Defended JK Rowling; banned from PHSCE

[Worriedthisisactuallyhappenin]

I have name changed for this as outing and have been vague about my connection to it but I am quite involved in the situation and don’t know what advice to give.

A person I know is a teacher in an all girls school and as part of being a form tutor does PSHCE with them. Last week they were looking at cancel/call out culture and looked at the examples of JK Rowling’s discussions around trans/women’s rights. Every student in his form agreed that she was a hateful bigot that shouldn’t be allowed to say those things. They then looked at some (censored) examples of the things that were said in response to her, and the students again all agreed that they were an appropriate response to “hate speech” though a few thought they shouldn’t have been so rude. The person I know tried to encourage a bit of critical thinking and encouraged them to think how loss of female only spaces could impact people eg. rape victims, women of certain religions, and to think about who decides what is considered hate speech and how JK’s message could be considered that while the responses to her weren’t.

Since then they have been called into a meeting with the head and asked to hear their side of the story as students had complained that they were defending a transphobic bigot. Having heard their side of the story they have been told they are no longer able to teach PHSCE as it’s “obviously not working”

I don’t really know what I’m looking for, maybe just reassurance that there are still other people out there that would be worried by this!

Really sorry, not RTFT but I’m really disappointed to hear posters saying this teacher is ‘playing with fire’.
It's not that disappointing. It's the reality of teaching PSHE, which will cover controversial issues and issues that can have quite polarising views

Know when and how to go on tangents, how to facilitate exploration of related issues, how to ensure the curriculum is covered and prevent the lesson becoming a talking shop of everyone's views on assorted issues is a skill and there's a toolkit staff should have.
How staff teach issues, adapt from schemes of work, judge tangents, etc comes down to the age of the pupils, how established the member of staff is, the member of staff's knowledge on a particular topic, any awareness of which issues are currently hot topics in the school/community/year group, whether the member of staff has a strong, positive relationship with the class, the teacher is aware of their views and any blind spots this might give them in the teaching of the topic, the class have an established set of norms about how to debate and respectfully disagree and so on.

Whether it's this issue or any other hot topic issue with lots of heated debate, it's playing with fire to move away from the objectives and content in the scheme of work unless you're confident you know your stuff, confident it's contributing to the big picture of the topic, and you've got an established, positive relationship with the students.

@anaily

It was discussed and the teacher didn't like the outcome? Why can't the teacher be open minded and accept they are wrong? Why must it be that everyone who disagrees is wrong?

As you appear to think the teacher's opinion (which appears to merely have been an attempt to encourage the children's critical thinking skills at looking at a contentious point from both sides) was wrong - here's JKR's essay. Please point out the specific points which she has made that are 'transphobic'

• www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

@senua

don’t know what advice to give. Get things cleared by management first? Don't fly solo.

You have only got his side of the story. Although his attempts sounds great, your friend was mansplaining which is never a good look.

Err, no, he was teacher-splaining which is the point of the flippin' role.

He was also trying to teach critical thinking - i.e. is what you've been told JKR said even visible here in her actual words, where is your evidence? He might even have been trying to talk about gender critical views being worthy of respect in a democratic society - which is nothing to do with him being a man or the kids being girls. anyone can hold GC views. It is just teaching citizenship, free speech and democracy.

Is it not enough that the poor bloke has to teach in a school where the Kool-Aid has been deeply drunk without this kind of soft response to his predicament??

@Heruka

I am also incredibly worried by this - this does not sound at all like trying to impose own views but encourage critical thought. Which seems to be wrongthink these days.

Exactly.

@Fariha31

Wonder at which point all these young women are going to realise those rights they are givving away are...their rights, that they very may well need some day.

I was thinking about this the other morning; Is this an end of civilation thing? the distress caused by societies ending/radically changing/ recources becoming less abundant, like ours enivitably will with climate change, is causeing a subconcious, incohearent rage against women, femininity, motherhood?
Bethany Hughs did a doc about the end of Minoan civilation and they destroyed all their female gods (or something like that?)
Maybe this is the same impulse?

That's interesting if a bit scarey ! As to the OP's question , well I've had a change of heart after reading the whole thread. I did think he should try to fight it but now I don't think that would be wise. The consensus on here seems to be he was rash to use the JKR example. He was foolish to question the unanimous view that she is a bigot. And last but surely not least ; he is a man teaching in a girl's school so he will be judged to a different standard. This seems to be the position of the Head as far as we can fathom it. Many teachers on here seem to agree with her. Now he might be upset but he should also consider his own mental health. The school year has hardly started. Is it really worth all the grief he will get if he tries to fight this ? Just keep your head down and go through the motions like the other drones. Let the judges and politicians sort this mess out. It's what they're paid for.

