Teacher reassigned after burning U.S. flags in class

[deadparrot]

A Stuart Middle School teacher has been removed from the classroom after he burned two American flags in class during a lesson on freedom of speech, Jefferson County Public Schools officials said.

Dan Holden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned small flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it, district spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.

A teacher in the school district since 1979, Holden has been temporarily reassigned to non-instructional duties pending a district investigation. The district also alerted city fire officials, who are conducting their own investigation.

“Certainly we’re concerned about the safety aspect,” Roberts said, along with “the judgment of using that type of demonstration in a class.”

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AI...

[OwnedByFerrets]

1. Sig Heil Ya'll nt

[wellst0nev0ter]

2. Free Speech Lesson #1

In public schools, you have no rights.

[coalition_unwilling]

71. So much for the principle of academic freedom. (n/t)

[Ready4Change]

3. Lord knows...

We mustn't expose our tender children to controversy. It might prick their delicate bubbles of fantasy sometime before their 40th FRICKEN BIRTHDAYS!

Sorry, was that my outside voice?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pepperbear]

5. Devil's advocate on 1 point....

Wouldn't it have been safer to take the class outside to do the demonstration?

[Ohio Joe]

20. Agreed

I think it should have definitly been done outside... emphasis on definitly should have been done. I find this an amazing lesson, one every student should be given. Learning about our right to free speech and allowing students to really come to their own conclusion about it, with a demonstration like this, is a lesson every child should get.

[LiberalFighter]

26. Was it even necessary to burn the flag?

The teacher could had just as easily made the assignment without the demonstration.

I would had split the class into two or more if other concerns. I would also try to assign the side that was opposite of the student and tell them their grade would be based on how well they supported that side. And better yet try to split up friends.

Some will be writing in support of their side but they will have prove their case to make the grade.

As a measure of the assignment I would do a blind poll on how the class as a whole felt about the issue. To increase the odds that the poll was honest I would have the students mark their ballot up front away from the other students. A blind poll would be done after the assignment to see if there was a change.

I would also like to have the student indicate their position on the issue prior to the writing assignment. And then how they felt after it was over.

[Canuckistanian]

6. Wow, somebody actually burned a flag!

No doubt he was "emboldened" by the failure of the flag-burning bill!

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/washington/28flag.htm...

Why, oh why does he hate America? What will we tell the children? The terrorists have won.

[beam me up scottie]

7. What's even more incredible, he did it in Kentucky.

I applaud the guy, but he had to know what would happen once the red state talibornagains found out.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. Maybe he should have burned a bible, too.

That'd sure as hell get some attention - of the fire-bomb-your-house variety, no doubt.

[brentspeak]

29. Are you kidding? This idiot teacher would have been fired in ANY state.

If he burned a flag in any NJ classroom -- goodbye, you're fired. NY? You're fired. California? Take a hike.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

90. What if he burned an unrelated object?

Would the same apply?

My high school Science teacher demonstrated in the lab what happens when you mix glicerine and sodium permanganate. Nasty.

[wordpix2]

92. burning a flag or a paper bag in a class is pretty stupid & a risk to kids

although I think flag burning is not a threat to the US

[coalition_unwilling]

72. Those "red state talibornagains" will probably celebrate the teacher's

firing by going out and burning a cross (while wearing white hoods and sheets). It is Kentucky, after all, former slave state and nominal border state during the U.S. Civil War.

[MasonJar]

78. Being a teacher myself in the Jefferson Co, Public Schools, I am

not that pleased with the stereotyping of Kentuckians. In fact much of Jefferson County is quite democratic. The teacher would have been wiser perhaps to send out a notice of explanation to the parents in advance, since Stuart Middle School is in the south end of Jefferson Co. Just for your info, the school where I teach has just been named as one of the top 100 high schools in the nation (based on certain criteria, not just academic.) Much of the reason is that we have an incredibly diverse student body and the school addresses the needs of such a wide socio-economic range & such a wide academic range from Advanced to the special needs (academically.) In addition, two years ago the Jefferson Co. School System was one of three finalists for an award as the best school district. Our state under the former governor (a Dem) began a program that has been a model over the country. You can access it by CATS. Good name for Kentuckians because of the UK wildCATS.

[last1standing]

8. With rights come responsibilities.

I support the right to burn the flag just as I support any form of free speech. However, knowing when and where to apply this right is just common sense. Our classrooms are not the place to be burning flags or perform any other controversial exercise that would cause a national uproar. It takes away from valuable teaching time, and yes, there are many other ways to teach free speech without pissing off over half the nation.

How would all the people here supporting this idiocy feel if this story was some bush* lovin' Neanderthal burning pictures of Bill Clinton, Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, Paul Wellstone, or some other Democratic symbol? All this teacher has done is make a lot of people very angry with no good reason. The only lesson he's taught those children is that sometimes adults do stupid things. I'm guessing they already knew that.

[Sherman A1]

9. Agreed

While certainly within his "right" to do so, this message could have been discussed using other methods such as the Constitution's First Amendment and historical photos of flag burning. I am sure the message would have gotten through to the kids without the actual act of flag burning in the classroom. Not too well thought out, in my opinion.

[heliarc]

11. Really?

You've got better students than mine.

