On break

My high school is on spring break this week, but the assignments we did for this week's class remind me of the perilous edge that advisers walk each day. A good adviser will encourage students to take risks and even be controversial in the topics they choose to cover, and a good principal will encourage the students to push the First Amendment to its legal and ethical boundaries.

Unfortunately, a good adviser cannot facilitate this kind of rigorous environment in the journalism classroom without a supportive principal. I have heard horror stories of other schools where the publication has been or has come under prior review. I would like to say that most of those examples I know of involve principals who fear bad press for their schools above a desire to make a sound pedagogical decision.

I do have to wonder if some of the instances I am familiar with are a result of careless reporting. The media most frequently reports when a student has been censored and/or a paper has come under more restrictive review after they have been notified by a newspaper staffer. After all, a school is not going to alert the media that they have decided to be less permissive with their student media. I always want to know what the backstory is regarding what has been taught in the class, what ethical and legal standards have the students been held to, and what discussions advisers have had with students about specific or generic controversial situations.

While I do hold that a principal should encourage a rigorous First Amendment laboratory, I hold the adviser equally responsible for enforcing the responsibilities that come with those rights.