A California Superior Court judge last week ordered San Francisco Unified Schools to restore Eric Gustafson to his role as Lowell High School journalism adviser.
The court decision was a major win for student journalists and a warning to school administrators, finding that Lowell High School violated the state’s New Voices law when it reassigned Gustafson solely because of his students’ reporting.
A few days after the verdict, the Student Press Law Center caught up with Gustafson to chat about the ruling.
Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
SPLC: How are you feeling? What does the ruling mean to you?
Gustafson: Well, I have to be honest, my first reaction was just relief. You know, it has been a while. So it was a sense of relief, but then a sense of vindication. I felt strongly that I hadn’t done anything wrong, and the ruling made it really clear that the role I played in the articles that were in question was correct — and that the students had done the right thing. All along, even the administrators have never come up with a reason that these articles were unethical or had any kind of problems. So, yeah, I feel a sense of vindication.
Finally, it’s also the clarity that it gives. Reading that ruling and seeing in those first few lines that it is about protecting student journalism and really clarifying that. That was satisfying. When you see the judge’s words, she really made it clear — and her words are so definitive — that you cannot do what they did, which was to — in an attempt to change or influence the students’ words — take retaliation against the adviser. So, yeah, I think the clarity of it is what makes it so satisfying.
What message do you think this sends to student journalists across California?
I think with that clarification should come a sense of confidence that they really can do this. They really are independent. That will hopefully provide them with a sense of confidence, but also just to know how you can say no in these situations.
What were your current and former students’ reactions?
When I got the news from my lawyer, I emailed two of the EICs from last year. They really put their all into this, and I felt it was important that I tell them first. They were really moved and happy for me.
It’s been really gratifying. The current EICs, they were congratulating me, and obviously, they want to find out what’s happening next. I told them that I really respected what they pulled off with the other adviser, and they’ve been put in this difficult situation. Yes, I would like my job back, and the judge agrees, but I don’t want to take apart something that they’ve already created.
They took that to heart, and they had an editor’s meeting. Then they came to me, and they had already drafted a letter to be sent to the district that said the eight editors unanimously want Mr. Gustafson back as soon as possible.
They conveyed that a lot of people have talked about what’s best for students. Initially, when the change of schedule was made, the principal said this was in the best interest of students, and much of the argumentation made by the district was that this was for the best interest of the students. The editors felt really strongly, they would like to say exactly what their feelings are, which is that they’d like me back. They first want to finish the next magazine and get that off the printer, which is a good time to do it. I couldn’t be more proud of them.
What message do you hope that school officials and administrators take away from this?
It’s really clear that this avenue of trying to influence student journalism isn’t going to work. Especially in California, they’ve learned you can’t go full frontal and just try to say you can’t write this or that.
I get it. Those articles did cause a lot of unhappiness, and it was a frustration. The administration had to come up with a way of trying to make the other teachers happy in the wake of that article.
But going after the adviser is just not on the menu anymore.
It’s a pretty big step to sue your employer. What considerations went through your mind when you were deciding whether to go forward with this lawsuit?
It definitely wasn’t a simple decision to make, but knowing what was at stake — that these people in administration and the school district truly were trying to intimidate my students — made it so much easier to make a decision. Of course, I am going to stop that.
To be honest, I wasn’t really clear about the protections that I had, initially. I was kind of in shock, and it was talking to SPLC’s Mike Hiestand and talking to others that suddenly I realized this really is clear; that there is a defense for me.
But ultimately, just thinking about my students and knowing that so many of them have gone on to do journalism. Right now, for example, I have a person who was at the Harvard Crimson and now they are at Mission Local here in San Francisco. Thinking about them made it a lot easier to do what I was doing.
For other advisers who might be in your situation, what advice would you give them?
Reach out to other advisers and get support. I have to give a lot of credit to Paul Kandell at Palo Alto High School, who had been at Lowell High School. He was super helpful. He really had my back and was reaching out to other people. He had been very involved with the Mountain View case and already had a sense of what we’re up against.
Talking to Mike at SPLC was really important for understanding what I could do next.
What I realized immediately is just how much this mattered to other advisers — those I had met and those I heard from by email. It made me feel really special to be part of this relatively small group of educators who really do care about journalism. At the end of the day, we’re teachers, but this is about journalism.
I worked as a professional journalist for 15 years before I became a teacher. So it was much less of a decision on that front. The students have this right, and I want to support their right to do that. So it was a little bit more reflexive for me. One younger colleague at Lowell, after finding out what’s going on, told me, “You know, Eric, I don’t know if I could do this if I were in your shoes.” The stakes just seemed a lot higher for him.
But, in the end, I felt immediately supported by my peers in journalism, and it also helps that my wife is a San Francisco Chronicle journalist, and I have a lot of journalism friends. So I very quickly had a whole phalanx of people behind me, including tons of students too.
You’ve gotten support from so many corners of the community. You talked about much of it, but is there anyone else you would like to mention?
There was, obviously, the student support, and they kind of organized themselves. A few previous EICs are so good at running operations. They kind of set up a hotline and got alumni I had taught before.
The same thing happened with parents. These were parents of former students, and some parents of current students. That was a big role. Some people who are in politics, some who really have a voice in San Francisco. Boy, they really organized letters, and there’s no doubt that the administration at Lowell High School and San Francisco Unified was hit with a lot of very strongly felt opinions that these kids have a right to do what they’re doing, and what the administration and the district did to me was wrong.
Any final takeaways from this experience?
Just knowing the Student Press Law Center is out there, and hopefully because of this win so many more people will know your influence and your role in all this. Hopefully, people can start getting a sense that this is a national issue. I know you guys are plugging away one state at a time, but hopefully people see this on a national level, and it’s really made me think more of it in that way too.
And, fortunately for me, my takeaway is that the students weren’t intimidated. This is the same administration that did it last year, and the students are willing to say this. And you know, to me, it was heartening that they wan’t me back, but more importantly, that the administration didn’t get away with it. This was an intimidation practice, and it’s been over these last three or four years, and it’s been over that first drugs article, and then the sexual harassment. Wanting prior review, and then ultimately changing me out of the role. This is a pattern of intimidation, and that’s tough. These are adults with power and students who have less of it, and they were not intimidated. I just couldn’t be more proud of them.
A lot of tears have been shed in the last few days. I think most advisers realize this. We’ve got the best job in the world. We get to work with these kids who have these abilities, and these priorities, and these convictions.