The Case for the Political Classroom
According to a report released by Heterodox Academy, college students are more reluctant to discuss controversial issues on campus than they were in 2019. The primary reason: their concern that other students would criticize their views as offensive.
In college classrooms, students should be exposed to a diverse range of issues and views, which they should be expected to discuss with classmates. As such, high school teachers have an obligation to prepare students for an environment in which they will encounter perspectives that differ from their own so that they can learn how to engage civilly and productively, without fear of retribution.
Education scholars Jonathan Zimmerman and Emily Robertson argue that “discussion of controversial issues helps students develop an array of skills and dispositions embodying the ability to formulate and evaluate arguments, thus fostering their capacities for rational thought and action.” These skills help students engage with one another on college campuses and with colleagues in the workforce. It will help them as they encounter different ideas in the news, on social media, and within their community. Teaching controversial issues in K-12 schools, however, requires that teachers resist imposing their own views on students and treading on the beliefs that parents aim to instill in their children.
That teachers sometimes struggle to do this creates a legitimate concern – one that can be effectively addressed by creating a political classroom. The political classroom, as described by education scholars Diana Hess and Paula McAvoy, is one in which students engage in deliberations about issues that involve the question: “How should we live together?” This type of classroom helps students engage in discussions of contentious political questions, which will prepare them both for life on a college campus and for participation in a democratic society. Hess and McAvoy found that the most effective political classrooms were “best practice discussion” classrooms. In these classrooms, teachers spend significant time preparing students for civil discussions so that when such discussions take place, the teacher can shift his or her role to that of a facilitator.
When teachers act as facilitators, they intervene only to keep students on topic, provide students with missing information, or ask probing questions. Otherwise, students mostly engage in student-to-student talk. Teacher/facilitators often play the role of devil’s advocate, rather than sharing their own opinions. Hess and McAvoy present the case of a high school teacher, Mr. Kushner, as an example of a “best practice discussion” classroom. Mr. Kushner did not reveal his personal views, and as a result, his students reported that the curriculum seemed more open to investigation. This, in turn, made the class more challenging and engaging; it was one of the few classes where students felt that they learned to think through both sides of complex issues.
In an example that contrasts with Mr. Kushner’s classroom, Zimmerman and Robertson recount what many classrooms were like during the Vietnam War. They note that students at that time referred to their teachers as “foremen, wardens, and robotic apologists for the regime” when they refrained from expressing their opinions. The goal should be to find a balance between forcing teachers to be “‘plastic people’ – colorless, less-than-real figures, who are unwilling to express their own opinions” – and alienating parents and students when more controversial issues enter the classroom.
However teachers choose to approach the issue of sharing their own opinions, the political classroom should be structured in a way that prioritizes student-to-student talk; encourages positive relationships between students and teachers; fosters the skills of civility and constructive disagreement; incorporates diverse viewpoints, with teachers introducing them into the classroom if necessary; and mimics authentic experiences that students might encounter when they engage with others elsewhere.
The ultimate goal of creating a political classroom and introducing difficult issues into a school curriculum is to encourage open inquiry and prepare students to engage with varied viewpoints. If students become accustomed to questioning their own beliefs and the beliefs of those whom they encounter in a civil and constructive manner, they will be more willing to participate in discussions with their peers on college campuses and in the broader public discourse. And they will be less likely to self-censor. After all, when students self-censor, the goal of the political classroom – to engage the question of how we should live together – cannot be advanced.
