By Philip Sean Curran, Staff Writer
Using so-called “hurtful language” in the Princeton public schools can get teachers, athletic coaches and even parents in trouble, even though district officials have never defined what they mean by hurtful speech.
The district has sought to crack down on anyone who threatens the “health and safety” of staff and students or verbally or physically demeans them, as spelled out in a “civility” policy created in 2011 and revised last year.
“This policy applies to any conduct by board members, or employees and parents in the presence of students on school property or at school-sponsored events, including sporting events and concerts,” the document reads in part. Elsewhere, the policy said the school board “finds loud, offensive, inappropriate, intolerant speech and threatening behavior unacceptable.” So-called “hurtful language” is also considered a no-no.
One school official who worked on the revisions explained last week that there were adults — parents and coaches — using foul language at district athletic contests, and that the district wants them to set good examples for children.
“Our purpose of the policy is that, first of all at sports events, we would have parents cursing,” said Board Vice President Dafna Kendal on Friday. “We had some coaches cursing at the kids. We wanted to have some way to deal with that, because we didn’t previously.”
The policy would apply to a range of scenarios, from parents interacting with teachers, teachers interacting with students and coaches interacting with their players. But the document is silent on what amounts to “hurtful language,” giving administrators no concrete guidance when having to mediate disputes or base their decisions.
“It might be vague, but it’s up to the building administrator to make that determination,” board president Patrick Sullivan said Friday. “They have to look at the facts and circumstances of each case. And it’s up to them to determine.”
Still, the policy calls for disciplining an employee for violating the policy, although it was not immediately known what punishments employees could face.
In terms of amending the policy, Kendal said the district “maybe” could define what it means by hurtful language to add the “reasonable person” standard of what someone would find hurtful. The district will not create a list of what constitutes that kind of conduct, however.
But asked if a coach telling a student athlete to lose weight to be on a team would constitute hurtful speech, Kendal said it would. She said coaches, in that scenario, would need to find a “gentler” way of communicating that message.
“Teachers and parents and administrators and everyone are role models. So you just wouldn’t … say that,” she said. “To talk to a kid like that is … not appropriate.”
At a time nationally when college students seek so-called safe spaces and avoid hearing views they feel threaten them, officials said this is not what the policy is about. The district said it is not trying to limit anyone’s First Amendment rights to free speech.
“We certainly understand the school district’s interest in preventing verbal harassment or having employees or students feel threatened or vulnerable based on their identity,” said Amol Sinha, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union-New Jersey. “But … it’s really important to carefully structure a policy so that it does not chill protected speech, even speech that we disagree with.”
“It’s a fine line because on the one hand, we need to be comfortable that every kid is being treated with respect,” Sullivan said. “We’re a public school. People are bringing their children to us. And we want to make sure that they feel safe and protected. On the other hand, you don’t want to go so far as creating safe spaces the way that you kind of hear it out in the world these days.”
Author Heather Mac Donald, of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, has been on the receiving end of college students trying to shut her down. She said the “attack on speech,” is being generated by universities and “it’s trickling down like so much else.”
“It’s not that the k through twelve is the prime mover in teaching students to think of speech as violence and to think of themselves as vulnerable to racism and sexism,” she said. “The k through twelve is mimicking the ideology that has been cultivated at the universities.”
For Kendal, the policy is about making sure adults act like adults when they are around children — whether that is in the classroom, on the playing field or in the stands.
“Parents and teachers are role models, they need to act like it,” Kendal said. “Some of these sports parents take it too seriously, and they’re screaming at the coach, screaming at the kid. What are you teaching the kids if you’re doing that? And so we need to have a way for parents to be removed.”
Superintendent of Schools Stephen C. Cochrane could not be reached for comment Friday. In a letter to parents this week, he mentioned the policy and said the board’s intent is “to promote mutual respect, civility and orderly conduct among district employees, parents and students and the public.”
