Evening star., 1930-06-04
The "Gag.Rule" Controversy.

There Is nothing particularly new In
the current discussion over a so-called
gag rule" as applied against teachers
in the public school system. The clash
between disciplinary regulations and
the right to speak ones mind freely is
as old as the hills. And in the present
instance there is enough exaggeration
over the issue involved to give it more
Importance than it deserves.
Existing regulations, interpreted as
'gagging" the teachers. are innocuous
enough. An old rule of the Board of
Education declares that the board will
look with disfavor" on agitation by
teachers and groups Of teachers in con-
nection with legislation. That can be
interpreted in many ways, and it is not
established that being regarded with
disfavor by the Board of Education Is
penalty, the fear of which paralyzes
the vocal chords of school teachers and
renders them speechless. On the other
hand, 1t Is not certain that to lift this
rule would mean that every teacher,
ipso facto, would become an ardent
lobbyist. One prefers to believe that
the school teachers possess ordinary
professional pride. Debate over the
rule itself is tempest that very easily
may be confined to teapot.
The root Of the controversy, In this
instance, however, penetrates deeper
than the rule supposedly "gagging' the
teachers. Much of 1t Is traced to the
fact that the school officials and some
members Of the Board of Education
committed themselves, before the House
subcommittee on appropriations for the
District, to a policy regarding kinder
gartens upon which there is a striking
and fundamental difference Of opinion
And after thus committing themselves
there was too obvious an effort on their
part to hush UP the natural and healthy
discussion Of a decision that affects so
many parents of children as well as
teachers.
It Is one thing for the Board of
Education to adopt policy after hold
ing hearings, Summoning those inter
ested and qualified to speak and allow
ing the public, which owns the school
system, to speak Its mind. And after
adopting the policy, it is proper that
the board should look with disfavor and
even consider disciplinary steps against
teachers who refuse to abide by it and
go about attempting to undermine faith
in the board or the policy.
But it Is an altogether different thing
for the Board Of Education and the Of
hcials of the school tacitly to approve a
policy, arrived at in the secret commit
tee rooms Of Congress, and then at
tempt to halt all further discussion OF
the subject and to discourage sugges-
tions from the teachers. Neither the
school officials nor the Board Of Edu-
cation should attempt to place their
allegiance to Congress on a higher plane
than their allegiance to the people OF
Washington. Once they do, the people
are going to protest, and there exist
no earthly means to prevent 1t.
AS for the failure of letters directed
to the Board Of Education to reach the
board, that Is matter into which the
board may well inquire. Every teacher
should have the privilege of directing
such requests and having them reach
their destination through proper chan
nels. Teachers or school officials who
appeared before the committees Of
Congress without the knowledge OF the
superintendent or the board doubtless
did so at the request Of the members
of Congress. Those who sought the
committees ears without such an In
vitation are guilty of a possible I'M
propriety that the board can afford te
overlook, in order not to overemphaslzt
their Importance. Such things usually
| take care of themselves.