5 minute read
Legal Forum: “Learning about Islam in a Seventh-Grade World Cultures Course”
In a batch of court cases recently distributed through the national reporting system is a case in which a parent objected to the inclusion of information about Islam in a seventh-grade social studies course. The case is Hilsenrath ex rel. C.H. v. Sch. Dist. of Chathams, 500 F.Supp.3d 272, 390 Educ. L. Rep. [189] (D.N.J. 2020). This case is instructive for students of school law in two regards. First, it lays out the judge’s decision in a concise way, which displays the role of civil procedure in understanding the issues of a case and how the fortune of a court case rises and falls at each procedural step. Second, this case also examines, follows, and reinforces a long-standing rule about the teaching of religion in public schools.
C.H. was a seventh grade student in a school district in New Jersey. The school’s curriculum included a social studies course called World Cultures and Geography. The purpose of the course was to “develop a broad understanding of the world and its people” so that “students will become active and informed global citizens.” The course included units of study regarding each of the world’s major geographic regions. As part of that study, students also learned about the religions commonly practiced in each region. One of the units studied the Middle East and North Africa, which included information about Islam, the dominant religion in that part of the world. This unit contained nine lessons, mostly focused on geography and current events, but Islam was discussed in two of the lessons.
The first lesson was about the benefits and dangers of making generalizations, using the lens of Islam to drive the lesson. The teacher opened the lesson using a PowerPoint, which was also posted on Google Classroom, so it could be accessed at home. The last slide of the PowerPoint asked students to write down words they associated with Islam and asked students to watch a five-minute introductory video about Islam. The students
Dr. David Dagley
Dr. Dave Dagley serves as professor emeritus of educational leadership with the University of Alabama. Dagley holds the PhD degree from the University of Utah and the JD degree from Cumberland Law School. He has served as a teacher, principal, assistant superintendent, superintendent, and school board attorney. Dagley is a frequent presenter at CLAS events on various legal topics.
He has also been a long-time contributor to this publication.
Dr. Amy L. Dagley
Amy Dagley, PhD, is an assistant professor in educational leadership at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. She previously worked for the University of Louisiana at Monroe, and as a public educator in Alaska. She has earned bachelors and masters degrees from the University of Alaska Southeast, and a PhD from the University of Alabama.
Amy Dagley is the daughter of long-time columnist for this magazine, Dr. Dave Dagley. did not watch the video at school. However, C.H. and his mother watched it at home. The first part of the video showed pictures of places and people in the region, with questions and answers about Islam, “What is Islam? Who is Allah? Who is Muhammed? What is the Quran? What does history say about Islam?” The last part of the video focused less on Islam and more on cultural achievements in the region, such as in art, mathematics, and architecture.
The second lesson again had the teacher presenting a PowerPoint providing an overview of Islam’s characteristics, plus the five pillars, or obligations, every Muslim must fulfill to live a good life. The discussion then was led using a worksheet in which students would fill in blanks in the script. Again, a five-minute video on the pillars of Islam was posted on Google Classroom, but was not watched in class nor given as homework. Again, C.H. and his mother watched the video at home.
After viewing the videos with her son and reviewing the worksheet, C.H.’s mother expressed concerns that the lessons favored Islam over Christianity and Judaism, so she sent emails expressing her concerns to the social studies supervisor, the assistant superintendent for curriculum, the superintendent, and to the school board. She followed up by attending a school board meeting to voice her concerns. Following policy, the board convened a curriculum committee to review the curriculum and materials and recommend action to the superintendent. The curriculum committee recommended that no changes were necessary at a later school board meeting, and underscored its view that the curriculum aligned with the school board policy on religious neutrality. Before the later school board meeting, C.H.’s mother appeared on national television voicing her complaints, which resulted in threats against board members and school employees. The superintendent then had the links to the videos removed from the PowerPoint outlines.
C.H.’s mother sued the school district, the school board, the superintendent, the assistant superintendent, the principal, the curriculum supervisor, and the two teachers who taught the course. The individual defendants were named in their official capacity (which is important in assessing the role of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a civil rights statute, in the case, and therefore whether damages can be assessed against the defendants out of their own funds). C.H.’s mother alleged that the curriculum, especially the videos and worksheet, violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. She then asked for an injunction requiring the school to quit funding and providing religious instruction that favors the Islam religion; a declaration that the defendants violated her and her son’s rights under the Establishment Clause; a declaration that the defendants’ training, supervision, policies, practices, customs, and procedures that promote Islam violate the Establishment Clause; and, a request for nominal damages and the award of attorney’s fees. The school defendants moved to dismiss the case, but because the complaint alleged a constitutional violation, the judge denied the request, and the case went to the next stage, discovery
