The Experts below are selected from a list of 17784 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Julie Underwood - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Speak Freely to the School Board: School Boards Can Enact Rules about Public Comments at Their Meetings, but They Cannot Impede Someone's Right to Speak, Whether They Are Employees or the Public
Phi Delta Kappan, 2017Co-Authors: Julie UnderwoodAbstract:Access and input to decision making by public bodies, including school boards, is an important part of the American democratic system. How does the public, including school district employees, provide input to a school board's decision-making process? The public comment portion of the school board meeting provides this opportunity for many school boards. A recent federal district court case--Barrett v. Walker County School District (N.D. Ga. 2016)--raised this issue. The dispute appears to have started when the Walker County (Ga.) School District superintendent changed the district's grading policy. Jim Barrett, a district employee and president of the local educators' union, disagreed with the new policy. Between May 2014 and March 2015, Barrett attempted to get on the school board agenda during the public comment period to share his concerns over the new grading policy. The board policy detailed the procedure to be followed by any member of the public who wanted to Speak at a board meeting. An essential part of that procedure was securing approval from the district superintendent to be placed on the agenda. Barrett complied with that procedure but was never allowed to Speak at a board meeting about the grading policy. During the period when Barrett was trying to get on the board agenda, local parents were allowed to Speak about the same issue during the board's public comment section. Barrett also had been allowed to Speak at previous board meetings on other issues when his comments supported the superintendent's actions. [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] Barrett sued the district, claiming the board policy was an unconstitutional restriction of his First Amendment free speech Rights. The federal district court found that the policy on its face violated the First Amendment because it gave the superintendent unfettered discretion to approve, deny, or delay requests to Speak before the board and limited the nature of issues that someone could take to the board. This case did not turn on whether Barrett, as an employee, had a Right to Speak directly to the board. As a member of the public, Barrett did have the Right to Speak to the board. Even though he was an employee and the topic he wanted to bring to the board involved a school district matter, he still had the First Amendment Right to Speak to the board if the issue was a matter of public concern and not just a personal disagreement with an issue or a personal complaint about how he, as an employee, had been treated by the district. As decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, employees "may not be compelled to relinquish the First Amendment Rights they would otherwise enjoy as citizens to comment on matters of public interest in connection with the operation of the public schools in which they work." City of Madison, Joint School District v. Wise. Employment Relations Commission, 429 U.S. 167, 175 (1976). Certainly, matters of grading and educational standards are matters of public concern. Whatever its duties as an employer, when the board sits in public meetings it may not discriminate between Speakers on the basis of their employment or the content of their speech. In this situation, however, the board appears to be doing both: not allowing Barrett, the employee, to Speak and not allowing Barrett, the citizen, to Speak on issues he found important. Limited public forums Generally, meetings of elected boards are considered limited public forums. The Walker County board had created a limited public forum when it designated a specific public question-and-answer time on the agenda. In a limited public forum, the public can Speak, but there can be reasonable restrictions to ensure that such access does not thwart the business of the body. In a limited public forum, the government can put reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions on speech. For example, a public body can limit how long someone can Speak, limit the manner of speech (for example, prohibiting oversized signs), or prohibit disruptive or abusive speech. …
-
Under the Law: Speak freely to the school board
Phi Delta Kappan, 2017Co-Authors: Julie UnderwoodAbstract:School boards can enact rules about commenting at their public meetings, but they cannot impede someone’s Right to Speak, whether employees or the public. A recent federal district court case — Bar...
Wesley Y. Leonard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Musings on Native American language reclamation and sociolinguistics
International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2020Co-Authors: Wesley Y. LeonardAbstract:AbstractSociolinguistic approaches to Native American languages are best conducted as part of a project of “language reclamation,” argues Wesley Y. Leonard. He discusses how framings of Indigenous languages as “endangered,” while in some ways well-intentioned, replicate the distance of language communities from scholarly research. An emphasis on reclamation – “efforts by Indigenous communities to claim the Right to Speak their heritage languages” – highlights the role of the community members in the production of knowledge on and the revival of Native American languages.