[heliarc]

10. Well...

As a high School teacher I know how hard it is to get students attention. I'm betting he taught them a valuable lesson, and continues to do so as the controversy compounds. The lesson probably would have been lost on a lot of students had he just made them read a textbook that discussed our rights as citizens "yawn." I hate to say it, but students want "sex, drugs and rock and roll" and while you do need to be responsible about the way you present these topics sometimes the shock factor is the only way to get students attention. I had a teacher in High School who was Summa Cum Laude at Princeton when he graduated and he taught us American History (he was a total Fundie... but). When he taught his first class he would leap onto his desk and call out to the heavens as if he were Goodman Brown of the old Colonial Stories... He wasn't burning a flag, but his antics made us recognize the zeal of the Colonists and their contract with the bible. Stuff that I would have been bored to tears about.

I'd encourage you to watch the Frontline about Jane Elliot who convinced a class of elementary school kids that blue-eyed people were more important than brown-eyed people. Then she convinced them all that the reverse was true. The children remember this lesson to this day, and I daresay the experiment is one of the more controversial things ever done in a classroom setting.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/e...

I typically support pedagogy like this, and I don't think it's idiocy at all to create spectacle. Burning pictures of the liberals you list doesn't compare because it's not the center of a national debate. It doesn't rise above a cheap stunt. Burning the flag is a statement about nationalism in general and it refers to an actual ruling of the congress.

[CanSocDem]

23. Good link....

Should be required viewing for this thread.

[last1standing]

32. Did Jane Elliot burn a flag in class?

If not, then its not quite the same. I'm all for using unique tactics to get the attention of kids and to get them interested in learning, I just don't think burning a flag fits that bill. Instead it will cause many other worthwhile demonstrations from taking place because thousands of idiots will now be harassing the school district and parents will be threatening to sue them for child endangerment or some other half-assed excuse. I'm willing to bet that soon a memo will go out to the teachers in that district that all "non-orthodox" teaching methods must now be approved by the school board. How do you think they would rule on most of Ms. Elliot's methods?

I'll say it once again, with rights come responsibilities. Why so many have a problem with that last part?

[heliarc]

54. No she didn't, but...

She convinced a class of very young kids that arbitrary physical characteristics were prerequisites for success. She taught them to be little racists, effectively starting fights and creating a huge disruption in the class social structure, one that I think significantly put students in danger of hurting each other. Yes, she was responsible enough to show the students the danger of what she taught them, the drawbacks of judging people at face value, and it has been proven years later that it may have been the most significant lesson that these people (now grown up) have ever learned. I'm not sure if we know if this flag-burning teacher would have been responsible or not in his lesson, because the instructor was prevented from following up his stunt with real discussion and instruction. It is entirely possible that it was just a stunt, but stunts like this are an effective way of getting students to face real problems in society. If Jane Elliot had been removed from her class after first teaching students that blue eyed people were better, they might still believe it today. I believe in responsibility as well. I'm just not so sure his stunt was irresponsible. Not clear to me from the given information. Could have been highly responsible. Possibly visionary.

I think that most school boards would disallow Ms. Elliot's methods even today (especially today given NCLB Standards driven instruction). Her methods are proven to be effective, but dangerous, and they would never take a chance like that.

[last1standing]

66. I agree that unorthodox teaching methods can be very effective.

I just don't think this was a good method because, regardless of his ability or intention, it was bound to stir up a national uproar that would drown out any lesson that was supposed to be learned. I wish things were different but we have to acknowledge the fact that most of the country doesn't agree with us when it come to flag burning and work very hard to keep an amendment on it from ever passing in the senate. Stunts like this just don't help.

The only problem I have with Jane Elliot is in your own statement that here lesson was "one that I think significantly put students in danger of hurting each other". I hope things weren't as dangerous as it sounds. Basically, though it sounds like a fantastic lesson in racism. I wish more teachers were able to handle that kind of undertaking.

[coalition_unwilling]

73. You don't get it: the uproar is the lesson. Bravo to this teacher

for having some real guts.

[last1standing]

76. I'm sure one of us doesn't get it.

But we'll have to disagree on which one.

[bling bling]

68. I thought she was fired over it.

I'd have to look it up but I'm pretty sure she lost her job after that experiment.

[heliarc]

81. Not sure if its in the Frontline...

It was a while ago that I saw it.

Here's the link again. Watch it online... I love Frontline!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/divided/e...

[bling bling]

87. I found this....

This is from the frontline website. Looks like she wasn't fired. But I found something she said that was really appropriate for this thread. The following comments from her correlate quite well to what's going on with the Kentucky teacher who burned the flag:

So there are teachers who are doing the exercise (brown eye/blue eye exercise). However, I think the numbers of those who would do it are decreasing because of the very conservative stance this country is in right now. I think it has become much more risky to do creative teaching in the classroom. I also think the curriculum in the public schools is being circumscribed drastically because of the fundamentalists that are insisting that the schools teach only certain very narrow values. Several years ago the message was, "We don't want values education." Well, education itself is a value. There's no way a teacher can go into a classroom without telegraphing her values to her students.

