Prayer in Public Schools
Derrick DuHart
Race, Religion, Culture
Arkansas Baptist College
Dr. Johnson, Instructor
November 4, 2014

Tables of Contents

I. Introduction

Background/Statement of Problems pg. 3-4
Purpose of the Study pg. 5-12
Research Questions pg. 13
Significance of the Study pg. 14-19

II. Literature Review

Methodology and Sampling Design Strategy pg. 20
Data Collection Procedures pg. 20
Data Analyzed pg. 21
Ethical Issues pg. 21

III. Results

Conclusion pg. 21-22
References pg. 23
Appendix:

I. Annotated Bibliography pg. 24-26 II. Survey Questions pg. 27 III. Results (Charted/Tables) pg. 28-31

Notes:

I. Introduction
Background/Statement of Problem
Prayer in Public Schools
The courts have ruled against prayer in school. Many agree with the decision; yet many disagree. Prayer should be allowed in public schools because it is already practiced. It prevents immoral acts, and it enhances the learning environment. The issue of prayer in schools has been debated in the United States since the North West Treaty (1787and 1789) which states: “ Religion, morality, and the knowledge being necessary for good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of learning shall forever be engorged.” Thus, religion, which includes prayer, was deemed to be necessary. Many people believe that prayer is not allowed in the public schools. In fact prayer is allowed in the school system on buses, at the flagpole, in student religious groups, and in the cafeteria. However, prayer is not permitted in the classroom itself when class is in session. Prayer in class would violate the principles of church- state separation, which is defined by court interpretations of the First Amendment. This requires that public school teachers, principals, and boards to be religiously neutral. The reason for this is to prevent any arguments among students and teachers about their specific religion.
Public schools had prayer for nearly two hundred years before the Supreme Court ruled that state-mandated class prayers were unconstitutional (Engle, 1962). The fact that prayer was practiced for nearly two-hundred years established it by precedent as a beneficial practice in our schools. Since the court outlawed prayer, the nation has been in steady moral decline. Former secretary of education William Bennett revealed in his cultured indexes that between 1960 and1990 there was a steady moral decline. During this period divorce doubled, teenage pregnancy went up 200%, teen suicide increased 300%, child abuse reached an all-time high, violent crime went up 500% and abortion increased 1000%. Morals must be taught and they cannot be taught properly without religion, because most of the strong moral beliefs stem from religion such as the Ten Commandments. There is a strong correlation between the expulsion of prayer from our schools and the decline in morality. The third argument is prayer enhances the learning environment at public schools. Prayer enhances the learning environment because when there is a test coming up or a paper due, you think to yourself, “How am I going to do all of this, and do well?” When this happens, a number of people always turn to God, and He guides and gives them strength and understanding. The outcome from doing praying is always good. Prayer may not enhance everyone’s learning environment but before starting your day, ask God to let you have a good day and let everything that one does, be a true learning experience for them. The experience may not always be good, but if it happens, it happens for a reason.
We need something to pull us all together; natural prayer could be that miracle. It includes everyone even the non-believers.

