The test, as set forth in the Tinker opinion, asks the question: Did the speech or expression of the student "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," or might it "reasonably have led school authorities to forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities?" The case holds that to justify suppression of speech, school officials would need to show that the conduct in question would "materially and substantially interfere" with the operation of the school.[2]
Notes
^Alexander & Alexander 2011, p. 409: In Tinker, the Supreme Court established the “material and substantial disruption” test to protect the freedom of speech and expression in public schools. Here, the Court made it clear that school authorities are not permitted to deny a student ...