We recently filed an academic complaint on behalf of Correne, a public university student in Ohio, who has been disciplined due her inclusion of Christian viewpoints in response to assignments and in class discussions with her peers and professors.

Correne is enrolled in an early childhood education program with the goal of becoming a public elementary school teacher. She has consistently made the Dean’s List and has typically received positive feedback from her professors. Correne’s academic and personal life have been shaped by her Christian faith.

While she does not frequently discuss her faith in academic settings, she has incorporated a religious perspective during class discussion or in response to assignments on occasion when she believed that it was appropriate to do so, for example, when class discussion has touched upon religious or moral issues, or when an assignment called for students to discuss their personal experiences or background. She has always been respectful of people who hold differing viewpoints and has not sought to force her belief system upon others.

In September 2009, Correne was informed that she will not be permitted to student teach in the Spring 2010 semester or obtain her teacher licensure through the university. She received a scathing faculty Disposition Assessment discussing her progress in the program that, among other things, described Correne or her actions as prejudicial, culturally insensitive, discriminatory, inequitable, unprofessional, and unethical.

The Assessment focused primarily on Correne’s limited discussion of her religious viewpoints in discussions with professors or other students or in her class assignments. For example, the Assessment states that Correne needs improvement in “accept[ing] and protect[ing] diversity among people including differences of [socio-economic status], gender, age, ability, sexual identity, race, ethnicity, etc.” due, in part, to her views “regarding religious diversity, homosexuality, or diverse family systems.” Correne was questioned about a student teaching situation in which she stated that she would be uncomfortable leading elementary students in Yoga exercises given the Hindu religious nature of the practice.

Our academic complaint filed with the university explains that the primary reasons given for the university’s decision are legally insupportable in light of federal and Ohio law. The complaint explains that “[a] public university professor’s act of labeling a student as insensitive, unprofessional, unethical, and prejudiced—and withholding a key academic opportunity from her—due to the viewpoints she expresses clearly violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

The complaint also notes that “[d]eclining to abandon one’s own personal religious beliefs or accept conflicting viewpoints is not a sign of professional incompetence or a justification for disciplining a student or withholding academic advancement.” We cited numerous cases, constitutional provisions, and statutes that protect student free speech rights and the freedom of conscience in workplace situations. For example, Article I, Section 7 of the Ohio Constitution declares: “All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience. . . . [No] interference with the rights of conscience [shall] be permitted. . . .”

Our academic complaint seeks Correne’s full reinstatement into the program, including the ability to student teach next semester and pursue teacher licensure through the university.

We will keep you posted as this case moves forward.