Purpose of the Study
There are facts that support that prayer in public schools would be beneficial for the children and the United States of America. Prayer is an address to God or a god in word or thoughts. The Anti- Defamation League states that, “A moment of silence will inevitably be unconstitutional or the purpose and effect of such moments of silence are invariably to advance religion. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down requiring a moment of silence which students could use for silent prayer or meditation because it was enacted for the purpose of advancing religion. The Supreme Court has not determined if a moment of silence can ever be constitutional.” The General rule – organized prayer in the public schools setting, whether in the classroom or at a school- sponsored event, is unconstitutional. The only type of prayer that is constitutionally permissible is private, voluntary student prayer that does not interfere with the school’s educational mission. The Establishment Clause – forbids state-sponsored prayers in public schools settings, no matter how nondenominational the prayers maybe (Lee v Weisman, 505 U.S. 577(1962). “In our young nation, the Bible was used as a text book for the purpose of teaching children moral principles to live by. As time went on, the Bible was gradually replaced by other text books such as Noah Webter’s Primer. This is the exact opposite of the school curriculum today. The courts in this country have revised the First Amendment, thus erecting a wall of atheism around every public school in America, where in God is not allowed to mention.” This is not the same wall that Thomas Jefferson envisioned (Bartons, 2009). Every form of religion attempts to communicate with their higher power in some way. Prayer is the only form of communication with a higher power. The Muslims pray three times a day facing their city of Mecca. Christians commonly pray before meals, during quiet times, or before going to sleep at night. A wide variety of religions are present in the public school system. The government has decided when and where prayer is appropriate and if it is appropriate in our schools. To fully understand this issue, prayer in the school system should be examined. Throughout American history, prayer has occurred in public schools both inside and outside of the classroom. To fully understand the concept of why and who has taken prayer out of public schools, an examination has to take place. In order to do so, research has to be done to determine if prayer in school will affect the students, whether positive or negative, will it affect those of any religion, or will it improve the quality of education for students.
In the case Engel versus Vitale in 1962, prayer inside the classroom was abolished. In this case, the Supreme Court voted that prayer in the classroom was unconstitutional. Along with this case, a similar case involving the School District of Abington versus Schempp in 1963, banned prayer along with Bible readings in the classroom. One report brought up the argument that “ since 1963 there have been no prayer or Bible readings in our public schools yet school children commonly recite “The Pledge of Allegiance” (Viteritti). The Pledge of Allegiance is a famous American passage and includes the phrase “one nation under God”. Many Americans were concerned that children were still reciting such phrases in the classroom and consequently the Pledge of Allegiance was banned. In 1987, Attorney General Edwin Reese was accused of “muddying the waters” on school prayer. Turner Rose felt that Reese was a supporter of the official school prayer but in fact he was not. The Director of Public Affairs in Washington, Terry Eastland states, “Neither the United States nor any state shall compose the words of any prayer to be said in public schools” (Eastland). A Kentucky law that required the posting of the Ten Commandments in all public places.
When Congress adopted the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1789, it left many questions open that would arise concerning church-state relations. It became clear early in the history of the country that the Supreme Court would have a great impact on how the First Amendment would be upheld and interpreted.
School prayer was the focus of Madalyn Murray O'Hair, a militant left wing atheist with close ties to the American Communist Party, when she filed a lawsuit against the school board of Baltimore. The local court judge, J. Gilbert Pendergast, dismissed the petition stating, "It is abundantly clear that petitioners' real objective is to drive every concept of religion out of the public school system." The case went to the Maryland Court of Appeals, and the court ruled, "Neither the First nor the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to stifle all rapport between religion and government." The "School Prayer" case then made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Leonard Kerpelman addressed the court saying prayer in the public schools had been tolerated for so long that it had become traditional and that anything that is unconstitutional does not become constitutional through tradition. He went on to say the Constitution had erected a "wall of separation" between church and state, at which point Justice Potter Steward interrupted, asking where this wording appears. Kerpelman was stumped and an embarrassing silence followed. When he regained his composure, he stated that the text was not explicit on the point but that it had been interpreted to mean so. Remarkably, the National Council of Churches and several Jewish organizations favored Madalyn O'Hair's case! Not a single Christian organization filed a brief in support of school prayer. The Supreme Court ruled 8 to 1 in favor of abolishing school prayer and Bible reading in the public schools. Justice Tom Clark wrote, "Religious freedom, it has long been recognized that government must be neutral and, while protecting all, must prefer none and disparage none."
The federal government considers atheism to be a religion, and this Supreme Court ruling favored atheism, at the expense of the Christian majority. The United States Supreme Court has demonstrated little tolerance for mandated prayer in the public schools. During the past twenty-five years, the Court not only has held that a state cannot require prayers to be recited in the public schools, it also has declared unconstitutional a state law providing that each public school day begin with a moment of silence for meditation or voluntary prayer.
Some feel this decision was justifiable, stating that everyone has a right to or right not to participate in a religious activity. The lack of prayer in school has caused serious issues for many children and teachers. The behavior has gotten worse; the lack of\f respect has gone from 10 to 0.
What can be said when tragedy strikes and innocent victims suffer greatly? When small children are slaughtered in the classroom? When happy moviegoers are mowed down in a theater? When a family on the way home from church is hit by a drunk driver? What is the answer to those who ask, even accusingly, “How can a good God let this happen?” In the midst of suffering, there is a just and loving God there for you. If we are allowed to be in public schools, churches, synagogues and anywhere else, why not put prayer back into school?
No single case banned organized prayer and Bible-reading in public schools; this was accomplished through a number of Supreme Court cases, beginning with Engel v. Vitale, (1962), that tested the limits of the First Amendment Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. In Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962), the Supreme Court held it was unconstitutional for a public school to require students to recite a prayer. The specific challenge involved the New York Reagents' Prayer, which a group of parents protested violated their religious practices:
"Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen." In a 6-1 decision authored by Justice Hugo Black, the Court held that the prayer violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it promoted a religious belief regardless of the actual words being ambiguous as to which religion was being endorsed. The Court held that the Establishment Clause prohibited the government from endorsing a class of religions that recognized an Almighty God. Other landmark cases banning prayer and Bible-reading in public schools include:
Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 US 203 (1963)

