Over the past weeks, the design of
a curriculum, its evaluation, and its purpose have been discussed. This cycle, the simple question, Should curriculum address controversial
issues? will be answered just as simply: Yes. We have learned from Leslie Owen Wilson that
the curriculum delivered to students includes the explicit curriculum (what is
taught) the null curriculum (what is not taught or ignored) (Wilson, 2015). By removing controversial issues such as
homosexuality, STDs, and causes for bullying, students learn that these issues
are not important enough to be brought into the classroom. If a school is to adequately prepare students
to be a contributive member of society, the schools must discuss the all issues
that society faces. For example, let’s
look at the students attending Crane
High School in West Texas. The
superintendent of Crane Independence School District supported an abstinence
only sex education curriculum because “if kids are not having any sexual
activity, they can’t get [STDs]…That’s not a bad program.” When the average age of the beginning of
sexual activity is 16 (Silin, 1997) it is clear that the Crane Independent
School District needs to reflect on the validity of their sex education
program. Why “taboo” topics should be
taught in school is simple enough to understand, but the major concern is how
these subjects are covered.
As
with all things, discussing controversial topics in all schools needs to be
done with sensitivity towards the subject and the audience. An example of how not to teach controversial
subjects is provided by the Gaia
Democratic School. Depending on the
maturity of the student, “explicit language” may be overwhelming (Eckholm,
2010, p. 2). With that being said, it is
important that parents are informed regarding what is being discussed and
how. As the guardian, it is the parents’
job to determine if he or she would like her child learning about sensitive
subjects in the school environment. If
the parent decides the child is not ready for this, the parent should have the
option to have her child removed when the contentious material is discussed –
without consequence.
The issue of
audience was frequently discussed in Erik Eckholm’s article. The issue presented in this article was
having teachers instruct their students, of all ages, on the causes of bullying
in order to bring awareness to the issue.
While controversial subjects need to be taught, knowing the maturity
level of the students is key. Tammi Shulz,
the parent of a five year old, did not want homosexuality taught to her
daughter because of her young age (2010).
Knowing the audience for this controversial curriculum would mean that
kindergarten aged students, such as Shulz’s daughter, could learn about
homosexuality on their terms, such as some people have two mommies, some have
two daddies, but anything that goes in depth regarding the details of homosexuality
would be inappropriate for this age group.
A large part of
knowing the audience is making sure that the content being taught is
appropriate for their maturity level, but also of interest to the students. In previous cycles in this course, we have
learned that a curriculum should be one that students are interested in so that
they are motivated to learn. Why not let
students ask their own questions to learn more about certain material that
personally affects them. A great method
my school uses when introducing a new topic is Chalk Talk. The teacher places the topic on the board and
students are to write all around the topic what they know about it – the fun
part is that students are not allowed to talk to each other while doing so, the
“chalk” is suppose to do the talking.
Imagine a second grade class where the students are to learn about
HIV/AIDS. Some students may know a lot
about the virus, others may have never heard about it. Using the Chalk Talk method above, the
teacher can gain insight into how much her class knows direct her instruction
to meet the students’ interest level (as well as maturity level). When given the chance to direct their own
education, the initiative taken by some students will is surprising. Students can learn more from their peers, as
did students in Albuquerque Public Schools with their student-led
anti-bullying campaign.
As Jami Coffman
mentioned in the news segment above teaching frequently debated subjects is
just one more things for teachers to do.
To avoid piling more onto teachers’ overloaded plates, could
controversial subjects be taught within the context of another subject? The example provided by Thorton sums up this
concept. In American History, the heroin
Jane Addams is discussed. Although she
never came out as gay, evidence shows that she lived a single life, surrounded
by other women all working towards the goal of women’s rights. Homosexuality may not be explicitly taught
here, but within the context of American History, students can study the
effects of homosexuality. What kind of
life did Jane Addams, or another openly gay public figure, have? Was his career affected? What were social views during that time
period (2004)? How about math? A math teacher could have students analyze
trends and correlations in HIV/AIDS infection rates in urban and rural
areas. Success rates of rehabilitation
for individuals addicted to drugs depending on if it was a government or private
rehabilitation program could be investigated.
Controversial
topics should be addressed in schools in order for students to be well-informed,
productive members of society. Why these
subjects should be covered in schools are fairly obvious, although parents do
have a right to remove their children from these classes if necessary. The more pertinent question that teachers and
school districts need to consider is how these concepts are addressed so that
students are well-informed about all aspects of the world around them.
References
Eckholm,
E. (2010, November 6). In school efforts
to end bullying, some see agenda. The New
York Times.
Silin,
J. (1997). Hiv/aids education: Towards a
collaborative curriculum. The Curriculum Studies Reader, 245-263.
Thorton,
S. J. (2004). Silence on gays and
lesbians in social studies curriculum.
The Curriculum Studies Reader, 362-367.
