# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser. Dismiss

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Create a new document and edit with others at the same time -- from your computer, phone or tablet. Get stuff done with or without an internet connection. Use Docs to edit Word files. Free from Google.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ted Talk: How to teach kids to talk about taboo topics

# data[].attributes.subject
Ted Talk: How to teach kids to talk about taboo topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Liz Kleinrock: How to teach kids to talk about taboo topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When one of Liz Kleinrock's fourth-grade students said the unthinkable at the start of a class on race, she knew it was far too important a teachable moment to miss. But where to start? Learn how Kleinrock teaches kids to discuss taboo topics without fear -- because the best way to start solving social problems is to talk about them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: How to Be an Antiracist Educator

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: How to Be an Antiracist Educator

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a social and emotional learning (SEL) practitioner-scholar, I am fortunate to get invitations to support schools and districts all over the United States. When schools and districts learn that I address SEL within the larger sociopolitical context, integrating culturally responsive and SEL practi

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: Critical consciousness: A key to student achievement 

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: Critical consciousness: A key to student achievement 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Black students can achieve at higher levels when schools teach them how to see, name, and challenge racial oppression.
Research has suggested that critical consciousness - the ability to recognize and analyze systems of inequality and the commitment to take action against these systems - can be a gateway to academic motivation and achievement for marginalized students. That was certainly the case for Terrence, a junior at One Vision High School and a participant in a school project to develop a podcast titled "Our City Today." Here's what Terrence said about his participation in this project:

I wanted opportunities to speak openly with my peers about the things that we see every day. Crime rates, drug rates, riots. I had the chance to put the past in conversation with the future. I watched a documentary that showed how police brutality and issues like that have been going on for a long time . . . [and that black] children back in the day didn't have the opportunity to come to a school like One Vision. I consider that a challenge. Sometimes I want to leave One Vision. Sometimes I want to leave so bad. But I know deep down in my heart why I'm here, so I buckle down and do my homework . . . I see the bigger picture.

A heightened critical consciousness helped Terrence commit to his schooling. Yet despite the benefits that critical consciousness development offers to students, little research has investigated how schools can develop black students' critical consciousness of racial oppression.

To help fill this gap, we studied five urban schools in the northeast that serve predominantly black student bodies and include critical consciousness development in their mission. (The names for all of the schools are pseudonyms.) Our longitudinal, mixed-methods study focused on the role schools can play in preparing youth of color to analyze, navigate, and challenge oppressive conditions in our society. Terrence was one of 50 black high school students in the class of 2017 whom we interviewed over the past three years.

A key theme emerging from these interviews is that black teenagers are attuned to the vast array of unjust structural forces operating in their communities, in society, and in their schools. Schools seeking to increase black students' academic achievement must directly address these relevant social forces. Otherwise, they're missing what Terrence calls "the bigger picture."
The case for critical consciousness
Brazilian educator Paulo Freire (1970) conceived of critical consciousness while working with adult laborers in Brazil. Freire realized that inequality is sustained when the people most affected by it are unable to decode their social conditions. Freire proposed a cycle of critical consciousness development that involved gaining knowledge about the systems and structures that create and sustain inequity (critical analysis), developing a sense of power or capability (sense of agency), and ultimately committing to take action against oppressive conditions (critical action).

Contemporary research has found that critical consciousness not only expands young people's commitment to challenging pervasive injustice (Ginwright, 2010; Watts, Diemer, & Voight, 2011) but also increases academic achievement and engagement (Carter, 2008; O'Connor, 1997). In particular, school-based programming designed to foster critical consciousness has been shown to increase academic engagement and achievement (Cabrera et al., 2014; Cammarota, 2007; Dee & Penner, 2016) and enrollment in higher education (Rogers & Terriquez, 2013). In explaining these relationships, researchers have suggested that critical consciousness of oppressive social forces can replace feelings of isolation and self-blame for one's challenges with a sense of engagement in a broader collective struggle for social justice (Diemer et al., 2014; Ginwright, 2010). Research also suggests that a critical consciousness about racism, specifically, can motivate black students to resist oppressive forces through persisting in school and achieving in academics (Carter, 2008). This motivation is often fueled by a desire to prove wrong the stereotypes embedded in racist structures and institutions (Carter, 2008; Sanders, 1997). Terrence's reflection about the persistent institutional racism he saw in his community as a challenge to stay the course in school is an example of such "achievement as resistance."
Promising practices
Three strategies emerged from our study as promising practices schools can use to develop black students' critical consciousness and harness the connection between critical consciousness and student achievement.
#1. Teach the language of inequality.
A key component of critical consciousness is the ability to recognize inequality and injustice (Watts, Griffith, & Abdul-Adil, 1999). For black students to successfully work against the conditions that create barriers to their learning, they need to notice when these barriers are at play and be able to communicate and explain what they notice. For example, Terrence's participation in the "Our City Today" project gave him time and space to "see" his community and understand its challenges at a deeper level, and it also gave him access to language to explain what he noticed. Educators can support such development in their students by introducing a framework for analyzing inequity.

Make the Road Academy (MtRA), another high school in our study, introduced students to a framework for recognizing forms of racism in society. Students learned that racism can be transmitted in three ways: through interpersonal racism, racism that occurs between individuals, institutional racism, racism that is expressed by and through social and political institutions, and internalized racism, racist beliefs that marginalized groups hold against themselves. Teachers taught this framework, called The Three I's, over several lessons. In one lesson our research team observed, students practiced their comprehension of each of the forms of racism by reviewing examples of racism from their community:

Teacher: How about when TV personality Judge Joe Brown tells black children they will be criminals in the courtroom?

Student 1: I called it interpersonal because he's telling kids a stereotype.

Teacher: Exactly. Or when liquor stores are strategically placed on every corner in urban neighborhoods?

Student 2: I put institutional. They're placing liquor stores in urban neighborhoods so a lot of people will smoke and drink.

Teacher: What about blacks believing their hair isn't beautiful, so they buy "better" hair from other races?

Student 3: Institutional?

Student 4: Internalized oppression because society says that black people have coarse or knotty hair, and [some black women] believe it.

Teacher: [to clarify] When any race or group of people starts believing the stereotypes about them, this is internalized oppression.

Later, students were asked to diagram an urban neighborhood where racism was present and label each example with the appropriate "I" in the framework. Students drew a range of images:

A business advertising for a job indicating, "No blacks" (institutional racism);

A black student on a basketball court saying, "This is all I can do" (internalized racism); and

A police officer racially profiling a black motorist (interpersonal racism).

Offering students language to distinguish among different types of racism gave them a tool that helped them read the world. One MtRA student, Mason, explained:

In school, they're really teaching us how to be able to recognize it [racism] more. If you were to ask me a couple years back if I knew what internalized oppression was, I wouldn't be able to tell you 'cause I didn't know. But I know what it is now.

This clarity and language offer profound benefits. Oppression is easiest to sustain when the disenfranchised ignore it, miss it, or support it rather than resist it (Watts et al., 1999). Critical consciousness and the associated language of inequality make racial injustice visible. In schools, this visibility creates an opening for educators to discuss the role that social forces play in students' lives and in students' learning opportunities and outcomes.
#2. Create space to interrogate racism.
In addition to being able to recognize inequity and describe it, students need to understand the depths of inequality and the myriad forces that sustain it. Terrence described his new understanding of the long history of police brutality in the lives of black people as powerful learning. It provided him with the motivation to persist and excel academically. Recognizing that such consciousness about inequality could both deepen their students' academic motivation and ability to resist racial injustice, each school in our study used different practices to create spaces within students' everyday schoolwork to facilitate learning about race inequality.

At Leadership High School, for example, 11th- and 12th-grade students participated in a semester-long English seminar focused on the black experience (another was offered on the Latino experience). The seminars created a space within school for students to learn about issues of race and racial identity and better understand how racial inequity works systemically and in their own lives. In the Black Experience seminar, students read Ta-Nehisi Coates's Between the World and Me (2015), a book that analyzes how black bodies are treated in the United States. After reading the book, the students discussed the underlying mindsets and systemic forces that contributed to the disregard for black bodies during slavery and continue to contribute to the persistent disregard for these bodies today. For most students in the class, who are navigating society in black skin, this conversation contributes to their understanding of their personal experiences with racial inequity.