Robert P. Holley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Ethics of Scholarly Research and the Internet: Issues of Publication, Privacy, and the Right to Speak *
Journal of Information Ethics, 2006Co-Authors: Robert P. HolleyAbstract:IntroductionThe following article considers the ethical implications of two basic issues that scholarly researchers face when using Internet sources-publication and privacy and who has the Right to Speak. The conventions, rules, and ethics in these areas were relatively clear when print publications dominated the process of scholarly communication, but the different nature of Internet resources has made it necessary to reexamine assumptions.I first faced the issues involved in using the Internet for research when I was writing the article on "Cooperative Collection Development" for the second edition of the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science.[1] I was using Google to look for additional information on the specific collection agreements that I had found in the published literature. In one case, I located an update in a source that was exactly what I was looking for; but I had concerns about using the information in my article for two reasons. First, the updated history was found in what appeared to be an internal document. Although I believe that it was clear enough that someone at that institution had decided to make the text available, I had my doubts about whether the author considered it to be a public document. Second, although I believe that the author was knowledgeable enough to provide accurate information about the agreement, she would not have been considered by many to be an appropriate spokesperson to give the history of the cooperative collection development agreement. In the end, I decided to use this source and provided a link to the document as it was then found on the Web. I would not have been surprised, however, if the author had sent me an e-mail that questioned the appropriateness of citing her internal document in a published paper.What I wish to do in this article is to provide some preliminary thoughts on the topic of the ethics of using Internet resources and to define more clearly the issues involved. I do not have any clear-cut answers but believe that it is appropriate to open the discussion. I will limit my analysis to research that is to be "published" in some official format either in print or electronically. I do not wish to consider the issue of competitive intelligence, since I believe that a completely different set of ethical guidelines would apply in this case. Finally, I will use library examples in this article because I am most familiar with my own discipline though I believe that the proposed ethical principles would apply to other areas.The Issue of Publication and PrivacyBefore the arrival of the Internet, most scholarly research relied upon published documents. By the very act of publishing, the author intended to make these documents public and to share the information contained within them with the scholarly community. In fact, the academic world continues to reward authors whose works are frequently cited and to judge them to be more credible because their peers have found their work to be worth citing. Before the Internet, the exception was the use of unpublished source materials, most frequently found in archives and other private sources. The owners of these materials, however, frequently imposed restrictions upon their use-sometimes required by the authors/donors as a condition for the gift or sale-and screened users for valid research purposes. In a similar way, much grey literature[2] and many internal documents were theoretically available; but researchers had to know what they were looking for and where it was located. They then often needed to travel to the site, fill out complex forms, and find ways to record their findings for future use.The Internet has opened a whole new area for potential research. Although much of the Internet remains "private" in the sense that researchers must know where to go and then either register or pay to get access[3], the "open" Web includes an incredible amount of potentially useful information. …
-
the ethics of scholarly research and the internet issues of publication privacy and the Right to Speak
Journal of Information Ethics, 2006Co-Authors: Robert P. HolleyAbstract:IntroductionThe following article considers the ethical implications of two basic issues that scholarly researchers face when using Internet sources-publication and privacy and who has the Right to Speak. The conventions, rules, and ethics in these areas were relatively clear when print publications dominated the process of scholarly communication, but the different nature of Internet resources has made it necessary to reexamine assumptions.I first faced the issues involved in using the Internet for research when I was writing the article on "Cooperative Collection Development" for the second edition of the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science.[1] I was using Google to look for additional information on the specific collection agreements that I had found in the published literature. In one case, I located an update in a source that was exactly what I was looking for; but I had concerns about using the information in my article for two reasons. First, the updated history was found in what appeared to be an internal document. Although I believe that it was clear enough that someone at that institution had decided to make the text available, I had my doubts about whether the author considered it to be a public document. Second, although I believe that the author was knowledgeable enough to provide accurate information about the agreement, she would not have been considered by many to be an appropriate spokesperson to give the history of the cooperative collection development agreement. In the end, I decided to use this source and provided a link to the document as it was then found on the Web. I would not have been surprised, however, if the author had sent me an e-mail that questioned the appropriateness of citing her internal document in a published paper.What I wish to do in this article is to provide some preliminary thoughts on the topic of the ethics of using Internet resources and to define more clearly the issues involved. I do not have any clear-cut answers but believe that it is appropriate to open the discussion. I will limit my analysis to research that is to be "published" in some official format either in print or electronically. I do not wish to consider the issue of competitive intelligence, since I believe that a completely different set of ethical guidelines would apply in this case. Finally, I will use library examples in this article because I am most familiar with my own discipline though I believe that the proposed ethical principles would apply to other areas.The Issue of Publication and PrivacyBefore the arrival of the Internet, most scholarly research relied upon published documents. By the very act of publishing, the author intended to make these documents public and to share the information contained within them with the scholarly community. In fact, the academic world continues to reward authors whose works are frequently cited and to judge them to be more credible because their peers have found their work to be worth citing. Before the Internet, the exception was the use of unpublished source materials, most frequently found in archives and other private sources. The owners of these materials, however, frequently imposed restrictions upon their use-sometimes required by the authors/donors as a condition for the gift or sale-and screened users for valid research purposes. In a similar way, much grey literature[2] and many internal documents were theoretically available; but researchers had to know what they were looking for and where it was located. They then often needed to travel to the site, fill out complex forms, and find ways to record their findings for future use.The Internet has opened a whole new area for potential research. Although much of the Internet remains "private" in the sense that researchers must know where to go and then either register or pay to get access[3], the "open" Web includes an incredible amount of potentially useful information. …
Marie Y. Savundranayagam - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Expanding current understandings of epistemic injustice and dementia: Learning from stigma theory.
Journal of aging studies, 2019Co-Authors: Jessica Young, Christopher Lind, Joseph B. Orange, Marie Y. SavundranayagamAbstract:The current paper addresses the nature of epistemic injustice as it may be experienced by persons with dementia. We describe how theoretical models of stigma align with the current model of epistemic injustice through a consideration of the concepts of 'stereotype', 'prejudice' and 'discrimination', shared by the two models. We draw on current understandings of dementia-related stigma to expand understandings of the epistemic injustice faced by persons with dementia. We discuss how these insights may inform the development of mechanisms to uphold the basic human Right to Speak, to be heard, and to be believed for persons with dementia.
Charles Illouz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Debts of Peace and Words of War in Melanesia (Maré, Loyalty Islands, New Caledonia)
Autrepart, 2003Co-Authors: Charles IllouzAbstract:In Mare, social and territorial organisation of local chiefdoms is based on military alliances. After a long period of terrible wars, the ancient chiefdoms were overthrown at the beginning of the 19th century but war continued throughout the period of colonial evangelisation until the early 20th century. The social conditions generated by perpetual warmongering led to the emergence of a tacit debt which places the young men in a position of subservience to older men of the family. As long as the debt is not challenged, peace will be upheld. to ensure that the debt is respected by the next generation, the older men take advantage of their “Right to Speak” and have recourse to violent magic. War, however, offers the youths an opportunity not only to demonstrate their valour in the face of death but also to attain the status of “great warrior”. Freed from the fear which reduces them to silence, young men cancel the debt which cripples their lives and at last obtain the Right to Speak.