Wilson, L. O. (2015). The second
principle. Retrieved from http://thesecondprinciple.com/instructional-design/types-of-curriculum/
ReplyDeleteHi Marissa,
I really enjoyed your post! For most people it is a given that controversial topics should be taught in schools. The question, as you mentioned, is how. There are so many things being taught and implied when we teach something controversial that we must be careful about how it is discussed and approached. More than one well-meaning teacher has gotten burned over a topic taught in school. While I don’t believe we should back down from a worthy cause, we do need to be careful about how we do it.
As you mention, these topics should be taught with “sensitivity toward the subject and the audience.” Sometimes in the name of trying to bring about empathy and tolerance, we discuss topics or information that is not developmentally appropriate for our students. We do need to be fully conscious of the information and language that is used with each age group. We can teach empathy, diversity, and anti-bullying at any age. It will however, look different at each grade level.
Controversial and sensitive subjects can be discussed in almost every subject, so it is not really a stretch to do so. It works out especially well in History and English classes where it is easy to tie it into other topics being discussed. We want students to be aware and be able to respond to issues that are current and pressing in our society, so teachers should be looking for ways to introduce these topics into their curriculum. As an English teacher I do this through what I call Article of the Week. Each week students read and respond to a short, non-fiction article about a given topic. I use websites like Newsela and ThinkCerca that tailor the topics (and in Newsela’s case, the words to be grade level appropriate) to a particular grade band. I rarely have to worry about appropriateness with these sites. In addition to working on summarizing and analysis skills, we also get to talk about current events and these discussions can become an open space to talk about these topics and explore them further.
I think working with parents and keeping them abreast of the topics being discussed is paramount in being able to continue addressing controversial issues. If a parent feels out of the loop or as if a teacher is trying to force an opinion on their child, it may be harder to continue or may result in disciplinary action. Make parents a partner in these discussions, especially at a young age, so they can continue the discussion at home. I agree that parents should have the right to determine whether their child should learn about sensitive subjects. This is something I am not sure whether teachers really think about when planning lessons on controversial issues.
I have used chalk talks in various ways in my own classroom. It is a great way to see just what the students know. You can also use it to pose questions to the students, to probe them for their opinion, or to just get them thinking deeper about a given topic.
Thanks for your post!
Laycee
Hi Marissa,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your post. It’s an interesting issue you raise about audience. It’s a topic I discussed similarly (but briefly) as “age appropriateness” in my blog post. I think all teachers in favor of covering these “controversial issues” are aware of and believe in making it age appropriate. I don’t know any teachers really trying to push explicit sexual knowledge, for example, on elementary schoolers. So why is this such a big question?
My sense is that a lack of age-appropriateness is a good scare tactic. I saw a Facebook post not long ago in outrage that second graders were going to be taught about anal sex. It had a ridiculous number of shares, and frequently people were tagging their teacher friends, saying, “This better not be true!” etc. My opinion is that these threats of giving way too much information are deliberate exaggerations by those wholly opposed to children even knowing that some people stray from the norm. I can’t think of a teacher who would teach that to their students. It makes no sense for it to be a huge concern, but it gets thrown out there because it is highly successful at shutting down the conversation. It puts advocates for acceptance and tolerance on the defensive. Suddenly, the conversation becomes about proving how little children will learn. It also does a number on nervous parents who feel they can’t “risk it.” Even if they agree with, say, reading books about a child that has two mommies, when someone tells them their child will learn about more explicit or graphic material, it seems safer to just back away from the issue altogether.
I like your idea about letting students ask questions. I would guess that students will generally ask things that are roughly age appropriate, and if anything came up that went too far, a masterful teacher can always redirect. I also think that some of our students who have been “kept in the dark” so to speak, or have been misinformed, would ask the most questions, and perhaps the best questions. Imagine the power behind a conversation after a child shares that he has heard gay people are "bad." It could provide a unique opportunity to speak directly into the ignorance. The chalk talk was a great suggestion!
Thanks for your post!
-Taylor
Hi Marissa,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your post and the great conversation that resulted! Well done!
Wow, as a Minnesotan, the story about the teacher who took some students to a sex shop is a little shocking! Not that I can't see the point the teacher is making--it's just such a shocking naivety (or obliviousness) to the social perception and social pressures around these issues. I really don't want to defend this teacher, but I can't help but think about how hypocritical our society can sometimes be. We expose kids to all kinds of inappropriate commercials (and other media), yet we get upset about this! Teachers really are held to a very high standard. That's, I suppose, as it should be. But as teachers, we miss out on helping kids navigate the really messy parts of their lives. It reminds me of Friday Nigh Lights, where Tammi Taylor got fired for helping a pregnant girl who eventually decided to get an abortion. (Have you seen that show? It's amazing!)
I have really mixed feelings on parent opt outs. I suppose we have to allow it. But there is a real problem here. Should we then let Holocaust deniers opt out of those lessons? Maybe that example is too extreme. But you see my point? It's not clear that parents only get to decide what an appropriate education for children is. If that were the case, there would be no laws (and no legal precedent) for compulsory education.
I like your later approach of working with what the children bring to a topic. That is, essentially, what Silin said. If the curriculum is permeable, there should be space in it for teachers to be responsive to students--their interests, their questions, their problems.
Great post!
Kyle