U.S. 503, 511 The lessons that were to be learned from the Journalism II course, according to the Curriculum Guide, included development of journalistic skills under deadline pressure, "the legal, moral, and ethical restrictions imposed upon journalists within the school community," and "responsibility and acceptance of criticism for articles of opinion." All the while, the public educator nurtures students' social and moral development by transmitting to them an official dogma of "`community values.'" In neither case did this Court suggest the distinction, which the Court today finds dispositive, between school-sponsored and incidental student expression. Pursuant to the school's practice, the teacher in charge of the paper submitted page proofs to the school's principal, who objected to the pregnancy story because the pregnant students, although not named, might be identified from the text, and because he believed that the article's references to sexual activity and birth control were inappropriate for some of the younger students. That is, however, the essence of the Tinker test, not an excuse to abandon it. Dissociative means short of censorship are available to the school. Manifestly, student speech is more likely to disrupt a curricular function when it arises in the context of a curricular activity - one that "is designed to teach" something - than when it arises in the context of a noncurricular activity. Unsurprisingly, Hazelwood East claims no such pedagogical purpose. Petitioners are the Hazelwood School District in St. Louis County, Missouri; various school officials; Robert Eugene Reynolds, the principal of Hazelwood East High School; and Howard Emerson, a teacher in the school district.
The other costs associated with the newspaper - such as supplies, textbooks, Educators are entitled to exercise greater control over this second form of student expression to assure that participants learn whatever lessons the activity is designed to teach, that readers or listeners are not exposed to material that may be inappropriate for their level of maturity, and that the views of the individual speaker are not erroneously attributed to the school. The legal issue in Hazelwood was whether a . Id., at 46, n. 7 (citing Widmar v. Vincent). But we need not abandon Tinker 460 Obscenity Case Files: Tinker v. Ante, at 271 (footnote omitted). For example, Board Policy 348.51, which stated in part that "[s]chool sponsored student publications will not restrict free expression or diverse viewpoints within the rules of responsible journalism," also stated that such publications were "developed within the adopted curriculum and its educational implications." 385 478 These concerns were shared by both of Spectrum's faculty advisers for the 1982-1983 school year, who testified that they would not have allowed the article to be printed without deletion of the student's name. It is much more likely that the objectionable article was objectionable because of the viewpoint it expressed: It might have been read (as the majority apparently does) to advocate "irresponsible sex." 307 The school district held that their actions were reasonable ones, made in order to uphold school discipline. 347 Cornelius v. NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., Particularly telling is this Court's heavy reliance on Tinker in two cases of First Amendment infringement on state college campuses. The court held at the outset that Spectrum was not only "a part of the school adopted curriculum," id., at 1373, but also a public forum, because the newspaper was "intended to be and operated as a conduit for student viewpoint." .
." U.S., at 46 The Court had addressed similar questions in a few previous cases, three of which were cited in the decision. In Kansas, a student was suspended for making fun of his school's football team in a Twitter post. No. Instead of "teach[ing] children to respect the diversity of ideas that is fundamental to the American system," Board of Education v. Pico, The District Court thus found it "clear that Mr. Stergos was the final authority with respect to almost every aspect of the production and publication of Spectrum, including its content." In that regard, the Court attempts to justify censorship of the article on teenage pregnancy on the basis of the principal's judgment that (1) "the [pregnant] students' anonymity was not adequately protected," despite the article's use of aliases; and (2) the judgment that "the article was not sufficiently sensitive to the privacy interests of the students' boyfriends and parents . Id., at 11. The newspaper was written and edited by a journalism class, as part of the school's curriculum. , but also from speech that is, for example, ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences. (1968). Hague v. CIO, Ante, at 271. The public schools do not possess all of the attributes of streets, parks, and other traditional public forums that "time out of mind, have been used for purposes of assembly, communicating thoughts between citizens, and discussing public questions." U.S. 853, 864 The Journalism II course was taught by Robert Stergos for most of the 1982-1983 academic year. . The Court of Appeals reversed. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL and BLACKMUN, JJ., joined, post, p. 277. We held that official censorship of student expression - there the suspension of several students until they removed their armbands protesting the Vietnam war - is unconstitutional unless the "Any yardstick less exacting than [that] could result in school officials curtailing speech at the slightest fear of disturbance," 795 F.2d, at 1376, a prospect that would be completely at odds with this Court's pronouncement that the "undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough [even in the public school context] to overcome the right to freedom of expression." U.S. 147, 150 In Oregon, 20 students were suspended over a tweet claiming a female teacher flirted with her students. Further, he explained the deletions only in the broadest of generalities. 403 v. Fraser, Print. Free student expression undoubtedly sometimes interferes with the effectiveness of the school's pedagogical functions. or the rights of others.'" The Hazelwood East Curriculum Guide described the Journalism II course as a "laboratory situation in which the students publish the school newspaper applying skills they have learned in Journalism I."