Granted by the Bill of Rights in 1791, the first amendment is one, if not, the most vital amendment that defines the American democracy and culture. This fundamental amendment grants citizens freedom of speech: allowing them to express their individuality and vocalize their opinions, regardless of how socially or politically unpopular those might be. Even though freedom of speech remains protected under the Bill of Rights, there are some institutions, such as colleges and universities that try to place restrictions on what can be said and thought on campus grounds. According to the organization: Foundation of Individual Rights in Education, “89.7 percent of American colleges maintain policies that restrict or could easily restrict- student and faculty expression.” (FIRE) Freedom of speech is a universal concept that is essential to not only citizens in general but college students as well. College is a significant time in a young student’s academic journey where they are exposed to a new ambient; filled with people that have different perspectives and ideals. It is place where preexisting knowledge and beliefs are placed on trial, thus allowing students to expand their minds. If colleges and universities limit freedom of speech and free thinking, students will not be capable of further blossoming in a society that is meant to be free.
Freedom of speech allows students to participate and engage in controversial topics that help them improve their critical thinking skills and develop non-judgmental attitudes towards issues that might have various perspectives. In an attempt to open a friendly discussion over the controversy of using racial slurs, Professor Phillip Adamo from Augsburg University was suspended indefinitely from his classroom (FIRE). The use of the racial slur he was addressing correlated with the material he was teaching in class; thus, he was under his professional authority to approach the matter how he best saw fit. By opening discussion over the use of racial slurs, Professor Phillip Adamo was allowing students to engage in a civil debate and give their opinions on whether they felt the use of racial slurs is appropriate when used in context and support why they believe racial slurs are or are not justifiable to use under certain circumstances. In other words, students would be using their critical-thinking skills to create profound arguments/counterarguments. Augsburg University prides itself on allowing academic freedom yet violated a professor's right to approach class material how he best saw accordingly. In not allowing topics such as these to be open for debate and suspending professors for attempting to, Augsburg University is indirectly sending a message to students that their education derives from what the university's administration deems 'appropriate' not ideas that challenge them to think outside the box. “a university exists to educate students and advance the frontiers of human knowledge” (FIRE).
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Moreover, allowing students to voice their opinion when they are not in favor of certain administrative decisions is crucial to their overall development as it helps them learn how to approach matters maturely and civilly. When students partake in advocating for change: whether it's outside or inside campus grounds, they are indulging in being proactive members of a free society. Thus, restricting a student's ability to express concerns over campus matters is undemocratic and violates the ideals of America and higher education. This was the case for a student at Valdosta State University. T. Hayden Barnes got expelled after trying to protest the creation of more parking garages in the university (FIRE). Barnes was against creating more parking garages because he felt it encouraged students to rely heavily on cars and that the money that was being used for this matter could be used for something more important. To try to get his message across the campus he distributed flyers, letters, and even made Facebook posts. Even though other students expressed a similar concern with the creation of parking garages, VSU President Ronald Zaccari deemed the issue “a clear and present danger to the campus” (FIRE) because he felt that the Facebook posts made by Barnes were a threat to his safety and the campus. The university completely disregarded Barnes's concerns and held them to no importance and instead expelled him,” The University seems to feel irrationally threatened by the products of the very minds that it is supposed to nurture and develop” says Danielle Wogulis, member of the Foundation of Individual Rights in Education organization. Ultimately, the decision to expel Barnes exerts a dangerous message for other students who might want to speak out about any issues they feel strongly about with the fear that there will be harsh consequences awaiting. The act of suppressing a student’s right to freedom of speech minimizes them to mere individuals who will conform in every situation.
Attempting to regulate a student’s thought process is also as detrimental to growth as trying to limit what is allowed to be said. When students are not allowed to speak on certain matters, at least they can still protect their inner thoughts. However, when their thoughts are a product of what is politically and socially acceptable; it affects their ability to construct abstract concepts and personal beliefs. Substantially this was the case for the students at The University of Delaware who were forced to surrender their own principles to conform to those of the University. The University of Delaware’s Office Residence Life imposed an orientation program that students had to attend, which announced and encouraged the strong ideologies they had to accept wholeheartedly and indisputably,” the Office of Residency Life failed to facilitate the development of independent and critical thought” (FIRE). In essence, when universities try to enforce certain ideals upon students what they are suggesting is that students don’t deserve to have thoughts of their own unless those thoughts support already pre-existing popular beliefs.
Some people consider that allowing students to have ultimate freedom of speech will result in “dangerous” and “offensive” speech to be present and acceptable across universities and colleges where one of the main objectives is to secure a safe environment for faculty and students. However, to guarantee a safe environment for ALL students, all speech must be given the same level of importance; as silencing and censoring those that hold highly controversial beliefs is like discriminating a person on account of their race or gender,” the only way to protect speech is to protect it for everyone, even those whose opinion are intolerable to many others”(Share America). Offensive speech is legal and protected under the first amendment of the Bill of Rights.
Stuck on your essay?