Now, teachers are being required to teach some values that are not the values that you want children to take into this next century. We need to stop inculcating in our students the belief that only white is right, the belief that there's only one right way to worship, the belief that males are superior, the belief that the U.S. has and has always had the right answer to every question and that we are a superpower because God is on our side.

[heliarc]

89. Great quote....

Thank you for finding this. I couldn't agree more with her description of the NCLB Standards based curriculum. It smacks of thought control. One need only look at the "standards" for abstinence education to see that a sharp bias has emerged in the criteria for instructional rubric. I haven't looked at many of the published NCLB standards yet, but I'm imagining the bias is going to be expressed across the wide range of disciplines.

[annabanana]

12. Burning the flag is not just a stunt.

It makes real the very essence of the concept of freedom of expression. The rights that the flag stands for are enumerated in the Constitution, not in the physical reality of the piece of cloth.
In the Bibleyest Bible belt, the concept of idolatry shouldn't be a foreign idea.

[Ms. Toad]

17. I agree, but

it could as easily, and even perhaps more effectively, have been conveyed by showing old newsreels of individuals burning the flag during the Vietnam war, for example, because for the people involved in flag burning at the time it was generally a real expression of agony, anger, fear, rejection of idolatry, and a whole lot of other things that were best expressed in that "picture is worth a thousand words gesture." As it is, it appears to have been a classroom demonstration not of personal expression (the basis on which flag burning is constitutionally protected), but an act intended solely to provoke a response in the students (the equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater).

Sort of reminds me of my 9th grade biology class in which the biology teacher insisted that each pair of students had to dissect a preserved frog, then each pair had to pith a live one and cut open its chest to see its heart beating. I am not completely against animal dissection - but any additional information gained by destroying the second frog per pair of students could have been just as effectively (and much less wastefully) have been accomplished by a video of the process and at most demonstration with a single additional live frog per class.

I agree with the educational message (in both instances), but would choose a different means to convey it. (FWIW my guess is that even showing old newsreels would likely have garnered the same reaction from the administration, resulting in the same additional education to which the students are now being exposed).

[NashVegas]

55. And I Disagree

it could as easily, and even perhaps more effectively, have been conveyed by showing old newsreels of individuals burning the flag during the Vietnam war

This teacher knew exactly what he was doing. He was giving his a Social Studies class a first-hand lesson on social controversies.

from the article:

Holden apparently told the students to ask their parents what they thought about the lesson, he said.

He did this for the same reason biology teachers have you disect frogs, chemistry teachers let you blow things up, gym teachers put you on a balance beam.

The challenge for the kids, the lesson for the kids, is not just 'how do you feel about me burning this flag,' it's about studying how people react to controversy. Couldn't ask for a better perspective than a front-row seat. Film reels are great for theorizing, but nothing beats first-hand experience.

[last1standing]

33. Burning the flag IS a stunt.

Just as burning a bible or pissing on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial would be. I'm not saying they should be illegal, just understood for what they are. Other than that, I didn't disagree with anything you said. I am merely saying that there is a time and a place for everything and this was neither. That teacher will do far more damage in the fight for freedom of expression than good and anyone who doesn't see the ramifications of his actions isn't looking very hard.

[Alexodin]

13. Free speech and unpopular speech are not by definition idiocy.

I would support anybody's right to burn a photo of whomever they choose, yes, even my greatest heroes and deities.

I would rather raise the Constitution and burn the flag than raise the flag and burn the Constitution.

It may have been somewhat unsafe to cause a small controlled fire in a class room but that consideration is minuscule compared to the danger that is raised by threatening to destroy our right to free speech. I wonder if he had a fire extinguisher handy? I would bet money he did.

Who was it that said," I may not agree with what you have to say but I'll die for your right to say it."?

This is a fantastic lesson. A true life example of fascism for the children to write about.
Naked and right before their eyes, yep thats better than showing a boring old safety first photo any day. I doubt that the students will ever forget it.

[last1standing]

34. Voltaire said it, and I agree with him.

If you read my post again, I said very plainly that I support the right to burn the flag. My problem is with people who don't think before taking action, in this case a teacher willing to push the envelope on an issue that is already very close to being passed by a two-thirds majority in the senate (I think it only failed by two votes or so). Now there'll be thousands of morons screaming again for a flag burning ban and a bunch of ethically challenged repubs ready to work this into a wedge issue, yet again. Is that somehow a good thing?

Voltaire also said "It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong." I agree with that saying as well. Our government is very wrong right now and providing ammunition like this is the worst thing we could do.

[coalition_unwilling]

74. This teacher very clearly "thought" about it before the class. Of course

we probably will not get the teacher's side of the story, now that we're into round-the-clock Jon Benet Ramsay coverage.

[greenman3610]

14. totally agree

this is spectacularly unhelpful.

[cali]

15. I'm with you

What a bonehead thing to do, and totally unneccessary to make his point.

[GeorgiaDem69]

16. Agreed

Totally out of line to do something like that in a classroom. I am totally opposed to any sort of flag-burning ban but this teacher shouldn't do what he did in school.

Oh, and by the way, schools can restrict freedom of speech.

[heliarc]

56. Oh, and they do...

There is a restriction at my school from talking about the Iraq war and talking about Katrina, because students are "having nightmares"

There is a restriction on talking about religion... yet there's a big fat directory of Jewish holidays that everyone has to honor (no mention of Islamic or Wiccan holidays).

