“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek Essay (Critical Writing)

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Made by Human No AI

The article discusses the current topic of social media use by teachers and the legislation balancing free speech rights and the educational benefits of social media. The authors claim that in the United States, teachers use social media to contact students or parents, improve the curriculum, and develop professionally through interaction with peers (Vasek & Hendricks, 2016). Despite the benefits of social media, it has its drawbacks, as some teachers publish controversial content, and their social networking with students might be considered inappropriate. The following paper will explain the need for responsible social media use and describe the limits of the Pickering decision.

The problems of the irresponsible use of social media and unprofessional teacher-to-student networking require school leaders and legislators to take disciplinary action against educators regardless of their First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech. Thus, teachers should exercise caution while using social media or networking with students to enjoy the technology’s pedagogical benefits without the risks of damaging their careers. The case of Pickering v. Board of Education provided protection for teachers commenting on socially important matters. However, educators should avoid media comments on employment conditions since they will be considered as personal matters that are not covered by First Amendment protection. Moreover, the teachers should ensure that their speech or a social media publication does not interfere with school operations or working relationships between employees and supervisors.

The modern case of Spanierman v. Hughes involved the Pickering balancing test. The teacher used his personal Myspace account to contact students, but the page also had inappropriate content. The school guidance counselor received students’ complaints and advised Spanierman to use the school email instead of the personal account for communication with students. The school officials refused to renew the contract with Spanierman after he created the identical Myspace page. The case was dismissed as there was no public concern involved, and the content had a negative impact on the educational environment. Therefore, teachers should avoid social media networking with students or topics unrelated to education as inappropriate speeches are not protected by the First Amendment and might lead to lawful employment termination. Additionally, educators should never post personal information and comments about students, parents, or other teachers, as the case of Munroe v. Central Bucks School District shows. Despite the teacher’s attempt to hide her identity, it was uncovered, and the offensive content of her blog led to her termination. As the blog negatively affected relationships and respect in the school community, the court dismissed the case, so it was not protected by the First Amendment.

The legal case of Pickering v. Board of Education demonstrates how free speech rights protect school teachers. Marvin Pickering was fired by the board of education after expressing his disagreement with their financial decisions in a local newspaper. Pickering appealed to the court in 1968, which resulted in the conclusion that educational goals must be balanced with the teachers’ free speech rights. The Pickering balancing test, however, created some limits to the freedom of speech, as seen from Connick v. Myers case. Sheila Myers lost the case, as the court decided that her questionnaires did not communicate a matter of public concern.

The cases of Pickering and Connick led to the development of a two-prong test during free speech challenges. The first prong requires teachers to prove that their message addresses a matter of public concern. The second prong demands that a teacher demonstrate how his/her speech interests “outweigh the school’s efficiency in operations interest” (Vasek & Hendricks, 2016, p. 3). Overall, the court decisions limited the freedom of speech, so the educators can rely on the First Amendment only when their speech involves public concern and the school’s operations.

Reference

Vasek, M., & Hendricks, R. (2016). Teachers, social media, and free speech. eJournal of Education Policy, 1–10.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2022, February 21). “Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek. https://ivypanda.com/essays/teachers-social-media-and-free-speech-by-vasek/

Work Cited

"“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek." IvyPanda, 21 Feb. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/teachers-social-media-and-free-speech-by-vasek/.

References

IvyPanda. (2022) '“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek'. 21 February.

References

IvyPanda. 2022. "“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek." February 21, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/teachers-social-media-and-free-speech-by-vasek/.

1. IvyPanda. "“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek." February 21, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/teachers-social-media-and-free-speech-by-vasek/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "“Teachers, Social Media, and Free Speech” by Vasek." February 21, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/teachers-social-media-and-free-speech-by-vasek/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, please request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
Privacy Settings

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

  • Basic site functions
  • Ensuring secure, safe transactions
  • Secure account login
  • Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
  • Remembering privacy and security settings
  • Analyzing site traffic and usage
  • Personalized search, content, and recommendations
  • Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Required Cookies & Technologies
Always active

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Site Customization

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

  • Remembering general and regional preferences
  • Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy.

Personalized Advertising

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy.

1 / 1