ELA.10.R.2.4 Tinker v. Des Moines

Complete the table by matching each technique used to develop an argument with the text (either Majority or Dissenting) that uses that technique.

(1) Emphasizes the importance of student freedom of expression as part of democratic society - ​ ​ (a)  

(2) Uses hypothetical scenarios to illustrate potential disruptions in school discipline if expression is unrestricted -​ (b)  

(3) Relies on legal precedents to argue that symbolic, peaceful expression is protected by the Constitution​ - (c)  

(4) Highlights specific instances of classroom disruptions caused by wearing armbands to justify limits on expression​ - (d)  

(5) Frame unrestricted expression as a potential risk to school authority and order - ​ (e)  

• Dissenting
• Majority

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4

In Tinker v. Des Moines, how do the majority and dissenting opinions differ in their approach to student free speech rights?

• The majority focuses on preserving order, while the dissent emphasizes free expression.

• The majority relies on emotional appeals, while the dissent uses legal precedents.

• The majority highlights freedom of expression, while the dissent stresses the need for school authority.

• The majority uses hypothetical scenarios, while the dissent cites specific examples of disruptions.

Answer explanation

The majority opinion in Tinker v. Des Moines emphasizes the importance of protecting students’ freedom of expression as part of their constitutional rights. In contrast, the dissenting opinion focuses on the need for school authority and discipline, arguing that allowing unrestricted expression could undermine the school’s ability to maintain order.

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4

In Tinker v. Des Moines, both the majority and dissenting opinions acknowledge that students wore black armbands to protest the Vietnam War. How do the two opinions interpret this action differently?

• The majority views it as disruptive, while the dissent sees it as harmless.

• The majority sees it as symbolic speech, while the dissent views it as a threat to authority.

• The majority interprets it as an act of violence, while the dissent considers it peaceful.

• The majority dismisses it as unimportant, while the dissent emphasizes its significance.

Answer explanation

The majority opinion interprets the armband protest as symbolic speech, a form of peaceful expression protected by the First Amendment. In contrast, the dissenting opinion sees it as a potential threat to school authority, arguing that allowing such expression could disrupt the school environment and undermine discipline.

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4

In Tinker v. Des Moines, the dissenting opinion claims that the armband protest disrupted classroom activities. Which detail from the majority opinion, if true, would call this claim into question?

• Only a few students wore the armbands, with no major disruptions reported.

• The armbands symbolized opposition to the Vietnam War.

• Students wore other political symbols without issue.

• The school feared a controversy, not a disruption.

Answer explanation

The majority opinion states that only a few students wore armbands and that no substantial classroom disruptions occurred as a result. If true, this detail would undermine the dissent’s claim that the protest disrupted classroom activities, suggesting that the armbands did not interfere significantly with school operations.

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4

In Tinker v. Des Moines, the majority opinion claims that student expression should be protected because the armbands did not cause substantial disruption. Which evaluation best assesses the evidence supporting this claim?

• The majority provides strong evidence by detailing a lack of actual disruptions.

• The majority uses weak evidence by focusing on the armband's symbolism.

• The majority’s reasoning is flawed, as it ignores potential future disruptions.

• The majority relies on emotional appeals rather than factual evidence.

Answer explanation

The majority opinion supports its claim by providing evidence that no substantial disruptions occurred when students wore the armbands. This evidence strengthens the argument by directly addressing the core issue of whether the protest interfered with school activities, reinforcing the claim that peaceful student expression should be protected.

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4

In Tinker v. Des Moines, the majority opinion argues that fear of potential disturbance is insufficient to justify banning student expression. Why is this claim effective and valid?

• It highlights the role of schools in fostering safe environments.

• It appeals to the idea that the Constitution protects all viewpoints.

• It supports school authority in managing student behavior.

• It emphasizes that restrictions need evidence of actual disruption.

Answer explanation

The claim is effective and valid because it stresses the need for concrete evidence of disruption before restricting expression. By requiring actual evidence rather than hypothetical fears, the majority reinforces the principle that First Amendment rights should only be limited when there is a clear justification, making the claim both reasonable and constitutionally grounded.

Tags

FL.ELA.10.R.2.4