There is a restriction on talking about politics... period. No political distinction can be shown.

So we've effectively silenced the one tool we have to bring these topics into the liminal world and robbed children and teachers alike from their real ability to work out these problems in a communicative healthy way.


I will attest, that all of my important and standout instructors, teachers and professors have been vociferous, opinionated people who were honest to the extreme. My American History teacher in High School was a Fundie from the South who said so, and presented his bias to us and challenged us to fight his position. We did, and found it to be the most rich and delicious intellectual environment I have ever known.

I'm not so sure I agree with this nonsense that says fomenting argument and debate in the classroom or national theater is a bad thing.

[Exiled in America]

38. Then we wonder why americans slit blithley by while our country implodes.

Hey! The educational system is NO PLACE for serious, critical looks at what our "rights" really mean. It's certainly not the place for engaging controversial issues or making students think from perspectives other than the establishment mainstream, right???

The only lesson he's taught those children is that there is a big difference between the freedoms our government and people in power SAY the people have, and pay lip service to every day and the freedoms we ACTUALLY have. He taught the lesson that we have freedom of speech in this country - as long as its comfortable speech that people in positions of power agree with.

The reason why the majority of the population in America right now has sat by and watched as we have been stripped of right after right, lost civil protection after civil protection, and experience the largest expansion of government intrusion and intervention in the lives of its citizens is because any time there's ever been a radical teach who tried to get the sheeple of america to think a little bit outside the box, they're run out on a rail, while we all cheer....

We want americans to be better in tune with political progressive values ...we just don't want them to every be taught anything but the status quo or in any way but the conventional. So he burned a flag in the classroom. Big deal. I think those kids learned a much valuable less about so called "free speech" by discovering that unpopular speech isn't really protected - its just a lot of lip service and feel good rhetoric about the 1st amendment that isn't enforced.

[last1standing]

41. That was a wonderfully sarcastic reply, only not very realistic.

You can attack me and my post as much as you want but unless you can come up with a response that proves I'm wrong about the repercussions of his actions it means very little. I support free speech as much as, if not more than, anyone on this board. I just know there's a time and a place to make controversial statements and a middle school is neither.

You can wax eloquently, or not, about children learning about the status quo, but who's status quo are they being taught to hate? Which unpopular speech isn't being protected and which is? School is a place to learn how to think, not a place to learn what to think. Let's teach them how to come up with answers, not which answers to come up with. There's a tremendous difference if you think about it.

[Exiled in America]

42. Hmm... I don't believe I attacked "you" at any point.

I did however, attack the argument, which I disagree with.

I don't agree at all that middle school is not a place for "controversial" statements. I can't think of a better place for "controversial" education. You can't teach them how to "come up with answers" if you don't teach them the range of possibilities beyond the comfortable.

I don't really understand your second paragraph. By definition there are not multiple status quos. They are not being taught to hate anything, they are being taught to think broadly, out side the boundaries of standard ideologies. It is very much like Howard Zinn's book sub-titled "Cross-examining American Ideologies." It is that kind of complete education that American students utterly lack. They are not being taught to come up with answers - that's the problem. They are being taught which answers to come up with. And those answers reflect the perspective of the historically victorious, the powerful, and the priviledged.

Thus we get lots of rhetorical talk about the glories of free speech and expression, and zero education of what that practically means. What 1st amendment rights we actually, practically have are drastically different than all the glorious rhetoric shovled at students every day. Is it any suprise then that the moment these students go out in the world and try to actually act on these rhetorical ideas fed to them in school, and discover that in the real work free speech and expression are frequently denied to them, frequently assaulted, and not very secure it is an awfully disillusioning experience that causes a lot of people to simply check out.

You can't teach kids how to come you with answers with out fairly presenting the story. One of the critical pieces of any teaching about the bill of rights is to teach the frequent disconnect between our rhetorical talk about how wonderful these rights are and the number of times they very people paying lip service to them also want to undermine them when those rights become "inconvenient."

We can disagree about whether the literal act of burning a flag was the best way to get this broader message across. But that doesn't even seem to be at the heart of your objection, since you say "there's a time to make controversial statements and a middle school is neither." Personally I couldn't disagree more with that idea. There is never a bad time to present the truth, and the only way you present the truth is to tell more than the establishment version of the story.

Education about the first amendment can't stop at what a great thing it is, or how smart the authors of the amendment were, or how great America is because we have this freedom and rah rah rah go USA. It has to include the historical obstacles to genuinely achieving this freedom for ordinary citizens. It has to include the historical and current disconnect in freedom of expression along racial lines and along lines of class. It has to include the tension when the ideal of freedom of speech is put to the test, which it is whenever someone says something that we strongly disagree with. It has to include discussion of the historical limits to free speech, questioning of the right and role of the state in regulating speech, or determining where an individuals right to free expression infringes on someone else's rights, etc.

Any or all of these critically important pieces of real education could have been fasciliated from the flag thing. Maybe there's a better way to do that, and that's fine - but I wholeheartedly support the spirit of the attempt to more honestly and broadly education these kids, and I do not think for a minute the teacher trying to do so should be dismissed.

