UMD Theses and Dissertations
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/3
New submissions to the thesis/dissertation collections are added automatically as they are received from the Graduate School. Currently, the Graduate School deposits all theses and dissertations from a given semester after the official graduation date. This means that there may be up to a 4 month delay in the appearance of a given thesis/dissertation in DRUM.
More information is available at Theses and Dissertations at University of Maryland Libraries.
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item CULTURE WARS AT THE SCHOOLHOUSE GATE: SCHOOL BOARD DECISION MAKING & STUDENTS’ SPEECH RIGHTS(2024) Callahan, Pamela Catherine; Scribner, Campbell F; Education Policy, and Leadership; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)School boards occupy a unique space in the fabric of American governance. School board members are often called upon to make decisions about how the values of a community are reflected in its schools, their classrooms, and even the school district’s library collection. These decisions are far from inconsequential. School board members serve as a link between federal case law and the ways students in the district will experience their First Amendment rights to free speech and expression. School boards have been in the spotlight regarding the retention and/or removal of challenged school library books (Natanson, 2020). One of the most frequent reasons for book challenges has been the inclusion of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Asexual, and more (LGBTQIA+) characters and themes in library books (American Library Association, 2023). After studying culture war conflicts, Hunter (1991), Zimmerman (2002), and Harman (2019) posit that the bounds of pluralistic living, such as whether to include or exclude educational materials with LGBTQIA+ characters, are never settled for good. Instead, culture war-related conflicts will follow a cycle of conflict and peace. When the issue of library book challenges resurfaces, school boards must decide how to respond. Although school boards are often tasked with making difficult decisions related to the speech and expression rights of public-school students and culture war issues such as religion in schools (Ross, 1994) and the inclusion of intelligent design (Superfine, 2009); they are also responsible for ensuring that the constitutional rights of public-school students are protected. Where, if at all, might a school board member turn for guidance on these persistent challenges? For legal guidance, they might consider turning to the Supreme Court of the United States. In Island Trees School District v. Pico (1982), the Supreme Court ruled that the removal of school library books was enmeshed with the First Amendment rights of public school students. As such, Justice William Brennan argued in the plurality opinion, that school board members must avoid removing library books due to a disagreement with the ideas in the book or because of one’s motivation to remove the book for political or partisan reasons (Driver, 2018). Do board members heed this guidance and if so the degree to which school boards use the decision in Pico (1982) when making decisions about challenged library books is an open empirical question and the focus of this study. This dissertation study uses case study methodology to examine the influence of Pico (1982) on one district school board’s decision-making process during two different library book challenges in the same suburban public school district in Virginia (Yin, 2014). The first case study centers on the 2008 challenge to the book And Tango Makes Three and the second case study centers on the 2019 challenge to the book My Princess Boy. Both And Tango Makes Three and My Princess Boy were challenged by members of the school community due to LGBTQIA+ characters. Each case study offers insights into an important but little-studied phenomenon of school board decision-making, which has consequences for understanding how school boards conceptualize and balance the rights of public school students during culture war-related conflicts. The findings for each case study indicate that Pico (1982) was not a factor of influence in school board decision-making in the cases examined. This finding has implications for how the First Amendment rights of public school students are protected during library book challenges. Despite the lack of influence of Pico (1982) on board member deliberation and decision-making, each case study does offer insight into the ways that school board members engaged in the decision-making process following a book challenge as well as the way the guidance in Pico (1982) does not align to the process used by each school board. Taken together, these case studies highlight the internal processes school boards use when making book challenge decisions, the complicated legal role of school board members, areas of misalignment between the law as written and the law in practice, and how district policy is used by school board members during a culture war-related conflict.Item Culture Warriors Go To Court: The Supreme Court and the Battle for the "Soul" of America(2015) Spivey, Michael; McIntosh, Wayne; Government and Politics; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)ABSTRACT Title of Dissertation: CULTURE WARRIORS GO TO COURT: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE BATTLE FOR THE "SOUL" OF AMERICA Michael O. Spivey, Doctor of Philosophy, 2015 Dissertation Directed by: Professor Wayne McIntosh Department of Government and Politics The notion of a "culture war" has become a fixture in the academic writing about current American politics, in the popular press and in the cultural zeitgeist. Theorists have suggested that there is a cultural fault line dividing cultural progressives and religious traditionalists. This fault line, it is argued, stems from a basic epistemological disagreement as to whether there is transcendent "truth." According to James Davidson Hunter, these different worldviews lead to policy polarization and cultural warfare. Hunter goes on to suggest that courts (and especially the Supreme Court) are focal points for this conflict. This work analyzes the nature and scope of battles over culture war issues in the United Supreme Court. It relies on a popular description of key culture war issues: God, guns and gays. The Supreme Court's treatment of each of these issues is analyzed in turn. In addition, the Supreme Court's abortion jurisprudence is also examined. With respect to each issue, key Supreme Court cases are identified. The briefs filed by the parties are then summarized and coded, identifying key "modalities" of arguments and specific arguments themselves. All amicus briefs are similarly analyzed and coded. The key Supreme Court decisions are then analyzed in light of arguments raised by parties and amici. Based upon this analysis, it appears that there is not one culture war but rather an interrelated set of cultural battles. Relatedly, there has been an evolution of cultural warfare over time. Some issues have become largely settled (at least within the Court's jurisprudence; others are on their way to being settled and still others present continuing opportunities for cultural clashes. The work concludes by suggesting that the sexual revolution lies at the heart of cultural warfare. Moreover, cultural battles are over the "meaning" of America, that is, what social values will be protected under law.