Student speech has and continues to be a contested issue in schools. The Supreme Court ruled in Tinker that students do not shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate; in the Kuhlmeier and Fraser decisions, however, the Court gave school officials greater latitude in regulating student speech, especially when it bears the imprimatur of the school. However, in its Frederick decision, the Court established school officials as the arbiters of the meaning of student speech. This article explores the underlying values in schools that rejected the speech of Fraser while accepting the speech act of cheerleaders’ dance routines. It examines how the interpretation of these speech acts by school officials contributes to gender reproduction, with all the inequalities imposed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsN. G., & BettisP. (2003). Power of the preps and cheerleading equity policy. Sociology of Education, 76, 128–142.
2.
AdamsN. G., & BettisP. (2005). Cheerleader! An American icon.New York: Palgrave.
3.
AdamsN. G., & BettisP. (2006). Short skirts and breast juts: Cheerleading, eroticism and schools. Sex Education, 6(2), 121–133.
4.
Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc, 501 U.S. 560, 111 S. Ct. 2456, 115 L. Ed. 2d 504 (1991).
5.
BarnettL. A. (2006). Flying high or crashing down: Girls’ accounts of trying out for cheerleading and dance. Journal of Adolescent Research, 21(5), 514–541.
6.
BennettJ. C. (1990). The secondary school cheerleader as ritualized sexual exploitation. Clearing House, 64(1), 4–7.
7.
BernsteinB. (1977). Class, codes and control: Volume 3. Towards a theory of educational transmissions.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
8.
BernsteinB. (1990). The structuring of pedagogic discourse. Volume 4: Class, codes and control.London: Routledge.
9.
BestA. L. (2000). Prom night: Youth, schools, and popular culture.New York: Routledge.
10.
BestA. L. (2004). Girls, schooling, and the discourse of self-change: Negotiating meaning of the high school prom. In HarrisA. (Ed.), About the girl: Culture, power, and identity (pp. 195–203). New York: Routledge.
11.
Bethel School District v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 106 S. Ct. 3159, 92 L. Ed. 2d 549 (1986).
12.
Biediger et al. v. Quinnipiac University, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73143.
13.
BojeD. M., & DenneheyR. F. (1993). Managing the postmodern world: America's revolution against exploitation.Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
14.
BotteryM. (1990). The morality of schools.London: Cassell.
15.
BourdieuP., & PasseronJ.-C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
16.
California v. LaRue, 409 U.S. 109, 93 S. Ct. 390, 34 L. Ed. 2d 342 (1972).
17.
CherryholmesC. H. (1988). Power and criticism: Poststructural investigations in education.New York: Teachers College Press.
18.
ConleyJ. M., & O'BarrW. M. (1998). Just words: Law, language and power.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19.
Doran v. Salem Inn, 422 U.S. 922, 95 S. Ct. 2561, 45 L. Ed. 2d 648 (1975).
20.
EderD., & ParkerS. (1987). The cultural production and reproduction of gender: The effect of extracurricular actives on peer-group culture. Sociology of Education, 60, 200–213.
21.
FaircloughN., & WodakR. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In von DijkT. A. (Ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction (pp. 258–284). London: Sage.
22.
FischerF. (2003). Refraining public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23.
FoucaultM. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge: And the discourse on language (A. M. Sheridan Smith, Trans.). New York: Pantheon Books.
24.
FoucaultM. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books.
25.
FoucaultM. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings.New York: Pantheon Books.
26.
FoucaultM. (1991). Governmentality. In BurchellG., GordonC., & MillerP. (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 87–104). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27.
GleesonK., & FirthH. (2004). Pretty in pink: Young women presenting mature sexual identities. In HarrisA. (Ed.), All about the girl: Culture, power, and identity (pp. 103–114). New York: Routledge.
28.
GriffinC. (1993). Representations of youth: The study of youth and adolescence in Britain and America.Cambridge: Polity Press.
29.
GriffinC. (1997). Troubled teens: Managing disorders of transition and consumption. Feminist Review, 55, 4–21.
30.
HabermasJ. (1984). The theory of communicative action (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston: Beacon Press.
31.
HansonM. E. (1995). Go! Fight! Win! Cheerleading in American culture.Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
32.
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260, 108 S. Ct. 562, 98 L. Ed. 2d 592 (1988).
33.
In re Giannini, 69 Cal. 2d 563, 446 P.2d 535, 72 Cal. Rptr. 655 (1968).
34.
JenksC. (1996). Childhood.London: Routledge.
35.
KahnP. (1999). The cultural studies of law: Reconstructing legal scholarship.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
36.
KairysD. (1982). Introduction. In KairysD. (Ed.), Politics of law: A progressive critique (pp. 1–9). New York: Pantheon Books.
37.
KelmanM. (1987). A guide to critical legal studies.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38.
LambS. (2001). The secret lives of girls: What good girls really do—sex play, aggression, and their guilt.New York: The Free Press.
39.
MacKinnonC. (1987). Feminism unmodified: Discourses on life and law.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
40.
MacKinnonC. (1989). Towards a feminist theory of the state.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41.
MacKinnonC. (2005). Women's lives men's laws.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42.
MayallB. (1994). Children in action at home and school. In MayallB. (Ed.), Children's childhoods: Observed and experienced.London: Falmer Press.
43.
MertenD. E. (1996). Burnout as cheerleader: The cultural basis for prestige and privilege in junior high school. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 27(1), 51–70.
44.
Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393, 127 S. Ct. 2618, 168 L. Ed. 2d 290 (2007).
45.
MorrowR. A. (with Brown, D. D.). (1994). Critical theory and methodology.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46.
New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 105 S. Ct. (1985).
Scad v. Borough of Mount Ephraim. 452 U.S. 61 (1981).
49.
ShapiroJ. P., & StefkovichJ. A. (2010). Ethical leadership and decision making n education: Applying theoretical perspectives to complex dilemmas (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
50.
StarrattR. J. (2004). Ethical leadership.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, 393 U.S. 503, 89 S. Ct. 733, 21 L. Ed. 2d 731 (1969).
51.
ThorneB. (1993). Gender play: Girls and boys in school.Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
