NOTE: Check with your professor before using
Some WCU history professors prefer a single superscript at the end of a paragraph with a corresponding footnote containing multiple sources, rather than multiple superscripts scattered throughout one paragraph followed by multiple footnotes at the bottom of the page. This practice is particularly useful in paragraphs where multiple sources provide overlapping information. The two examples below come from “Flaunting the Freak Flag: Karr v. Schmidt and the Great Hair Debate in American High Schools, 1965-1975,” by WCU’s Gael Graham:
N. Jones v. Day, 127 Miss.136 (1921); Pugsley v. Sellmeyer, 158 Ark. 247 (1923); Palladino, Teenagers, 162; Arlene S. Skolnick, Embattled Paradise: The American Family in an Age of Uncertainty (New York, 1991); James Burkhart Gilbert, A Cycle of Outrage: American’s Reaction to the Juvenile Delinquent in the 1950s (New York, 1986), 16; Board of Education, Buffalo, New York, School-Community Coordination, “Recommendations of the Inter-High School Student Council for Appropriate Dress of Students in High School,” in American Record, ed. Graebner and Richards, II, 320-21.
N. 11. Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. at 503. On high school press freedom, see Shanley v. Northeast Independent School District, 462 F.2d 960 (1972); Quarterman v. Byrd, 453 F.2d (1971); and Scoville v. Board of Education of Joliet Township High School District, 425 F.2d 10 (1970). Student political expression was handled in Guzick v. Drebus, 305 F. Supp. 472 (1969). Due process in high school discipline was established in Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.W. 565 (1975).