[Doremus]

19. I'd take one creative teacher like this over 100 who play it safe. n/t

I'll take

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
over
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

everytime, and I'm sure most kids would too.



This guy cares enough about his students to put his heart and soul into his lessons. Of course he'll be lambasted for it -- we can't go having imagination in our classrooms.

[cali]

21. Oh, please

There are plenty of ways for teachers to be imaginative and lively, to engage kids, without doing something this fucking melodramatic.

[Doremus]

25. Why? Did he have a drumroll or something...?

Melodrama might describe demonstrations by groups like Scared Straight, but since we're talking about a topical, timely issue that affects every citizen, I'd say his use of props is not only highly appropriate but distinguishes this teacher from his lackluster counterparts.

You may prefer boring lectures but most people don't learn best that way.

[Exiled in America]

36. Yeah, its really melodramatic to actually dare to USE the 1st Amendment...

I can't think of a much better lesson for kids then to watch their teacher use his first amendment right to free expression in a legal manner (flag burning not illegal) and then watch him be punished for doing so. That's about the must significant lesson in the limits and hypocrisies of our great "free" society that will hopefully stick with them as they continue on in the world.

[tblue37]

40. These kids will never forget what they have learned about the suppression

of unpopular speech. And if they actually liked this teacher, they may well end up being more vehement than most about resisting the attempts of others to stifle free expression of political ideas.

[heliarc]

58. I think its fair to think...

That they might be really opposed to flag-burning too, but they will have had a real opportunity to see the government work its magic. "Now you see your civil right to free speech!!! Now you don't... Magic, its gone!" and they have a real experience to take to heart and analyze the way they see fit... which is the best that any educator can do.

[stepnw1f]

46. Melodramatic?

Your reaction and the govt's is MELODRAMATIC! Flag burning ban is and should be unconstitutional.

[cali]

47. Er, where the fuck did I say I was for a constitutional

amendment banning flag burning. What a totally moronic conclusion to jump to. As a matter of fact, I'm vehemently against any such amendment or any laws prohibiting what I consider to be fundamental speech rights. Should there ever be such an amendment, i'll be among the first to get out there and burn a flag. That has nothing to do with what this teacher did, which was indeed a melodramatic and stupid little act.

[stepnw1f]

48. That "stupid little act" Just Taught Those Kids a REAL Lesson

about this country. And I didn't mean to accuse you of supporting the ban of flag burning, although looking at how I wrote what I did, I can see how you would. I accused you of reacting melodramatically because what was done should not be seen as a "big Deal" or a "stunt". It was a FUCKING lesson! And the lesson and manner in which the teacher used was most effective!

I will say this; he should have burned the flag outside of the classroom so as to note break any fire code laws.

I applaud this teacher for trying...

[heliarc]

59. Hear Hear n/t

[warrens]

22. Starting fires in a classroom...

Not too bright. I love the concept, though.

[noonwitch]

28. My chemistry teacher lived to set fires in class, or explosions

I'll never forget the time he did the sulfur/iron thing with the bunsen burner-the test tube exploded and pieces of glass went flying all over. No one was hurt, and Mr. Dykstra seemed to enjoy himself a great deal with the whole thing.

[marshall]

49. Science Classroom vs. Non-Science Classroom

I'm assuming the classrooms that people are talking about where fires were routinely set by science teachers were equipped to handle the safety aspects of having an open fire. This was not a science class and in all likelihood the class was NOT equipped for such a demonstration.

[NashVegas]

62. "Social Sciences"

Are indeed sciences.

[marshall]

63. Ah, maybe that is true

but my point is a class like chemistry or physics is taught in a room that is more equipped for open fires than a "social sciences" classroom would be.

When I was teaching we were not even allowed to burn a small candle, much less set fire to a piece of cloth.

[NashVegas]

69. These Were Not Full-Sized Flags

The news story describes them as small. I assume we're talking desk-size. Hardly a threat as long as you're doing it over the waste-basket.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

91. Heh. See #90. -nt

[robcon]

24. Not too bright???

Actually it was moronic to burn a flag in class. The guy started a fire in a classroom. He should be dismissed.

Showing a picture of a burning flag would have done just as well, and, as others on the thread have stated, there are other ways to get students' attention on the first amendment.

[brentspeak]

27. This teacher makes Idiot Of The Week

[mccoyn]

30. One of my middle school teachers burned hydrogen in class.

In chemistry I had a teacher use electrolysis to fill an upside down bowl with hydrogen. He then flipped it over and lit the rising gas. It was a good demonstration conservation of energy. It was also in the chemistry lab, which had fire extinguishers and stuff.

[trixie]

31. The teacher pushed his own views down their throats

and made them participate in something they may have not supported. Why are the teacher's rights more important than everyone elses in the room? I can't stand when someone does this type of thing. He isn't helping any cause. He is only making the cause more extremist. Those kids were captive and had no right to stop him like they could in the real world and express their distaste for his actions. Even though I agree with his sentiment, I would have pushed for his dismissal. He has no right to indoctrinate other people's children.

Loose cannon and should be released.

For any teacher that thinks kids need theatrics like this, you should look into another career for you are not effective at this one. It's called burnout - move on.

