Reassigned Woodlan adviser honored

The American University law school honored Amy Sorrell with its Mary Beth Tinker Award on Wednesday for her efforts to fight censorship in her school.

The honor is well deserved for an adviser who has gone through a lot in this ordeal.

Sorrell detailed her experiences to at a luncheon in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday. She challenged those at the luncheon to work toward protecting student rights.

"This is something we need to do now - not wait until you are a victim of censorship," she said. "We need to challenge schools to be advocates for students and to truly make schools a place for learning. Schools need to be places that harbor student rights, that encourage students' thoughts and ideas even when they are unpopular."

Settlement reached in Woodlan case

Embattled Indiana journalism adviser Amy Sorrell, whose ordeal we've been tracking here, has reached a settlement with with East Allen Community Schools in what has to be considered a blow for student free expression rights. Under the settlement, Sorrell keeps her job but will be transferred to another school and barred from advising publications in the district for three years.

Predicatbly, very few seem to agree with the district's decision, although the district maintains it has been unfairly maligned. Said the Indianapolis Star in a staff editorial (stop us if you've heard this before ...):

"While student press freedom is not and cannot be absolute, court precedent holds that educators may not arbitrarily suppress school journalism and must show academic reason for intervening. Avoidance of trouble does not strike us as an academic criterion, much less a guide for budding opinion writers."

So, what can be learned from this situation for advisers who hope this never happens to them?

David L. Adams, a professor of journalism at Indiana University, said one of Sorrell's biggest mistakes might have been taking the lead in fighting against administration:

In hindsight, one of the other mistakes Sorrell might have made: leading the charge for threats to her students’ expression. It’s a difficult task for 14- to 18-year-olds to do this, and many teachers make a similar mistake because they know that freedom of expression is often challenged by those in authority. Young Americans can be terrified easily by adult threats when they try to express their thoughts on issues of controversy.

Advisers, it's always best to let your students do the leading in situations such as this. You can point your kids in the direction of sound information and advice, such as WJEA and the Student Press Law Center. But the moment you take the lead, you run the risk of putting your job in jeopardy. Sorrell's job might have been in jeopardy anyway, but it certainly wasn't helped by the fact that she used her district e-mail to solicit help for herself and her students. Protect yourself!

This doesn't in any way excuse the district's actions, which were reprehensible toward student free expression, and it's unfortunate that Sorrell's forced apology gave Superindendent M. Kay Novotny the opening she needed to issue this smug statement (which included the assertion that Sorrell was allowed to keep her job out of "compassion").

But it's important for both students and advisers alike to remember that student journalism is always at its strongest when the students are the ones making the decisions -- even whether to fight censorship.

Resolution expected soon for suspended adviser in Indiana

About a month ago, we brought you the story of Amy Sorrell and the staff of the Woodlan Junior-Senior High School newspaper, in which Sorrell had been punished for failing to bring an editorial the principal later found too controversial to his attention before publication.

Sorrell now faces losing her job.

In what has been a pretty slow-developing story, the school board is finally ready to make a decision on Sorrell, who has been suspended since the incident. According to this AP story, a public hearing on Sorrell's status will be held Saturday, and a vote on the matter by the school board is expected by Tuesday.

Sorrell regulary submits stories she believes could be controversial to Principal Ed Yoder for review, but failed to submit an editorial that advocated for tolerance of homosexuality. School officials argue Sorrell should have known better.

"The way we view it is the broad topic of homosexuality is a sensitive enough issue in our society that the principal deserves to know that it's something the newspaper is going to write about," said Andy Melin, assistant superintendent of secondary education and technology.

At the risk of blaming the victim, this case should serve as an excellent example of why it's never a good idea to agree to submit stories to administration for review -- especially agreements where it's up to the adviser to determine what might be controversial. It's a no-win situation, and I know from experience that sometimes the stories that are most controversial are the ones you never anticipate.

If a principal insists on reviewing content, it's wise as an adviser to insist they review it all. That way, you have protected yourself from the very predicament Sorrell finds herself in. This principal has created a situation where he wants all of the control but none of the liability. It's a bad spot for an adviser to be.

On the bright side, the coverage of this case has brought out the most thoughtful piece of writing from a school official that I can remember. John Quick, a superintendant in Indiana, wrote this piece over the weekend for the Indianapolis Star, advocating for student publications to operate as an open public forum.

"Empowering our students with high-level thinking and decision-making skills in this manner is solid educational practice. Students take their position of ownership seriously. They are well-versed on current events and seek to present information within a local framework. They understand writing for a teenage audience. They contact sources by interviewing experts outside the school in addition to school administrators and students. ...

"In addition, student journalists acquire high-level and transferable skills. These include initiative, responsibility, leadership, accountability, problem-solving, teamwork, delegation, meeting deadlines and communication. Their future employers will be grateful. Because students have the unique opportunity to maintain the journalistic credibility of their own publications, they practice such intrinsic values as integrity, truth, loyalty, courage and commitment to excellence."

Think about doing as I've done with this piece: Print yourself a copy and save it for when you need to articulate to someone why it's so vital that students operate in a public forum setting -- especially a school official who refuses to believe it can be done responsibly. So often, these arguments come from advisers. This one comes from a superintendant.

We'll update you as more info becomes available on the Woodlan situation.

Another example of press restriction, this time in Indiana

As we await word on the fate of House Bill 1307, the Student Free Press Bill, it's worth noting one of the more egregious examples of abuse of principal power in recent memory -- one that continues to have fallout more than a month after it happened.

It all started with an editorial at Woodlan Junior-Senior High School in Woodburn, Ind., that called for tolerance towards gays and lesbians. The principal said the material was not suitable for some members of the school (which serves grades 7-12), and after publication of the paper instituted a policy of absolute prior review, where he would review everything before it went to press.

Additionally, he sent a letter of reprimand to the adviser, who he says was supposed to bring any articles to him that might potentially be controversial before the paper goes to press. She since has been put on paid leave by the school board, which strangely also refuses to hear any public commentary on any aspect of the issue.

Some experts have weighed in, saying the principal was well within his Hazelwood rights to do what he did. It's worth noting that under House Bill 1307, none of this could happen to either the students or the adviser.

Here are some of the opinion pieces that have come out in the wake of this whole mess. In the interest of balance, I would include a piece defending the principal -- but I can't find any.

• "Tolerating student views"
• "Student journalism should teach civics, not censorhip"
• "Censorship easy way out for schools"
• "... and principal could do much better"