AIBU to think that secondary school teachers should be apolitical in classroom and encourage debate

[vdbfamily]

DS17 and DD14 both came home today and seperately stated that they were surprised their teachers were allowed to be so anti Republican/Trump and that there was an assumption everyone agreed with them. FWIW neither of my kids like Trump but they felt uncomfortable with the fact that teachers were making derogatory comments about any idiots who voted for Trump and this was several teachers for both of them. WIBU to contact school and suggest it should be a place where students are encouraged to discuss pro's and cons of different parties and not get dictated to about such things! My daughter was saying that some of the kids who would not have known any different were then parroting the teachers views without really knowing what they were talking about.

Just to add, in relation to Trump, I think I would have to talk about how he spreads mistrust of the media which is wrong, and also casting doubt on the democratic process. I think it is important to point out when these things are dangerous.

SuperbGorgonzola - were those that supported the Tories criticised by students who disagreed with them?

Superb Gorgonzola - would you tell your students that those who wanted another EU referendum were anti democratic by not accepting the result?

@Maireas

Superb Gorgonzola - would you tell your students that those who wanted another EU referendum were anti democratic by not accepting the result?

I sincerely hope that no teacher would say such a thing - it's highly divisive and inaccurate. What should ensue is a discussion about what an advisory referendum is vs a binding referendum and what that means, and what the pros and cons are - it's by no means a black and white issue and should not ever be presented as such.

Cameron said it was final. In/out. He never said well, if its leave we'll have another one.
I'm not really bothered about it, personally, it's just a point I'm making if a teacher tells students that certain groups are being anti democratic. Caution advisable.

In the UK schools are required by law to be apolitical. If they eg invite speakers from one side of a debate then they MUST also provide the opposite side.

The thing is with Trump he is a dictator in the making - would you be arguing that Saddam Hussain/Osama Bin Laden should be given an impartial hearing in the classroom?

I sincerely hope that no teacher would say such a thing - it's highly divisive and inaccurate. What should ensue is a discussion about what an advisory referendum is vs a binding referendum and what that means, and what the pros and cons are - it's by no means a black and white issue and should not ever be presented as such
I agree with you.

There is a skill in handling social and political issues in the classroom. Some teachers really excel at it (regardless of whether they choose to share or not share their views), some do it well/to a good enough standard (I'm thinking here about people who don't enjoy teaching PSHE but are good teachers), and then there's some who aren't very good at it at all.

I remember making myself scarce from the team base and staff room in the run up to the Brexit vote because I hated the endless echo chamber (and I'm a remain voter). I also advised a younger colleague to be careful where they were engaging with others who wanted to have strongly political conversations because they should not have a student audience: intentionally or otherwise.

The thing is with Trump he is a dictator in the making - would you be arguing that Saddam Hussain/Osama Bin Laden should be given an impartial hearing in the classroom?
I would be hugely concerned if I ever heard a colleague making that comparison in the classroom.
It's over emotive and inflammatory hyperbole that undermines any sense of sensible and tolerant debate.

LolaSmiles - ^^ this.

Just to add, in relation to Trump, I think I would have to talk about how he spreads mistrust of the media which is wrong
I'm not sure what you mean here. I certainly have mistrust of media of all kinds at the moment

Back in my secondary days (late 70's/early 80's) each party used to publish a manifesto (probably about 20-40 pages long).

My agnostic RE form teacher made us read them and asked us questions about them in the run up to the general election at registration.

I'd need to check the dates, but we were several years away from the voting age at the time. I remember this several decades on.

A teacher should be able to facilitate debate.

@Aesopfable

In the UK schools are required by law to be apolitical. If they eg invite speakers from one side of a debate then they MUST also provide the opposite side.

The problem I have here is with false equivalence. In some cases there is genuinely a 50/50 split, but in many cases there is not. On climate change for instance, scientific opinion isn't split 50/50 - the 'climate change is a hoax/not real' view is a minority one. How do you address this with inviting speakers in schools? Same with abortion - anti-choice organisations have a tendency to spread misinformation about it (it makes you infertile/most women regret it/it's less safe than childbirth). Again, how do you handle that in a school? There isn't an easy answer.

Being impartial is not about leaving your brain at the door - it is about applying the same level of thought and critical analysis to both sides of the argument.

So it was suggested we couldn't be impartial in discussing Saddam Hussain - of course we could and should be. If we are afraid to consider all the facts, including those in favour or against our opinion, then we are doing young people a huge disservice. Do you worry if presented with impartial facts about Saddam''s dictatorship that they might form the wrong opinion? That they can only come to a reasonable conclusion if you distort the facts and hide information?

Aesopfable absolutely not, but how would you deal with an organisation brought in to argue the other side, who are known for presenting misinformation and distorted 'facts'? I have no problem with any organisation that presents factual information, but an organisation like SPUC, for instance, has been known to be economical with the truth.

pointythings you get the kids to critically assess the information provided by both sides of the debate. Ask them to take the key claims presented by each side and trangulate that information against that from other reputable sources.

Aesopfable I have no problem with that - but it does mean requiring your students to do a certain amount of pre-reading on the subject so that they are prepared before the discussion takes place. It could be a very worthwhile activity - it's certainly worthwhile teaching students to read critically and sceptically.

@Maireas

Cameron said it was final. In/out. He never said well, if its leave we'll have another one. I'm not really bothered about it, personally, it's just a point I'm making if a teacher tells students that certain groups are being anti democratic. Caution advisable.

Oh dear raking over old ground here but the referendum was advisory, I have no idea why Cameron decided to say that (or was it because Johnson said we could have another one?)

But when the legislation was being passed Alex Salmond suggested that there should be a provision to say that the decision should only be binding if all four home nations agreed to it and David Lidington said it didn't need to be there because it wasn't binding.

I'm just making a point Cologne about how tricky this is. If a teacher talks of Trump ignoring democracy, you have to be careful not to open these cans of worms. It can get very complex and would need skilful navigation.

@vdbfamily OP's children believe that evolution is wrong, and have no doubt been told that it's wrong to be gay too. If teachers are contradicting that it can only be a good thing.

trhfxbtht

@vdbfamily OP's children believe that evolution is wrong, and have no doubt been told that it's wrong to be gay too

I am really confused. Who are you? Do you know my children. They definitely all believe in evolution and they are definitely all happy with people being of any sexual persuasion. In fact , they are not even baptised and none of them would claim to be Christian. Maybe because they have been raised to decide for themselves what they think and not just parrot what their parents think. Unless of course you know them better than me in order to make above comment. Not only have I been outed as a ' fundie' on this thread but now my kids are too. I can now see why people name change a lot....🙁

I always enjoyed it at secondary school when teachers expressed an opinion - it was part of sparking a debate. Obviously if they shut down kids’ views that would be another thing.

However there are things you can say objectively about Trump that are extremely critical, and teachers shouldn’t be stopped from saying these things as truths!

@Flaxmeadow

...I don't want teachers lecturing my grandchildren on their own personal political opinions.

history..

My grandchildren don't need to understand a history teachers own opinion on an histotical event. They need an education without bias. They need to be taught the facts, from widely accepted primary and secondary sources. They need to be presented with the evidence and allowed to make up their own minds. Their own opinions without bias from an adult

In the 1970s, as a child, I was taught about the trans atlantic slave trade (I've actually seen teachers now deny that this was taught back then, but that's another debate) . I was presented with the evidence of it. Both in text and in illustration. My teacher didnt have to give an opinion on how bad it was. The evidence spoke for itself

This is my point. As I said earlier, I had a good history teacher and i never ever knew his political leanings, not once. He never gave them. Even in such an emotive and upsetting subject. He never gave a political opinion, past or current, because it wasn't about him

I have been wondering if there isn't an age differential around the different answers on this question. I find many younger people have somehow imbibed quite a lot of this business about being authentic, by which they mean letting all their personal views come out even in settings where they really ought to be private, and often they have no idea how to be both authentic and keep appropriate boundaries.

Your thoughts about teachers leaving moral issues up to students to discern is also on point IMO. This seems to have completely disappeared, and children are given very explicit moral teaching all the way through school, often without much information to really fall back on to support it.

It comes home to roost when they get to university and are often quite impaired in their ability to think through complex questions themselves, and become upset when people challenge ideas they have learned are correct and unassailable. .

@TheFuckingDogs

The thing is with Trump he is a dictator in the making - would you be arguing that Saddam Hussain/Osama Bin Laden should be given an impartial hearing in the classroom?

Why not? Do you think they'd be convincing?