[Exiled in America]

37. Yes, the horrible view that the first amendment actually means something!

Shocking!

[trixie]

45. Oh stop right there

So if a Bushite set fire to something you hold dear you would just sit there and say, "Excellent class on the first amendment!" Give me a break! Your rights end where someone elses begin. You have no right to shove your crap down my kids throat. I bet the teacher now has a whole group of students that are vehemently against flag burning. Great job for the cause!

[Khayembii Communique]

53. Quit your bellyaching

This demonstration was specifically about freedom of speech and nothing else. It was a demonstration in freedom of speech and expression. Regardless of what you want to think, this is completely in compliance with constitutional law, as would be a "Bushite" burning a symbol of something you "hold dear". This had absolutely nothing to do with "pushing views" on your beloved children. Hell, how do you even know the teacher has that particular belief?

[lynne]

79. It may comply with constitutional law but it sure doesn't comply with ~

common sense. Remember that this was a group of incoming 7TH GRADERS. We're talking age 11 here. Do you think they came away with an appreciation of their freedoms from this display? At best they came away with a laugh about what their teacher did in class and good story to tell at the dinner table that night.

Had this been a junior or senior government class, I'd have no problem with it. 17 and 18 year old kids are more mature, would better appreciate the demonstration and have the ability to creatively think and express their own opinions and thoughts on the matter.

However, 11 year olds are a captive audience and have far less ability to express themselves should they not understand the demonstration. I think the demonstration not appropriate for the age group. Not to mention the sheer stupidity of starting a fire inside a public building. Had the sprinkler system gone off, the damage done to the books and materials in the school would have been severe.

[heliarc]

60. BS

I've had fundie teachers who were great teachers. They presented their own opinions (often condescendingly and offensively), and what set them apart was the fact that they encouraged debate, and recognized real scholarly argument on its merits even when they believed things that were in direct opposition to my own beliefs and the students around me.

They've even done so with intense biases... very often the bias was posed theatrically in order to advocate (often devilishly) a bigoted view or position. The results in pedagogy are engaging and powerful. Dangerous to be sure, but there are few places in this world that aren't dangerous and children need to be prepared for the real world. I for one want an engaged and thoughtful child, and would encourage teachers who challenge the lame norm to which we are sadly more accustomed.

Plus I want clear and present representation of the thoughts and biases of those around me. I have an intense distrust for environments that silence people from stating their opinions and rigour in achieving those opinions. I want to know who the stupid people are so I can prepare myself and know where they stand.

The problem I have is not with Fundies who offend me... its those who choose to speak their mind and then silence the debate. I have no tolerance for people like that.

[trixie]

86. As soon as he set fire to the flag he silenced debate

There was no debate just his view shoved down their throats. You have the right to burn the flag and the right to respect it. That is choice, that is freedom. He did not give those kids any choice but to burn. I am pro-choice but this means CHOICE. In choice you have options. In freedom of expression you have options. Those kids had no options.

This had absolutely nothing to do with "pushing views" on your beloved children.

If this was my child then he definately cut me out. I no longer have the opportunity to educate the child on the proper use of freedom of expression or other rights. The responisibilty to make options in a democracy is a big one and I teach my kids to respect that. It is disheartening to see fellow Dems make stupid choices without regard to others rights and very sad to see a felloe DUer act like a rightwing nutcase about it.

[heliarc]

93. Not true

He gave them the opportunity to write an entire opinion paper about his act. He exercised his freedom, protected yet again by legistators and the US Supreme Court and asked the students to opine... He gave them the OPPORTUNITY TO FORM THEIR OWN OPINION.

I don't think that its clear he's a democrat either. Is there another article that said so? The article quotes other officials at the school who mention particularly that he WASN'T promoting a particular political stance. I'm not sure where you get the idea he wasn't giving his students the option to disagree with his act. The freedom was theirs to form an opinion. A value that is inherently democratic and certainly not nuts! The only nutcase idea is to stand idly by as flag-waving nationalist bullies dominate the debate.

He hasn't cut you out at all. If your child was one of the students who came home "abuzz" as the article points out. Than you could direct that energy and thought any way you like. You could discuss it with your child to help them to develop an opinion about it. Your notion that cognitive psychology somehow is afflicted and turned permanently on singular events lacks any concept of irony, sarcasm and wit at all. Especially for children that age who are involved in a very complex process of development that takes lots of opposing stimulus and responds by creating self.

The only people who are cutting people and educational opportunities out of their children's lives are the home schoolers who force their children to encounter only one viewpoint day in and day out with no interaction with other educators, students and life experiences. By your argument, this man who is charged with the task of teaching children many number of things cuts you out of teaching them math problems, or that the world is round, or that human DNA is close to that of the chimpanzee. He taught them a very extreme civics lesson. One that I think is of utter importance and is a stand against the narrowing influence of the NCLB standards that are cutting out even the acknowledgement of condom use as a way of staving off the spread of disease.

As I've said in other posts. The threat of fire in this act was a real one. The threat of indoctrination was minimal to none at best. I think its funny that you're calling me a "rightwing nutcase" You're the one who seems like the fearfully overprotective Christian fundie right that covers its ears and eyes from anything with which they disagree.

