by Glenn Sacks
On her first day in office, Arkansas governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed an executive order banning โindoctrination and critical race theoryโ in schools.
Sheโs far from alone: a recentย Education Weekย analysis found that over the past two years, bills, executive orders, or other means that would ban โdivisive concepts,โ particularly critical race theory, have appeared in 42 states.
With an eye to enforcing such measures, Fox News host Tucker Carlson calls for cameras in classrooms and a โcivilian review board in every townโ to root out teacher bias. Since I began teaching high school social studies in 1990, Iโve never seen such scrutiny of what we teach.
I believe that educators, particularly social studies teachers, should teach controversial subjects. How? My high school social studies teacher showed me.
He didnโt pontificate upon the controversies of the dayโhe stuck to the curriculum and the textbook. In other words, he taught me exactly whatย notย to do. As teachers, it isnโt enough to present the material; we need to make the subject engaging.
Yes, it was my fault that I gained little from his class. My friend, a self-described โrobotically efficientโ student, was able to learn a lot from this teacher. I squandered the opportunity. But many of my classmates also found his class boring. Occasionally, someone would ask the teacher his opinion about a current issue, and Iโd perk up from my daydreams. Heโd only say, โNowโs not the time for that,โ and, disappointed, I would start to fade out again.
Largely because of social media, more than in any other recent generation, our studentsโ lives are steeped in politics. Students want to know what their teachers think of the videos and posts they see about current controversies.
When we social studies teachers pretend that we donโt have an opinion, our students feel that weโre holding out on them, and that theyโre being shortchanged. How could a teacher not have an opinion about the types of issues theyโve spent their lives studying?
Sometimes I think, โthe material Iโm teaching is interestingโhow did my teacher make it so boring?โ Often, it was because it was drained of any sense of controversy, of battle, of drama, of people fighting for a cause.
Critics confuse being opinionated with being partisan. Having a viewpoint doesnโt mean you canโt credit the other side when theyโre correct. I oppose Donald Trump, but I do explain to my students that the Left sometimes criticizes him for silly reasons and puts him in double binds.
For example, when Trump was friendly to North Korea, he was accused of cozying up to dictators. When he was adversarial, he was labeled a warmonger.
Having a viewpoint doesnโt mean that you canโt explain the other sideโs view. When speaking of an environmental law, for example, I might add, โconservative opponents contend it would drive up businessesโ costs and deter further investmentโand sometimes that happens.โ
When a student challenges me, I say, โIโll tell you why youโre right, then explain the problems with your argument.โ If a student fervently disagrees on an issue, I might toss him my marker, sit in back, and say, โOK, educate us.โ And yes, this will be on the testโI hold the other students responsible for anything this student teaches, just as if I had taught it.
When a controversy is being debated, the teacher should modulate the political angle to encourage further discussion. A few months ago, I invited a conservative former student to give a presentation supporting the Republican Party in the November 2022 elections.
He did a creditable job, but a few students aggressively challenged him. I then explained some of the flaws in the arguments leveled against the conservative student, using them to demonstrate curriculum concepts.
For example, when one student linked a moderate California Republican congressman to the events of January 6, 2021, I explained that this was a โguilt by associationโ tactic and provided some other cases in which it was used by both Democrats and Republicans.
Some conservative critics are unconsciously lumping two distinct issues together. Yes, the (rare) instances when a teacher personally attacks or disparages students for their political beliefs are a problem. But the vastly more common scenario is when students or parents are unhappy because political views that they agree with are being criticized.
Critics have the right to demand we treat those who disagree with us respectfully. They donโt have the right to demand that we always agree with them.
I canโt promise that no student ever walks out of my class annoyed, and no teacher could contend that their students are never bored. But the further a class gets from what is happening in the real world, the less engaged students will be. If a teacher is opinionated but fair, the various sides of an argument will emerge in a productive, compelling way.