Chamberlin v. Dade County Board, 377 US 402 (1964)

Wallace v. Jaffre, 472 US 38 (1985)

Lee v. Weisman, 505 US 577 (1992)

Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 US 290 (2000)

It's worth remembering, however, that no case or series of cases have "banned" prayer in schools. The Court has ruled that the government (in the person of public school teachers or other public school officials) can't endorse a religion by requiring students to pray or participate in bible study; that doesn't mean students themselves are prohibited from praying. The private exercise of religion is not prohibited in public schools.
Prayer in school is a controversial issue these days, and it is held dearly in the hearts of many people in America. Prayer has been in public schools from the colonial times until 1962.
Supporters, of prayer in school, view that starting the day off with a prayer will not harm society. Some people see it as a "way of allowing the students to clear their minds." (Mireless 28) It gives students a peaceful way to start the day, instead of a teacher to quiet an obnoxious group of students. They also think, "prayer is a healthy way to start off the day." (Mireless 50) It clears the minds of the students and makes them start to think deeply. This also starts the day off with a purposeful mood.
People supporting prayer view that not only does it help make the transition into learning smooth, but it also helps the students to resolve personal issues. Prayer gives students a time every morning where they think about values and faith to help them through life. "Many students have problems and prayer gives them time to think about their issues." (Mireless 30) Supporters also say that our youth has lost the respect that students had for their country, their peers, and their lives.
Many consider the uprising of crime and the lowering of values in society a result of taking prayer out of school. Since the expulsion of prayer in public school in 1962, studies show that teenage pregnancy went up two hundred percent, teen suicide increased three hundred percent, abortion increased one thousand percent and violent crime went up five hundred percent. These people say that prayer inflicts faith and values to those that would have otherwise contributed to the worsening of society. They also say that if prayer flows into their souls it may cause them to become better human beings, better members of society, and better parents for our young.
Supporters state that even early congressional action encouraged and approved in religion in public schools. The Northwest Treaty (1787 and 1789) declared: "Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary for good government and happiness of mankind, school and the means of learning shall forever be encouraged." Religion, which includes prayer, was deemed to be necessary.
From colonial times until 1962 prayer was practiced in public schools. Then, in the case of Engle vs. Vitale the Supreme Court ruled that state-mandated prayers were unconstitutional. People state that the fact that school prayer was practiced for over two hundred years establishes it as a valid and beneficial practice in our schools. These people also state that the first amendment does not separate god and government; it actually encourages religion. The first clause merely declares that federal government cannot establish one religion for all people. Nowhere does it convey anything about the separation between church and state. The second clause insists that the government should do nothing to discourage religion.
The people opposing public prayer feel that organized prayer will lead to many problems. They declare that school prayer is unconstitutional because of the first amendment in our constitution which states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." They say that this clearly states a division between church and state.
People state that since education is mandatory, public schools should not impose prayer on students who do not desire it. These people believe that students might be led by their teacher or classmates in any prayer that the teacher sees fit. Since this country is mostly Christian, the prayers may reflect Christian values. Students of other religions may get left out, or may feel uncomfortable praying with students of different beliefs. Some may say that, "prayer would be divisive," resulting in religious minorities feeling uncomfortable. They may feel forced to recite a prayer that they do not support. "The only way to make people of differing religions feel comfortable would be to make the prayers cross-cultural. However, any watered down prayer would result in the deeply religious persons finding it meaningless, and it would be an infringement on students who follow no religion."
Some Christians even oppose the amendment saying that the bible warns against school prayer. It says, "and when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men when thou prayest, enter into thy closet and when thou has shut thy door, pray to thy father which is in secret." (Matthew 6: 5-6) Some people believe that this shows that it is evident that praying in school is in direct contradiction to the bible.
The compromise to this solution is to have a moment of silence at the beginning of school. Students would now have the right to pray, meditate, contemplate or study. This kind of "prayer" helps students focus, alleviates stress, attunes them to their own creativity and empowers them. A book on natural prayer states "We have forgotten that we are all in this together, and we keep separating ourselves, by color, by football teams, by age, and so on and on. We need something to pull us all together. Natural prayer could be that miracle. It includes everyone, even non-believers" (Cornish 55).

