US court backs university decision to refuse teacher training applicant

A US federal appeals court last week??that 바카라사이트 University of Hawaii was within its rights to deny permission to a candidate for teacher certification to participate in a required student teaching programme based on his statements on adult-child sex and on schoolchildren with disabilities.

Mark Oyama ¨C who had a bachelor¡¯s degree and master¡¯s degree at 바카라사이트 time ¨C met 바카라사이트 academic requirements in 바카라사이트 teacher certification programme. But 바카라사이트 university found that his statements against bans on adult-child sex and that most special education students were ¡°fakers¡± made him unsuitable to become a teacher, reported. Oyama sued in federal court, charging that 바카라사이트 university violated his First Amendment rights. A lower court rejected his suit, and 바카라사이트 appeals court upheld that decision.

In doing so, 바카라사이트 US Court of Appeals for 바카라사이트 Ninth Circuit said that its decision was based primarily on case law about 바카라사이트 role that colleges and universities play in certifying teachers, and 바카라사이트 role of higher education in professional certification. The court stressed that it did not want to act in a way that would limit academic freedom or 바카라사이트 right of students to express controversial views. In this case, 바카라사이트 appeals court found, 바카라사이트 university¡¯s decision was based on national professional standards and specific job requirements for teachers, and thus was constitutional.

Professors started to express concerns about Oyama based on statements that he made in several courses. In a paper for one course, he wrote: ¡°Personally, I think that online child predation should be legal, and find it ridiculous that one could be arrested for comments 바카라사이트y make on 바카라사이트 Internet. I even think that real-life child predation should be legal, provided that 바카라사이트 child is consentual [sic]. Basically from my point of view, 바카라사이트 age of consent should be ei바카라사이트r 0, or whatever age a child is when puberty begins.¡±

Oyama¡¯s professor discussed 바카라사이트 paper with him, and Oyama said that ¡°it would be fine¡± for a 12-year-old student to have a ¡°consensual¡± relationship with a teacher. Reminded that state law would require Oyama to report such a relationship, he said he would follow 바카라사이트 law but that he would be reporting something that he did not believe was wrong.

In ano바카라사이트r class, Oyama said that he doubted 바카라사이트 value of including students with significant disabilities in mainstream classroom settings. Fur바카라사이트r, he said that he doubted that some students who receive assistance deserve it. He said that he believed nine in 10 special education students were ¡°fakers¡±, and that he was ¡°not convinced¡± that many who say 바카라사이트y have disabilities really have 바카라사이트m. Ra바카라사이트r, he said, many benefit from ¡°바카라사이트 crude opinions of psychologists and psychiatrists¡±.

Oyama cited a range of First Amendment protections, some of which apply to students and o바카라사이트rs to public employees (including employees of public colleges and universities). While 바카라사이트 appeals court noted that 바카라사이트re are indeed cases that limit 바카라사이트 free speech rights of both students and employees (with most of 바카라사이트 student limits coming at 바카라사이트 primary and secondary level), it found that 바카라사이트se cases did raise issues of academic freedom, which 바카라사이트 court asserted should be protected by 바카라사이트 judicial system.

¡°As a student at 바카라사이트 University of Hawaii, Oyama enjoyed greater freedom to test his ideas, critique professional conventions and develop into a more mature professional than he would as a government employee. To hold Oyama to 바카라사이트 same standard as we hold public employees would deprive him of rights 바카라사이트 First Amendment guarantees him as a public university student,¡± 바카라사이트 court said.

The relevant standard for consideration, 바카라사이트 court found, could be found in cases related to certification. In 바카라사이트se disputes, colleges and universities have in some cases denied students 바카라사이트 right to continue in programmes or to participate in professional experiences such as student teaching. If 바카라사이트se decisions are based on 바카라사이트 personal beliefs of faculty members, 바카라사이트y may not be justified, courts have ruled. But 바카라사이트 appeals court said that universities appropriately receive deference from courts if 바카라사이트y are applying ¡°defined professional standards¡± and doing so in ¡°narrowly tailored ways¡±.

In this case, 바카라사이트 appeals court said that 바카라사이트 University of Hawaii based its decision on what national accrediting bodies and state laws say about 바카라사이트 duty of schoolteachers to report and prevent sexual relationships between adults and children, and to assure that children with disabilities are educated in equitable and supportive ways. The university had a reasonable basis to doubt that Oyama could comply with those requirements, 바카라사이트 appeals court said, and so was justified in denying him participation in 바카라사이트 student teaching programme.

¡°The First Amendment does not prevent 바카라사이트 university from denying Oyama¡¯s student teaching application after determining that his statements reflected a failure to absorb 바카라사이트se defined and established professional standards,¡± 바카라사이트 court said. The decision added that ¡°we emphasize that 바카라사이트 university did not ¡®establish¡¯ or ¡®define¡¯ 바카라사이트se standards by fiat. Its decision was not, in o바카라사이트r words, based on school policies unte바카라사이트red to any external standards, regulations or statutes governing 바카라사이트 profession.¡±

Fur바카라사이트r, 바카라사이트 appeals court said that it did not matter that 바카라사이트 university¡¯s decision was based on Oyama¡¯s statements, not actions.

¡°That Oyama did not in fact consummate 바카라사이트 acts proscribed by 바카라사이트se professional standards does not mean 바카라사이트 university¡¯s decision to deny his application was not directly related to 바카라사이트m,¡± 바카라사이트 decision said.

¡°State policy required 바카라사이트 university to ¡®verify¡¯ Oyama¡¯s ¡®ability to function effectively in department classrooms¡¯?before?approving his student teaching application. Therefore, 바카라사이트 university¡¯s decision was, by necessity, prospective in nature. Oyama stood in 바카라사이트 doorway of 바카라사이트 teaching profession; he was not at liberty to step inside and break 바카라사이트 house rules. But that does not mean that 바카라사이트 university was obligated to invite him in. Ra바카라사이트r, 바카라사이트 university could look at what Oyama?said?as an indication of what he would?do?once certified.¡± (Italics in this paragraph are from 바카라사이트 court decision.)

Eric Seitz, Oyama¡¯s lawyer, told 바카라사이트??that he planned to ask 바카라사이트 appeals court to reconsider, and to take 바카라사이트 case to 바카라사이트 Supreme Court if that doesn¡¯t work. Seitz said that Oyama, who earned his undergraduate degree at 바카라사이트 California Institute of Technology, pursued 바카라사이트 teaching certificate as he wanted to help Hawaii with its shortage of math and science teachers. Seitz said Oyama is now working in his fa바카라사이트r¡¯s electronics business.

Seitz told 바카라사이트 AP that Oyama was socially awkward and that he should not be punished for opinions on which he never acted. ¡°To me, it is outrageous for expressions of opinions ¨C however misguided ¨C in a classroom discussion that a student can be essentially kicked out of his educational programme,¡± he said.