tinker_v_des_moines.pdf (1).pdf - Tinker v Des Moines(1969...

This preview shows page 1 - 4 out of 42 pages.

Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) “. . . In the absence of a specific showing of constitutionally valid reasons to regulate their speech, students are entitled to freedom of expression of their views.” — Justice Fortas, speaking for the majority TABLE OF CONTENTS Resources 2 About landmarkcases.org 3 Teaching Recommendations Based on Your Time Background Summary and Questions 4 ♦♦♦ Reading Level 8 ♦♦ Reading Level 10 Reading Level 13 Diagram of How the Case Moved Through the Court System Listen to the Oral Arguments (Online only) 14 Key Excerpts from the Majority Opinion 17 Key Excerpts from the Dissenting Opinion Full Text of the Majority Opinion (Online only) Activities The Case 19 What Is Symbolic Speech? When Is It Protected? 23 Classifying Arguments in the Case 25 How Does a School Identify “Disruptive Speech”? 27 The Editorial Staff of the Valley High School Voice Reacts 31 How Disruptive Is “Disruptive”? Access the American Bar Association’s Online Conversation with the Plaintiffs (Online only) After the Case 34 Gangs, Tattoos, and Symbolic Speech 38 The Internet, Schools, and Symbolic Speech: A Jigsaw Activity
Tinker v. Des Moines © 2000 Street Law Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. Visit . 2 About landmarkcases.org This document was created to accompany the landmarkcases.org Web site, which provides teachers with a full range of resources and activities to support the teaching of landmark Supreme Court cases, helping students explore the key issues of each case. The “Resources” section features basic building blocks such as background summaries and excerpts of opinions that can be used in multiple ways. The “Activities” section contains a range of short activities and in-depth lessons that can be completed with students. While these activities are online, many of them can be adapted for use in a one-computer classroom or a classroom with no computer. Depending upon the amount of time you have to teach the case, you may want to use one or more of the "Resources" or "Activities" in conjunction with one or more of the general teaching strategies. These include moot court activities, political cartoon analysis, continuum exercises, and Web-site evaluation. Each of these activities is accessible through the home page and within this document. If you have time constraints, consider using the Teaching Recommendations Based on Your Time, which is featured on page 3. Feel free to experiment with these materials!
Tinker v. Des Moines © 2000 Street Law Inc., and The Supreme Court Historical Society. Visit . 3 Teaching Recommendations Based on Your Time (Note to teachers: The last activity for this case deals with speech on Internet sites. You may wish to segue into the Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier case with this activity.) If you have one day . . .

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture