My class's journals and debates this week centered on censorship. Essentially, the debate was one of freedom versus security, as so many other issues in our culture are (think search dogs in schools, child vaccinations, gun control, etc., all of which relate to the conflict between individual freedom versus social security). Our specific question was whether a school library should allow middle school students to read controversial books. On the one hand is the First Amendment's promises of the freedoms of speech and press, and on the other a desire to protect children who might not be mature enough for the content. More often than not in debates, the debaters dutifully fulfill their requirements, making clear arguments and supporting those arguments with evidence. This round, however, the debate turned impassioned, to the point where a few students grew angry with one another. The exchanges were such that I had to step in fairly often to remind the debaters of debate rules.
In fact, the conflict that poured forth in that room yesterday was a fitting example of the conflict inside many teachers. How much, we may ask, should we censor the material we teach? On a personal level, how controversial should I make my debate topics? For my part, I want my students to be passionate about what they are debating, but I also want to ensure that they are civil. I realize that I must have a level of trust that my students will be mature enough to handle real-life issues, but I also know that I have a responsibility to maintain a peaceful class climate. For that reason, I try to keep a middle ground in the topics I choose: I want topics they care about, but not topics over which they may grow too vindictive. I purposely avoid abortion, evolution versus creation, homosexuality, and other sensitive topics because they are so incendiary.
This is not to say we haven't broached controversial issues. We've debated euthanasia, legalizing marijuana, gun control, war, burning the American flag, and other issues. Typically, students are civil, and yesterday was no exception. They may have grown upset, but on the whole, they remained on topic and avoided personal attacks. The conflict that did result, however, served to remind me of the larger issue that plagues (or blesses) teachers as they make decisions about curriculum and class discussion. On the beach of real-world issues, where do we draw the line in the sand? On one side of this imaginary line is educational enrichment; and on the other, unwanted provocation. Every teacher draws this line in different places because, of course, every class is different. A teacher must be aware of how mature his or her class is, and this should inform his or her decisions about how much to expose and how much to censor. The balance we try to maintain won't always be perfect, but I have no doubt that purposely tipping it one way or the other is reckless on the one hand and stifling on the other.
In fact, the conflict that poured forth in that room yesterday was a fitting example of the conflict inside many teachers. How much, we may ask, should we censor the material we teach? On a personal level, how controversial should I make my debate topics? For my part, I want my students to be passionate about what they are debating, but I also want to ensure that they are civil. I realize that I must have a level of trust that my students will be mature enough to handle real-life issues, but I also know that I have a responsibility to maintain a peaceful class climate. For that reason, I try to keep a middle ground in the topics I choose: I want topics they care about, but not topics over which they may grow too vindictive. I purposely avoid abortion, evolution versus creation, homosexuality, and other sensitive topics because they are so incendiary.
This is not to say we haven't broached controversial issues. We've debated euthanasia, legalizing marijuana, gun control, war, burning the American flag, and other issues. Typically, students are civil, and yesterday was no exception. They may have grown upset, but on the whole, they remained on topic and avoided personal attacks. The conflict that did result, however, served to remind me of the larger issue that plagues (or blesses) teachers as they make decisions about curriculum and class discussion. On the beach of real-world issues, where do we draw the line in the sand? On one side of this imaginary line is educational enrichment; and on the other, unwanted provocation. Every teacher draws this line in different places because, of course, every class is different. A teacher must be aware of how mature his or her class is, and this should inform his or her decisions about how much to expose and how much to censor. The balance we try to maintain won't always be perfect, but I have no doubt that purposely tipping it one way or the other is reckless on the one hand and stifling on the other.
Comments
Post a Comment