"Looks as if the teacher was trying to impose their views on the class. And it didn't work."

Sounds like the teacher was offering an alternative viewpoint that the indoctrinated gen z sheep rejected.

Nothing was imposed.

Abhannmor
If the JKR example was in the scheme of work then someone more senior has signed off on it and he shouldn't be challenged for using it as that would be unfair. I suspect the issue will come down to the details of how some other conversations played out in the classroom, which could be anything from teenagers thinking they have all the right thinking though to a member of staff misjudging how to explore a topic, and any shades of grey in the middle.

I don't think he should roll over and accept the silly decision to be removed from teaching PSHE, and he doesn't have to get into fight, but I do think he should request an open professional discussion about the specific moments that were deemed an issue.
He won't be the first or last teacher to misjudge something in a lesson. What a good leadership team would do is break it down with him what the issue was and if a training need was identified, offer genuine help to develop in that area. Removing a member of staff from a subject on the say so of angry students is an excessive and short sighted response.

@lazylinguist

Schools are hot beds of the woke left

Sweeping statement. I live in the rural NW of England. There are some very woke teenagers in local schools and probably a few woke teachers, but not the majority. Headteachers and senior leaders will be clued-up about being careful on these matters, but it doesn't mean they are true believers.

As always, the noisy minority are just that, even though they drown everyone else out.

Sounds to me as though formal debating would have been a good way to address this issue in a classroom situation. Divide them into teams and assign a pro/anti stance. Provide some rules, it doesn't have to be as formal as competitive debating but the teacher does need to retain control and referee things.

Debating is really good for critical thinking and very popular for things like job applications and university. But at a more basic level it is a good way of getting students thinking about both sides of an issue without getting personal (because they are assigned teams so aren't necessarily speaking in favour of a view they believe). My first experience was in year 8 in history and we debated whether Henry VIII should be allowed to divorce Catherine of Aragon.

This is why i am mighty happy to be Head of Personal Development including RSE.

We do not teach gender identity as a school beyond it being a belief system some people hold.

Err, no, he was teacher-splaining which is the point of the flippin' role.
Teacher-splaining is not the point of the PHSE role, it is not up to them to moralise. It is their role to say "some people believe X, some people believe Y" and facilitate debate.
I think he got a bit carried away trying to show off his feminist credentials (look at the list in the OP of all the topics he tried to shoe-horn into one lesson) and lost sight of the mission.

I agree that he needs to go back to the SLT and see how this can be made right. Removing him from the PHSE lessons seems like a really bad idea; it undermines him.

@JesusMaryAndJosephAndTheWeeDon

Sounds to me as though formal debating would have been a good way to address this issue in a classroom situation. Divide them into teams and assign a pro/anti stance. Provide some rules, it doesn't have to be as formal as competitive debating but the teacher does need to retain control and referee things.

Debating is really good for critical thinking and very popular for things like job applications and university. But at a more basic level it is a good way of getting students thinking about both sides of an issue without getting personal (because they are assigned teams so aren't necessarily speaking in favour of a view they believe). My first experience was in year 8 in history and we debated whether Henry VIII should be allowed to divorce Catherine of Aragon.

Unfortunately my experience is that things are far gone enough that in a lot of cases, formal debate won't get any farther than this poor teacher did. The students will not accept the parameters where they have to argue for a side they do not believe in, or which they think is wrong, who see that as promoting evil.

We now live in a world where the head of a major civil liberties organisation promotes censorship.

The kids are the ones who need to wind their heads in on this and they ought to have a good talking to from the head, but clearly they are going to be supported in their thinking instead.

We get pushback when we teach kids about the harms of porn too.

Should we stop that too because the kids disagree and think its great?

Some schools have lost the plot

Very depressing if that is true. Sadly I can believe it may be having seen the way debates generally go these days. Reason is out the door and it is all about tribalism and who shouts loudest.

If nothing else it is a way for the teacher to protect themselves against accusations, whilst also trying to encourage some kind of critical thinking.

The kids are the ones who need to wind their heads in on this and they ought to have a good talking to from the head, but clearly they are going to be supported in their thinking instead
That's my concern about the head removing this teacher from PSHE lessons.
What could easily be resolved and become a CPD opportunity and a moment for reflection (because all teachers will have misjudged something at some point) risks becoming a situation where the school essentially says that if you shout loudly about staff then the school will bend accordingly. It risks the students being reinforced in the thinking pattern my opinion on X is right because it is, therefore everyone else should shut up if they think Y and Z.