Purpose of the study
Research Questions 1. When was prayer taken out of public schools? 2. What does the Constitution state about prayer in schools? 3. Should prayer in schools be mandated? 4. Since prayer in schools has been taken out, has the attitude, situations, and perspective of students changed? 5. Would it impose undo religion on other students? 6. Who was instrumental with prayer being taken out of schools? 7. Is prayer now allowed in public schools? 8. Would prayer in school create a better or harsher environment?

Significance of the Study
The issue of school prayer remains contentious even where courts as diverse as those in Canada, the United States, Russia, and Poland attempt to strike a balance between religious and secular activity in state-sponsored arenas. Some arguments have held that religion in schools is both an effective socio-moral tool as well as a valuable means to psychological stability. On the opposing side, others have argued that prayer has no place in a classroom where impressionable students are continually subject to influence by the majority. The latter kind of claim holds that, to the extent that a public school itself promotes the majority religion, the state is guilty of coercive interference in the lives of the individual. The significance of this study is not to try and force religion on students, but to get all people to understand the importance of prayer in our public school system.
Ninety percent of America's young people attend public schools. These students come from homes that represent a variety of religious and philosophical beliefs. Given the vast diversity of American society, it's important that our public schools respect the beliefs of everyone and protect parental rights. The schools can best do this by not sponsoring religious worship. This principle ensures that America's public schools are welcoming to all children and leaves decisions about religion where they belong with the family.
The U.S. Supreme Court has been vigilant in forbidding public schools and other agencies of the government to interfere with Americans' constitutional right to follow their own consciences when it comes to religion. In 1962, the justices ruled that official prayer had no place in the public system.

This is a widely misunderstood concept today. The court did not rule that students are forbidden to pray on their own; justice said that government officials had no business mandating a composed prayer by one individual or committee for students to recite. The Engel v. Vitale case came about because parents in New York challenged a prayer written by a New York education board. These Christian, Jewish and Unitarian parents did not want their children subjected to state-sponsored devotions. The high court agreed that the scheme amounted to government promotion of religion.
In 1963, the Supreme Court handed down another important ruling about prayer in public schools. In Abington Township School District v. Schempp, the court declared school-sponsored Bible reading and recitation of the Lord's Prayer unconstitutional.

Since those rulings were handed down, a myth has sprung up claiming that Madalyn Murray O'Hair, an atheist, "removed prayer from public schools." The fact is that, the 1962 case was brought by a group of New York parents with no connection to O'Hair, and the 1963 case was filed by a Unitarian family from the Philadelphia area. O'Hair, was at that time a resident of Baltimore, had filed a similar lawsuit, which the high court consolidated with the Pennsylvania case.
It is vitally important to remember that in these decisions the Supreme Court did not "remove prayer from public schools." The court removed only government-sponsored worship. Public school students have always had the right to pray on their own as class schedules permit.
The Supreme Court also did not rule against official prayer and Bible reading in public schools out of hostility to religion. The justices held that these practices were examples of unconstitutional government interference with religion. Thus, the exercises violated the First Amendment.
This is now where faith groups stands on prayer in public schools…

Faith groups that support the First Amendment and oppose government-sponsored prayer in public schools include:

■American Baptist Churches, USA
■American Jewish Congress
■Anti-Defamation League
■Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs
■Central Conference of American Rabbis
■Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
■Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
■Friends Committee on National Legislation (Quakers)
■General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
■Mennonite Central Committee
■National Council of Churches
■National Council of Jewish Women
■National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council
■North American Council for Muslim Women
■Presbyterian Church (USA)
■Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association
■Soka Gakkai International - U.S.A.
■The Church of Christ, Scientist
■The Episcopal Church, USA
■The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism
■Union of American Hebrew Congregations
■Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America
■Unitarian Universalist Association
■United Church of Christ
■United Methodist Church
■Women of Reform Judaism, The Federation of Temple Sisterhoods

