Final project

Final Project (Recommendation Paper) The final project will be a 5-8 page recommendation and report to the President of the University based on a First Amendment controversy on campus that you, as the Chair of a Task Force has provided. Your paper will be evaluated on the following criteria: Demonstrated understanding of the assigned topic Comprehensive Introduction and Conclusion (Thesis) Full APA format (Title page, Headers, Double Spacing, Citations, 1 margins, Times New Roman 12 font, References) – Use the template if you need to. Proper use of sources (80% or more of the paper must be your words and your ideas) Originality Organization of material Coverage of all seven (7) pertinent facts) Proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and sentence structure 2-4 Legal Cases associated with the topic 2-4 Professional Sources to include either books or journals (the textbook can be one source) written in Microsoft Word Legal issues are a challenge for any higher education leader. It is critical that one is knowledgeable about the law and institutional policy and can utilize that knowledge to make informed and educated decisions about legal issues. The law is about Constitutional rights, precedents and past decisions. Leaders in higher education who are grappling with events that include legal or risk management conditions must be able to determine what action to take by knowing how to find and interpret past cases, state and federal law, and institutional policy. The final project allows the professor to evaluate each students ability to find and interpret the law, and determine appropriate policy and practice, and make appropriate recommendations to their institution regarding legal issues to reduce any risks to the institution. The following guidelines will assist students in completing the project: Project Roleplay: Deliverable: A professionally written recommendation that addresses legal issues related to the hypothetical event provided. As a valued administrator with expertise in legal issues in higher education, you have been appointed by the President of the University to chair a task force charged with recommending an approach and decisions related to the First Amendment legal issues potentially facing your institution. The President has asked for a formal recommendation from the committee [written by the chair] submitted electronically to his office [CANVAS]. The Presdient expects that the recommendation will thoroughly review the issue(s), identify current or past case law, policies and practices related to the issue(s), institutional risk, stakeholders, and provide a path forward regarding the issue (recommendations for decisions, practice, policies etc.). While college campuses are meant to be spaces where free expression and academic freedom thrive, there can be instances where First Amendment rights are perceived to be violated. Some possible First Amendment violations on a college campus include: 1 Content-Based Restrictions: Imposing regulations on speech based on its content, especially if it targets specific viewpoints, may violate the First Amendment. 2 Speech Codes: Implementing overly broad or vague speech codes that restrict constitutionally protected speech. 3 Prior Restraint: Attempting to prevent the publication or expression of certain ideas before they are made public. 4 Suppression of Peaceful Protests: Inhibiting or punishing peaceful protests, demonstrations, or assemblies. 5 Censorship of Student Publications: Restricting the content of student newspapers or publications based on disapproval of their viewpoint. 6 Speaker Disinvitations: Canceling or preventing speakers from addressing the campus community due to their views. 7 Free Speech Zones: Restricting expressive activities to designated areas, limiting the ability to engage with a broader audience. 8 Discrimination Against Unpopular Views: Penalizing students or faculty for expressing unpopular or controversial opinions. 9 Selective Funding: Allocating student activity fees or university resources in a way that favors certain viewpoints over others. 10 Faculty or Student Retaliation: Taking adverse actions against faculty or students based on their expression of certain views. 11 Online Speech Restrictions: Applying restrictive policies to online platforms affiliated with the college. SCENARIO At Prestige University, a renowned institution with a diverse student body, a controversial speaker, Dr. Jonathan Foster, known for his highly conservative views, has been invited by the right-leaning student organization ‘The Rational Union for Transparency and Honesty’ TRUTH, to address students. Dr. Foster’s appearance has been controversial on many other campuses including protests, sit-ins, anger and students and faculty claiming to have been offended and triggered by Foster’s rhetoric. Dr. Foster is expected to discuss his perspectives on traditional family values, the discrimination of conservative viewpoints on US college campuses, and express critiques of certain social and political hot topics. Pertinent Facts: 1 Speaker Disinvitations: Some student groups, along with faculty members, express vehement opposition to Dr. Foster’s views and pressure the university administration to disinvite him, claiming her presence would create a hostile environment for marginalized groups. 2 Free Speech Advocates: On the other hand, free speech advocates, including the student organization ‘TRUTH’ that invited Dr. Foster, argue that disinviting her would violate the principles of free expression and academic freedom. 3 Security Concerns: The university administration is concerned about potential security issues due to anticipated protests and counter-protests during Dr. Foster’s visit, prompting them to consider cancellation for safety reasons. 4 Designated Free Speech Zone: Prestige University has a designated “Free Speech Zone” on campus, where opponents of TRUTH and Dr. Foster demand that the event be held. This zone is a small concrete area by the parking lot of the Student Center. Critics of the Free Speech Zone argue that confining expressive activities to a specific area infringes upon the spirit of open dialogue and exchange of ideas throughout the entire campus. 5 Social Media Backlash: The controversy gains traction on social media, with students, alumni, and external groups weighing in on both sides, further polarizing the campus community. 6 Public Funding Debate: Some state legislators threaten to review the university’s public funding, arguing that hosting speakers with controversial views may not align with the values of the state or the taxpayers who fund the institution. 7 Campus Newspaper: Administration is concerned with a conservative student newspaper, ‘Prestige Press’ covering the upcoming event and promoting the ideas of Dr. Foster including its criticism of opposition student organizations and faculty. This hypothetical scenario encapsulates the tension between protecting the principles of free speech and maintaining a campus environment that is inclusive and respectful of diverse perspectives. The controversy prompts a broader discussion about the boundaries of free expression on college campuses and the challenges faced by institutions in navigating competing interests and values. The recommendation will be provided to the President and his executive team who, although familiar with the issue, have little or no background on the legal ramifications of the issue (decisions and risk), what actions should be taken and why, or past cases that may inform their decisions. The introduction should engage the audience [executive team] and provide them with the background of the controversy, the organization of the paper and its contents. The body of the paper should address the legal issue(s) by providing summaries related to case studies, Constitutional Law, and policy. The last section should advance recommendations for moving forward [policies, practices, decisions] based on your understanding of the law and the Constitution. Your professor will be available to work with you throughout the term to help direct research and provide guidance on the development of the paper. Grading will be based on the quality of the writing and the clarity and organization of the paper. The paper should logically and thoroughly explain the legal issues involved with the scenario and make recommendations for action, such as proposed administrative policies and practices, which would lead to effective legal compliance and ease practical difficulties associated with the issues identified (the seven pertinent facts). Final papers are due on February 27th (at 11:59 PM, submitted electronically through CANVAS). Papers turned in after this time are late resulting in a reduced number of points awarded for the paper at the discretion of the instructor. Proper APA Template UTM-1.doc ( )Download Proper APA Template UTM-1.doc ( )