[trixie]

94. So if he had made racist remarks

and then let everyone write their opinions about it you would be fine?

You're the one who seems like the fearfully overprotective Christian fundie right that covers its ears and eyes from anything with which they disagree.

Wrong! Here is the problem with extremists - they think their ideals are the only right ideals. I am a democracy purist and believe everyone has the right to their opinion whether I agree or not. Now acting on an ideal is where ideology crosses over into political action. Let me give you a little case for our side: I was in 3rd grade and my teacher had us do a huge project on why we should abolish welfare (this of course coming from a teacher paid by tax dollars) my parents objected loudly, as did other parents. The teacher was fired. Anyone paid by tax dollars better be very sure to remember they represent ALL tax payers. A better way of getting the message through would have been to place the flag at the front and say, "Some citizens burn the flag......" and have them research the topic and then write an essay on their opinion of whether one should or should not burn a flag.

I am for keeping flag burning legal and my mantra is, "the day I can't burn the flag is the day I no longer live in the USA". I am personally against flag burning. I find it hard to watch an American flag being burned. How are my children supposed to handle something I myself can't? I am pro-choice and will fight vehemently for the legal right to control my body but personally I am not going to have an abortion. Ideology and action - two different thoughts at the same time. Just like their are crazies in the right wing there are crazies on the left.

Some parents actually take parenting and moral/political instruction very seriously. These aren't college kids these kids are 10, 11 or 12 years old. Just like I don't want my kids learning a certain kind of religion at school (world religions is fine) I do not want them learning a certain type of politic at school. Some think that extemism, impulse and pushing the envelope as the way to politics. I think that responsibility and tolerance is the way to politics.

He had no right to shove his views down those kids throats. He should be fired.

[Renew Deal]

35. He couldn't use video or pictures?

Safety of the students is always the #1 concern. Setting fires at school is not bright.

[heliarc]

61. Simple.

This is my only problem with the stunt he pulled. I know kids and something tells me that some of them love the idea of getting a license to do stupid stuff, like setting someone's gym shorts on fire. I hated some of those jerks in gym class. I wonder if the Supreme Court would say burning Uribe's gym shorts qualified as a speech act protected under the 1st ammendment.

But, sometime's the real thing is best. There is nothing more boring than a class that is drawn just from books and from tertiary sources. This guy sure knew how to use a primary source.

[soaky]

39. geez

reading some of the comments here you'd think he set fire to the whole classroom

[robcon]

43. Point: he might have set fire to the classroom. Or the school.

If I sent my kids to a school where the teacher lights a fire in the classroom, I would be spitting mad, and would demand that the teacher be dismissed.

Poor judgment like that is not acceptable in a teacher, IMO.

[Doremus]

50. Guess your kids won't be taking chemistry. n/t

[YankeyMCC]

44. Let's put two statements from the article in perspective

1) Stuart sixth-grader Kelsey Adwell, 11, said students were abuzz about the incident yesterday.

2) “A teacher doesn’t do that,” he said. “It’s just disrespectful.”

Yes by all means as soon as a teacher gets students "abuzz" let's put a stop to it! It could result in an outbreak of creative and independant thought!

[Igel]

51. He could have gotten a buzz a number of ways.

He's an employee of the county or city, on county or city time.

He could have burned an American flag to get his 'buzz'. Or a crucifix.

Or a Qur'an. Or he could have burned a poster of Martin Luther King. Or the US Constitution, with the verbiage that it should be burned because it's libertine.

Many ways to create controversy and get kids talking. I'm sure almost any of these would provide a good basis for an essay.

But I think I'd rather have the teachers at most present pictures of video of the acts, not have agents of the state do the acts themselves. It's like having kids put on shackles and wear them around all day in discussing the Middle Passage, or require that they memorize Muslim prayers, take Muslim names, and take time out as though they were praying in order to "give them an awareness" of what it means to be a Muslim (as though that would do it). Silliness, at best. Deeply offensive, at worst.

[Hepburn]

52. I agree with the teather's stance...

....but I do have safety concerns about burning anything in a closed classroom. Not a good idea. He should have taken the students outside to a place where burning things was safe. Other than that concern, I say, "Hats off to that teacher!"

[SmokingJacket]

57. Sounds like an awesome assignment, actually.

Certainly one they won't easily forget -- and one that will really make the kids have to DEFEND whatever opinion they hold.

I used to teach writing to college freshmen, and the concept of actually defending an opinion with a strong argument is something they sorely needed to learn.

And didn't we decide that flag-burning is perfectly legal, after all???

[Hell Hath No Fury]

65. I agree with you...

I think it was an imaginative exercise designed to challenge and expand his students minds on a issue relevant to these times.

I can agree with the burning itself being a potential safety issue -- but was there mention of how big the flags were? Are we talking about a standard classroom-sized flag or a small souvenier flag, something like you would wave at a parade? How was it burned? In an inclosed container such as a litterbasket that could be covered quickly to snuff out the flames? Did he have a fire extinguisher on the ready?

Lots of unanswered questions to be looked at before I would fire the guy.