Nothing in the 1962 or 1963 rulings makes it unlawful for public school students to pray or read the Bible (or any other religious book) on a voluntary basis during their free time. Later decisions have made this even clearer. In 1990, the high court ruled specifically that high school students may form clubs that meet during "non-instructional" time to pray read religious texts or discuss religious topics if other student groups are allowed to meet.
It has been made clear by the high court over and over again, that objective study about religion in public schools is legal and appropriate. Many public schools offer courses in comparative religion, the Bible as literature or the role of religion in world and U.S. history. As long as the approach is objective, balanced and non-devotional, these classes present no constitutional problem.
To make a long story short, a public school's approach to religion must have a legitimate educational purpose, not a devotional one. Public schools should not be in the business of preaching to students or trying to persuade them to adopt certain religious beliefs. Parents, not school officials, are responsible for overseeing a young person's religious upbringing. This is not a controversial principle. In fact, most parents would demand these basic rights.
Different Solutions * Consideration:
School officials must recognize the valid condemnation regarding the school policies and practices, specifically pertaining to the conduct of religion and religious perspectives. * Comprehensive Policies:
Many schools do not have policies regarding the religious issues. Schools should involve the parents, who have strong conviction for their religion to develop comprehensive policies. By doing this, schools exhibit the significance of taking religious liberty sincerely. * Pro-active Approach:
When a conflict takes place, schools are not ready for this controversy because there are no policies regarding the solution of the conflict. If there are any, they are either not known or not supported by parents. The pro-active approach on the part of schools is important to articulate the proper role for religion and religious perspectives in the schools. The resultant policies and practices would be able to build an ambiance of trust in the community and the schools. This would also demonstrate active commitment of the schools to the guiding principles of democracy (Freedom of Religion, 2008). * Commitment:
To avoid personal attacks, in the schools that can hamper educational mission of the schools, all the parties (schools, students and parents) should treat one another with courtesy and respect each other’s religion and should attempt to be fair. * Collaboration :
Cooperation on the part of parents is vital. Parents in each community must work with school officials to do not only what is constitutional, but also what is right for all citizens. * Parents Awareness:
Parents’ awareness regarding the school policies and practices incorporating the issues, regarding the religion and religious liberty along with the education is quite essential. This would resolve the problem of the ignorance regarding the extent to which this liberty of religion could be realized in the schools (Kazmi, 2002) * First Amendment religious liberty:
The religious liberty principles of the First Amendment offers the public framework within which everyone is able to discuss his or her differences to understand one another and to create school policies that serve the common good in education. Since this amendment is already being interpreted by the courts and agreed to by a wide range of religious and educational organizations (Kazmi, 2002). For a more in-depth examination of the issues, parents should consult the guide and if parents have specific legal questions, the services of a qualified lawyer should be sought.
Solution to the problem
All these solutions should be realized on the part of schools, students and their parents who have high conviction for their religions. This controversy needs constructive dialogue to resolve the religion in school issue. The cooperative approach of parents to work with schools’ management to understand what the amendment has offered and what is right for all the citizens could help to resolve this controversy (MacLeod, 2000). The ambiguity regarding the law, which is misunderstood, should be understood by the schools by devoting a little part of their time in order to resolve the controversy. This controversy should be resolved proactively so that in future, it does not consume their productive time. Another solution is to take all appropriate measures to fight against intolerance based on religion or belief (MacLeod, 2000).

Methodology and Sampling Design Strategy

The research methodology used to research the problem to prayer in public schools is a way to systematically solve the research problem. These methods can be qualitative, quantitative, or a mixed method approach. For this particular project, a quantitative approach was taken to poll various people of different backgrounds, religions and faith to find their ideas and opinions on prayer in public schools.
A survey was constructed and sent out to various people. These questionnaires are presented to all respondents with the same questions in the same order. The questionnaire is closed ended.
There are no biases and the answers are in respondent’s own words and opinions. This tool provided the advantage of reaching to those respondents that are not easily approachable. Large samples were made use through the World Wide Web and these results are reliable and dependable.
Data Collection Procedures A survey was constructed through a website entitled Survey Monkey. A series of 10 questions were asked and sent out on various media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and a website link. After posting the survey for approximately 15 days, the material was then analyzed and graphed with results readily available to those who sought to know and understand the feelings of others concerning the matter of Prayer in Public Schools. Approximately 29 random people took the survey.
Data Analyzed The data analyzed showed that parents, grandparents and concerned citizens favored prayer in the public school system.