Teacher-splaining is not the point of the PHSE role, it is not up to them to moralise. It is their role to say "some people believe X, some people believe Y" and facilitate debate.
I think he got a bit carried away trying to show off his feminist credentials (look at the list in the OP of all the topics he tried to shoe-horn into one lesson) and lost sight of the mission.

What rot. 'Explaining' is part of the teacher's role in any lesson. That's not the same as moralising. From what the OP described, the teacher presented (and possibly explained) the material and then encouraged discussion around the subject, encouraging students to consider what related issues could contribute to people having a variety of views on the matter. How is that moralising? How is that shoe-horning?

Totally missing the point, but I would bloody love to have my form taken off me.

Is your friend sure he's not looking a gift horse in the mouth?

How is that moralising? How is that shoe-horning?
The OP said that "The scheme of work ... was looking at call out culture". He appears to have gone over the top on the JKR example and also "encouraged them to think how loss of female only spaces could impact people eg. rape victims, women of certain religions".
The takeaway that the girls got from the lesson was that he was "defending a transphobic bigot"; the message about callout culture got totally lost.

You are just making things up to suit your own agenda, senua. Can you explain precisely what did the teacher do that was 'over the top', according to what the OP has described? And can you explain why the examples the teacher gave are not relevant to the subject? The materials in this kind of lesson are meant to be the basis for a discussion. Bringing in other relevant points related to the topic is a normal and perfectly valid thing to do. It's also often a necessary thing to do in order to fill the time allotted without going over the same points repeatedly.

Wonder at which point all these young women are going to realise those rights they are givving away are...their rights, that they very may well need some day.

Yup. I wonder this a lot.

@JesusMaryAndJosephAndTheWeeDon

Sounds to me as though formal debating would have been a good way to address this issue in a classroom situation. Divide them into teams and assign a pro/anti stance. Provide some rules, it doesn't have to be as formal as competitive debating but the teacher does need to retain control and referee things.

Debating is really good for critical thinking and very popular for things like job applications and university. But at a more basic level it is a good way of getting students thinking about both sides of an issue without getting personal (because they are assigned teams so aren't necessarily speaking in favour of a view they believe). My first experience was in year 8 in history and we debated whether Henry VIII should be allowed to divorce Catherine of Aragon.

This.

As well as getting the kids to actually read what JKR said rather than what they've been told she's said.

It might be also be a good lesson in not to believe what social media influencers say and to check source material yourself...

You are just making things up to suit your own agenda, senua.
I'm speculating, I admit. But the truth of the matter is that the teacher didn't convince his class nor did he convince the HT. He's doing something wrong.
We know he's right but that's not enough; he needs to be more persuasive. He needs to somehow get the girls to come to a more favourable conclusion under their own steam.

Can you explain precisely what did the teacher do that was 'over the top'.
He should have realised that JKR had morphed from being 'an example of callout culture' to 'the main topic of discussion'. He should have moved on to a another, different example. That's a basic teaching skill, isn't it - having more than one way of explaining something.

I've given this advice before but I'll mention it again OP.
Please advise your friend to check their household i insurance, if they don't have legal cover add it in, it won't cost a lot more.
I have recently had reason to use mine and thanks to the brilliant help I had referred another poster here to use theirs, which was also massively helpful. Both mine and the other poster had a 24/7 helpline for initial advice before being referred on to the contracted providers who were fast and furious in dealing with the respective problems.

I also extend the same advice to all the posters reading this. These are difficult times and this may be a lifeline.

But the truth of the matter is that the teacher didn't convince his class nor did he convince the HT. He's doing something wrong.

No, you're speculating again. The measure of whether a teacher is doing their job properly is not that he is saying what a bunch of teenagers want to hear. What is it you think he should have been 'convincing them' of exactly? As for the headteacher's decision - she took the cowardly route, didn't she? Unless there is a lot more to the story, she had no justification for the decision she made. Based on what the OP's description (which is all we have), her friend did nothing wrong. I hope he speaks to his union about this.

He should have realised that JKR had morphed from being 'an example of callout culture' to 'the main topic of discussion'. He should have moved on to a another, different example. That's a basic teaching skill, isn't it - having more than one way of explaining something.

My impression from the OP was that the material he'd been given was about the example of JKR, or at least that the JKR situation was part of the subject of tye material, not that he'd chosen that example and decided to focus on that alone. And yes, he did move onto other examples - of issues which have been involved in this particular area which provokes cancel culture. So yes, he was using a basic teaching skill.