This story about a teacher in Burlington, Wisconsin raises two important questions for schools and teachers. One is the old beauty - eye - beholder and the other is when is it appropriate to touch on certain topics. There is no simple answer to either; the best solution lies in having clear policies and a supportive school culture.
In this case, an elementary teacher chose to focus on something topical, which she felt to be significant and which she felt students should know about. These are admirable and all defensible. The question of whether they were appropriate for G4 is more open to challenge and while I personally feel that they are, all depends on how material is presented, on context, on tasks and of course on school policies and culture.
Not everyone agrees on what is appropriate and what is controversial. I have written elsewhere about a programme on human relationships (friendships, being kind, families) being boycotted by one parent because one minor topic (in terms of time and materials covered) included sex education. You may already know that "Of Mice and Men" is one of the most frequently banned literary texts because of the use of "profanity". Even "Romeo and Juliet" has been challenged because it portrays teens disobeying their parents.
The report suggests that while the district in general may have supported the appropriateness of the subject, there was no clear policy defining it. This is dangerous both for the district for teachers. A well-intentioned teacher could find him/herself in all kinds of trouble; another with malintent could cause havoc for a school or district. A well-crafted policy will make appropriate and controversial clear, and at which levels or grades such topics can or cannot be covered.
In this case, and based only on the report, I think the teacher made a serious error of judgment for which I pin 100% of the responsibility on the school and district leadership. The reason for the error was a combination of youth and inexperience with the lack of a policy and apparently appropriate supervision, again a matter of culture and policy.
The error was the bias in her approach. The article quotes a task, "How do we stop systemic racism?" which is based on the a prioir assumption that "systemi racism" exists. She should have asked (a) What is a common definition of systemic racism? and (b) Do you think systemic racism exists? If yes, please explain with examples, If no please explain with examples. Her question in essence tells students there is one acceptable answer, which is a match and blue paper situation.
The teacher is quoted later as saying, "Our kids are already experiencing racism." Such a view is going to be expressed in words, actions, choices of materials and decisions on appropriateness. Again, it is a red rag to any bull with a different perspective and is a huge problem for teachers, especially young and/or new teachers. We must all be very, very cautious with our political perspectives, including the religious.
I remember once teaching a very intelligent and articulate ninth-grader who was also very religious and a right-wing conservative. I take the view that, at least in English, any argument is valid if properly articulated and supported and would often assign count-intuitive or unusual essay topics. Two which come to mind, "Horses are nice to look at" and "Hamlet is a cabbage". This girl was for me a straight A student, although I often disagreed with her perspectives and suspect that at college where standards for argument are higher than G9 she would not do as well.
She came to see me early in G10 because she had received a C on an essay, the first C in her life. I read the essay and it was an A so I went to her G10 teacher and queried the grade. My colleague asserted that the student could not score more highly than a C because she had argued that a woman's place is in the home. In other words, the teacher was grading the student on whether she shared the same views. This is the same mineshaft into which the Wisconsin teacher fell. I do not know what happened concerning my former student, but I can imagine her family and others with similar views being as incensed as they were in Burlington.
Subjects, materials and tasks are rarely if ever neutral and teachers and schools must constantly tread a razor's edge. I truly emphasize with this teacher and regret the approbrium she suffered, and she should not have been hung out to dry because of weak and ineffective leadership at school and district level.
**Questions and comments below; please add your email address through the box on the right to receive new post announcements.**
Further reading
https://www.yahoo.com/news/she-taught-fourth-graders-black-083013278.html
http://teaching-abc.blogspot.com/2020/07/this-old-chestnut.html
https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/subcategory/school-controversies
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/the-case-for-contentious-classrooms/524268/
No comments :
Post a Comment