Ethical Issues
For a religious or spiritual person, the relationship between himself and God is “the most precious relationship of all.” To respect that relationship, our First Amendment prohibits any interference with religion. Prohibiting school prayer is prohibiting the free exercise of one’s religion. (First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”) It follows, then, that eliminating prayer from public schools is wrong and unconstitutional.
Many religious values, like honesty, charity, and nonviolent problem solving, are important to society, and public schools should reinforce those virtues. Reinforcing moral lessons can reduce teenage pregnancy, STDs, gang violence, and drug/alcohol use.
The argument is not to force a specific view, but provide voluntary prayer for those who want to participate.
Conclusion
The fight plight about prayer in public schools is not a fight only about Christian rights, but really about Freedom and Liberty for all Americans as prescribed by our Constitution. The Supreme Court has trashed the First Amendment of the Constitution. Our government will be forced to resort to more and more force to keep law and order on an increasing violent population, and will necessitate further limiting of civil liberties. If this happens, America will no longer be a free nation, but one ruled by force with intolerance to any opposing ideas. The flame of freedom will have died, and we as a leader of nations will have faded. Everyone has a right to pray. We as people have been given many rights. No one, at any time is trying to force a religion on anyone. If people would read in the Bible in:
2 Chronicles 7:14
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. (Holy Bible, KJV)

References

About the Anti-Defamation League. (2010). Retrieved October 23, 2014, from

http://www.adl.org/about-adl/

Boston, R. (2012). How five new york families ended coercive prayer in America’s public

schools. Church & State, 65(6), pp. 12-15.

Durden, S. M. (2008). In the wake of Lee v. Weisman: The future of school graduation prayer

is uncertain at best. Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal. (1). 111.

Eastland, T. (2006). God and man at Davidson. First Thing: A Monthly Journal of Religion &

Public Life, (155), pp. 13-15.

Engle, M. A. (1998). Prayer in public schools/Legislation. Christian Science Monitor, 90(140),

B1.
Laats, A. (2012). Our Schools, Our Country: American Evangelicals, Public Schools, and the supreme court decisions of 1962 and 1963. Journal of Religious History, 36(3), 319-334. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9809.2012.01170.x Lupu, I. C., Elwood, F., Davis, E., Masa', D., Tuttle, R. W., Kirschner, S., & Kirschner, D. R.

(2007). Religion in the Public Schools. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Topics/Issues/Church-State_Law/religion-public-schools.pdf.

Matthew. (1995). In The Holy Bible: Containing the Old and New Testaments translated out of

the original tongues and with the former translations diligently compared and revised by His Majesty's special command. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Our Documents - Northwest Ordinance (1787). (1787, January 13). Retrieved October 30, 2014

from http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=8

Prayer in Public School. (n.d.). Retrieved October 29, 2014, from

http://www.allabouthistory.org/prayer-in-public-school.htm.

Viteritti, J. P. (2010). Journal of School Choice, 4(2), 203-221.

Appendix: I. Annotated Bibliography

Barnes, S. (2012). Prayer in the schools. The 1877-78 devotional exercise controversy in New

Haven. Connecticut History, 51 (2) pp. 203-233.

The article discusses an 1877-1878 controversy surrounding the decision of the New Haven Board of Education in Connecticut to halt devotional exercises in New Haven public schools. It provides information about the demographics of New Haven schools at this time and comments on the activities of Board of Education Member Maier Zunder. The author also reflects on a controversy surrounding the transfer of students from New Haven's Hamilton Street School and notes the rejection of a liturgy proposed by Protestant and Catholic clergymen.
While some thought that the controversy to take prayer out of school started with Madalyn O’Hare that is not the case. This controversy began long ago. It has always been said, you have to understand where you come from in order to know where you are going. This is the case with the study of prayer in school. Yes, we will use this in the analysis while writing our research paper.

Moen, M., Clarke, J., & Machalek, R. (1984). School prayer and the politics of life-style

concern. Social Science Quarterly (University of Texas Press), 65(4), pp. 1065-1071.

This research examines the issue of prayer in the public schools from a status politics framework, arguing the struggle over prayer may be understood as a surface conflict reflecting a much deeper struggle between two contending ways of life. Regression analysis of original survey data finds strong support for the model hypothesized. Cultural fundamentalists are likely to support reinstitution of prayer in the public schools as an affirmation of their cherished and once dominant values.
Politics have planned a major part in the fact that prayer was taken out of the school. Little did they know the effects that it would cause on the children? This is a read that has be broken down and analyzed by a peer group. Being that we are doing this in a group setting we will indeed break it down, analyze it and use it in the paper finale.
Rew, L., Wong, Y., & Sternglanz, R. (2004). The relationship between prayer, health behaviors,

and protective resources in school-age children. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric

Nursing, 27(4), pp. 245-255.

