fall into that category. In Daniels vs Quinn, it says, “to hold for

the teacher in private expressions would be to transform every personal grievance to protected

speech when complaints are raised about classroom materials, teacher aids, laboratory equipment

and other related issues.” (Daniels vs Quinn, 801 F. 2d 687 (4th Cir. 1986)) Ann’s comments was

harmful and interfered with the rights of others so her being dismissed is the correct choice.
Portfolio Artifact #2 3

Connick vs Myers (1983) is my next case in support of Ann’s dismissal. In Connick vs

Myers, Shelia Myers was informed by her boss that she would be transferred. She then

proceeded to create an internal office questionnaire that requested opinions about the office

transfer policy. She included a question that asked staff members if they felt pressured to work.

In response to this she was terminated. Since her questionnaire couldn’t be fairly related to any

matter of political, social or other concern to the community, she violated her first amendment

right and her dismissal was upheld. Ann did the same thing cause her comment wasn’t made as a

citizen so her dismissal by the principal is justified. Mr. Watts was right to fire Ann because

what she did on the job was the wrong thing. (Connick vs Myers, 461 U.S. 138 (1938))

The teacher is tenured, so Ann is saved from being dismissed right away because she is

protected by the Due Process Clause in the 14th Amendment. Cleveland Board of Education vs

Loudermill (1984) is a very good example. In the case James Loudermill applied and got a job

while putting he never was convicted of a felony on his application. It was later found that he

was convicted of grand larceny and dismissed from his job. Under Ohio law, he was a classified

civil servant, so he could only be dismissed for cause and was able to have his termination

reviewed. He filed a lawsuit saying he wasn’t able to defend his case and was in violation of his

right to Due Process. In court it was ruled that they violated the defendants due process rights by

removing their property rights to employment before providing a case for them to defend their

case. In the situation of Ms. Griffin because they didn’t allow her to defend her case of why she

made the comments. She is provided the due process and should be able to defend her comments

within a court before she is dismissed.

Portfolio Artifact #2 4

The principal dismissing Ann is the right decision because it adversely affects her

working relationships, and the statement was harmful to others. Both cases support that what she

did was not as a citizen but was made as an employee and the first amendment does shield

against that. She made the mistake of saying that and the consequences for that hurt her, but her

comments were very harmful and doesn’t allow the principal to believe she can do her job with

full confidence especially in a predominantly black school. She is now unfitting to preform her

duties because of the position she took on the matter. She spoke unprofessionally and created a

disruption in her school because of her comment.

Portfolio Artifact #2 5

Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill. (n.d.). Retrieved April 09, 2018, from
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1984/83-1362

Connick v. Myers. (n.d.). Retrieved April 09, 2018, from

https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/constitutional-law-keyed-to-
sullivan/freedom-of-speech-how-government-restricts-speech-modes-of-abridgment-and-
standards-of-review/connick-v-myers-2/

United States Court of Appeals, & Fourth Circuit. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved April 09, 2018, from
https://openjurist.org/801/f2d/687/daniels-v-d-quinn-e