Skip to main content

Censorship

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.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pleasure

*Note: In the following post, I am heavily influenced by a pastor named Bob Shirock. Specifically, Shirock writes about Solomon's response to the pleasures he experienced in life in Ecclesiastes, and observes that we can enjoy pleasures in life if we accept them as God's gifts, and if we express our gratitude in their enjoyment. He cites Ecclesiastes 2:24-26 and 1 Timothy 4:1-5. I’ve noticed something about pleasure: the highs can be followed by lows. This sounds obvious, but what I mean is that times of joy and fun in life's pleasures are wonderful, and can lift your spirits for a time, but they can be followed by a disappointment that comes from the realization that they are short-lived and will not satisfy us in the long-term. I’m calling this a pleasure hangover. We gain happiness for a time, but see that this happiness is temporary. We therefore feel a subsequent low that leaves us still longing. It reminds me of a theme in the life of C.S. Lewis: sehnsucht , or a wist...
Post a Comment
Read more

Ghosts

Exercising at a gym seems to be pretty important in our culture, but it's kind of weird to see the social dynamics when you're there. Usually, if you're running an errand, you see others doing the same thing, going about their days and focusing on what's in front of them. The same thing happens at the gym, only everyone is relatively stationary. They don't really go anywhere, except from one machine or area to another. One might think this lends itself to lots of interaction between members, especially since they're all there for the same purpose, but it isn't true. Not only do people generally avoid talking to one another, but they also avoid even looking at one another. It is as though there is no one else there, even though there are dozens on any given day. Most people follow this unwritten rule, unless something in the environment-- say, two people wanting to use the same set of weights-- gives them common ground to interact, or unless they've alr...
2 comments
Read more

End of an Era

It was over two years ago that I joined an experiment that would last until last July, an experiment that would significantly change me and the eleven others involved. That experiment was the creation of a new church comprised of twelve members whose purpose was to serve the people of downtown Stockton. Most attractive to me about it was that half of our income would be used in some way outside the church, to benefit the local community or to aid in international assistance. In that span of time, we did in fact serve in ways we'd envisioned. One of our first events was a pizza and school supplies giveaway (coupled with games for the kids who came) toward the end of our first summer. Many of those who came seemed genuinely happy at this. Through that year, we also hosted an event called a "card me house party," wherein each person's ticket to the event was a gift card. Once inside, chips could be purchased to play card and other games, with the resulting collection g...
1 comment
Read more