The purpose of this study was to examine (1) the relationship between children’s use of prayer as a coping strategy and other protective resources, and (2) whether children who prayed frequently and those who never prayed exhibited different levels of perceived stress and health behaviors. Prayer was found to be positively related to the protective resources of social connectedness and sense of humor. In addition, children who prayed frequently reported significantly higher levels of positive health behaviors than children who never prayed. These two groups of children did not significantly differ in their levels of perceived stress.
This study will be used in the analysis to discover the effects that prayer has on children in educational institutions. It will be most helpful in the study and will be greatly analyzed when completing the paper.

Secret, P.E., Johnson, J.B., & Welch, S. (1986). Racial differences in attitudes toward the

supreme court’s decision on prayer in the public schools. Social Science Quarterly

(University of Texas Press), 67(4), pp. 877-886.

While blacks are generally considered to be more "liberal" than whites, this generalization is primarily based on differences in economic welfare attitudes and party identification. Seldom have racial differences in social attitudes been explored. Using national samples, the attitudes of blacks and whites on the Supreme Court's school prayer rulings are compared. At each of the three times investigated, blacks were less supportive of the Court's rulings. This difference persists even when the greater religiosity of blacks and their lower socioeconomic status are taken into account.
While studying this article, it was very informative to learn the racial differences when it came to the idea of praying school. Now, I have always understood that there was a racial divide among people of color, but unknowingly, it became apparent how some feel about prayer. Yes, this will be something we will use in the further research of our paper.

II. Survey Questions

Prayer in Public School Survey 1. Do you support prayer in public schools? 2. Do you feel prayer in school will help stabilize the atmosphere? 3. Do you feel schools should be neutral in prayer? 4. What’s wrong with a “voluntary” prayer Amendment? 5. What would a prayer amendment permit? 6. How can Prayer be harmful in schools? 7. What’s wrong with a moment of silence? 8. What do you think of a student initiated prayer? 9. Should a commencement begin with prayer? 10. Can students pray in public schools now?

III. Results (Charted/Table)

Saved Views
Stores multiple views of your data based on the rules applied. Learn more »
Q1 Do you have children or grandchildren in the public school system?
Answered: 29
Skipped: 0 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 75.86% 22 | No | 24.14% 7 | Total | 29 |
Q2 Are students allowed to pray in public schools now?
Answered: 29
Skipped: 0 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 20.69% 6 | No | 79.31% 23 | Total | 29 |
Q3 If prayer is allowed in public schools, would you support it?
Answered: 28
Skipped: 1 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 100% 28 | No | 0% 0 | Total | 28 |
Q4 Do you feel schools should be neutral in prayer?
Answered: 28
Skipped: 1 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 82.14% 23 | No | 17.86% 5 | Total | 28 |
Q5 If prayer is allowed in schools should the prayer be student led?
Answered: 29
Skipped: 0 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 75.86% 22 | No | 24.14% 7 | Total | 29 |
Q6 Do you feel as if moments of silence would be more appropriate in public schools?
Answered: 28
Skipped: 1 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 57.14% 16 | No | 42.86% 12 | Total | 28 |
Q7 Can prayer in schools be harmful to students, staff and others?
Answered: 27
Skipped: 2 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 3.70% 1 | No | 96.30% 26 | Total | 27 |
Q8 Should school sponsored activities begin with prayer?
Answered: 29
Skipped: 0 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 93.10% 27 | No | 6.90% 2 | Total | 29 |
Coming Soon!
The feature you are looking for is not yet available in this Analyze Beta. We are busy rolling out features to the Beta as soon as they are ready. Thank you for your patience and thank you for providing feedback on the features that are active.
OK
Total | 27 |
Q9 Should prayer be done at the beginning of the school day?
Answered: 28
Skipped: 1 Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 89.29% 25 | No | 10.71% 3 | Total | 28 |
Q10 Do you feel prayer will change the behavior of students in the public schools?
Answered: 29
Skipped: 0

Answer Choices | Responses | Yes | 93.10% 27 | No | 6.90% 2 | Total | 29 |