[yurbud]

64. Teaching K-12 will do this to you. After another year, he'd burn himself

[heliarc]

83. Yeah he might re-enact the Buddhist protests in Vietnam

There's a certain amount of frustration that comes with teaching at any level. You want so much to educate young people and there is SO much holding you back: Paperwork (much of which you are not paid to do because it is done after school hours)... Behavior issues, funding cuts (I have to buy light bulbs for my classroom... I'm lucky if I have chairs).

And on top of all of that you are asked to censor yourself from discussing religion, and politics.

I just went to an orientation meeting for returning teachers and I wanted to scream when I heard the absurd NCLB standards. Sometimes the students are dying for some guidance in precisely the issues of politics and religion. They are questioning it themselves. This concept that they are vessels and that ideas or beliefs are poured in is insane. They are just as likely to be skeptical of everything you say and do, as they are to accept it, but if you are able to present strong cases on either side, it emboldens them to rationalize things and recognize stronger arguments when they hear them... Something like this flag burning could have only impassioned them to understand the ironies of the teacher's punishment within the context of what was clearly a discussion on the topic of free speech. Or, if not, it emboldened them to understand the importance of tactics and strategy when making a statement like that. Or they were appalled, and that is their prerogative. Hats off to this teacher.

[yurbud]

85. I think K-12 would be better if run like college. Administrators

are not seen and not heard (apart from cutting funding and negotiating our work contracts).

We are given a set of objectives, and are largely free to decide how to meet them. We are mostly evaluated by our peers. You do get some off the wall approaches this way, but even those probably reach more students than if they were in the kind of straight-jacket they put on K-12 teachers.

It amazes me that in every other job, if they want better people, they offer more money and autonomy, but with K-12, just like the asinine No Child Left Behind, they just want to demand more without giving you more. Like in Exodus when pharoah told the Jews to make bricks without straw.

If teachers were treated like professionals who actually know how to do their job, K-12 would chase away fewer smart people.

They should also have a new process for picking principals, like a draft. The other teachers vote for one of their peers and that person can't refuse. That would keep the authoritarian dim bulbs from giving themselves a promotion with a few night classes then making your life miserable by telling you how to do your job.

[bling bling]

67. I have no problem with this at all.

I think it's a GREAT idea, in fact. Burning the flag and then asking them to write a paper about their reaction is much more engaging than reading about burning a flag in a textbook. Sounds like an assignment given by a thoughtful teacher who cares about children thinking and learning.

The fear that he could have burned down the classroom / school seems paranoid. It was a small flag. When I was in high school you couldn't walk into any girl's restroom without seeing half a dozen students sneaking cigarettes behind the stall doors. It just seems unlikely the school could burn down and if we "what if....." everything to death our kids aren't going to ever get to experience anything first hand.

[marshall]

70. Alternatives

Around my part of the country the teacher would get a much bigger reaction if he burned the Bible. I don't think the kids really see the flag all that much in schools anymore, it doesn't mean the same thing to them as to the WWII generation that is behind the anti-flag burning bandwagon.

[heliarc]

84. This is a difficult proposition...

Burning a book is wildly different from burning a Symbol/Sign like the flag, but I see your point. I'm not so sure I get the argument of burning a bible. Sounds pretty intolerant to me. Unless you're freezing to death. Then, as Brecht says "Food is the first thing, morals come after" Well, and hermeneutic approaches might prefer memorization or incorporation to the idea that your beliefs are contained in an object that is outside of yourself. The bible as a book itself is inconsequential if its words have been imbibed in their entirety as monks in Asia have been known to do with their sacred texts.

[marshall]

88. Banned Book Week is coming up

Libraries and schools will be celebrating the freedom to read next month with the annual Banned Book Week. I could see some value in dramatizing the concept of banning books by a teacher burning books in the classroom. If it's a cherished book like the Bible or Koran or whatever other book the kids might value like Harry Potter it would drive the point home even better. But the concept behind the act cannot be removed from the danger of setting fire to something in a classroom that is not equipped for open flames. It is probably against fire code to have a fire in a classroom except in very controlled situations like a science classroom that has been set up for such a thing.

[Freddie Stubbs]

75. Good thing that he doesn't teach sex ed

[heliarc]

82. Haha...

But I think that your point is mistaken. My health teacher who taught sex ed in school should have used more graphic means to teach how to use a condom, dental dam, and frankly, I would not mind my son or daughter being shown prima facie how to put on a condom. Frankly, I have few hangups about that...

As a good example of her having done something that at the time was still controversial (sadly), she brought in a friend who was HIV positive to speak with the class. We were encouraged to shake hands with that individual on the way out of class. Some very much like you would have shunned "real" contact with the subject of study and your fears would have been unfounded. I'm not so sure I'd mind a responsible presentation of loving sexual practice in a class room. Though I think that issues this private are of a different nature to flag waving which is an inherently public act just as public as burning the flag is.

[MasonJar]

77. Oh, sure, the safety aspect.

[DarbyUSMC]

80. The teacher has been there since 1979 --- before many here were born.

"burned small flags"

I doubt there was danger. I doubt he was shoving his point of view on anyone. He wanted them to write an opinion. He wanted them to think.

We want a change in our failing schools. We want our children to actually learn something before they try to go to college or out into the world. A teacher uses something that will get the attention of the class and he's now ostracized.

And the fire department is investigating?

I can't stand it.