Schools in our study also make time to discuss racial inequity that students see on the news, in social media, and in their communities. Following a series of protests in the community as part of the Black Lives Matter movement, the principal asked her faculty to allot time during morning advisory for students to discuss and reflect on the following three questions:

What systemic issues are in place in Baltimore that could have led to the riots?

What do you think Baltimore's response should be to the riots? What should the governor's response be? What should the federal response be?

What action steps do you think we must take as a society to address police brutality in the United States?

In this and other instances, the conversations were not a part of the intended schedule, yet educators recognized the importance of these events in students' lives and took advantage of the opportunity to develop students' critical consciousness. To truly integrate critical consciousness development into the work of school, schools need to be prepared to fold in these conversations spontaneously when the need arises.
#3. Teach students how to take action.
When people understand the social, economic, and political forces threatening their communities, they're more likely to engage in activities that challenge those forces (Ginwright, 2010). In a third school in our study, Community Academy, the humanities curriculum introduced students to historical and contemporary methods for resistance.

In a 9th-grade lesson on apartheid in South Africa, for example, students discussed the differences between civil disobedience and militant resistance and debated their respective effectiveness in social change efforts:

Teacher: OK, the setting is 1961. The Sharpeville massacre just happened. You're a member of the African National Congress, and you have to decide what to do.

Student 1: I said we should do militant resistance because [the protesters] tried to be peaceful, and it didn't work.

Student 2: My opinion is militant resistance. [The protesters] really touched the government on some basics like shutting off their power plant or attacking government buildings and power stations. But they were avoiding killing people. I feel like that's important because it was like sending the government a warning and getting their point across by hurting what the government really needed.

Student 3: I disagree because they're not going to listen to you if you're not peaceful.

Student 2: Well, I'm not saying violence is the key, but, in this case, it really was. You have to fight fire with fire on this one. [The police] was treating [the protesters] all unfair. And when they marched peacefully, [the police] was like, "We don't care." They spit in their face.

Student 4: I disagree because either way everyone dies, and that doesn't solve anything.

In this lesson, students were learning how resistance happens, as well as the possible implications of different types of resistance. Such lessons position students to act against inequity in thoughtful and strategic ways. For example, as a part of the Black Lives Matter movement, numerous students at Community Academy participated in a citywide walkout and protest. One student, Missy, clearly linked this experience to her learning about different types of social action in humanities class. As she explained:

First I was like, I don't know what me marching out here is gonna do 'cause they can't personally hear what I want to say. But like we learned in humanities, civil disobedience will actually get us to where we want to be if we do it without violence and with words.

Through such instruction, Community Academy shows students how to resist in ways that overcome racism as a barrier to success and that have positive long-term outcomes for both individuals and communities. Scholars suggest that understanding adaptive strategies of resistance leads students to identify academic achievement as part of a collective struggle (Carter, 2008).
Empowered to achieve
A robust body of scholarship makes clear that disparities in academic learning outcomes between black students and peers from other racial groups are directly linked to a wide array of structural injustices in the United States against the black community. These include biased housing policies, gaps in economic opportunities, the over-incarceration of black men and women, rampant police brutality, and the unequal allocation of resources to schools (Carter & Welner, 2013). As educators, we cannot claim to be concerned with closing academic gaps without taking seriously the question of how to give black students the language and skills they need to understand the social conditions working against them.

Nor can we ignore the profound social change and academic benefits of nurturing students' critical consciousness. Through providing a framework and a language for analysis, making space to talk about inequity, and teaching students how to take action, schools can integrate students' sociopolitical realities into their ongoing work and contribute to critical consciousness development.

At the end of his interview, Terrence shared something he claimed he had never told anyone before. "This project changed me," he said. His reaction isn't just the isolated narrative of one black student. It's reflective of the transformative possibilities of committing to critical consciousness development in schools.
References
Cabrera, N., Milem, J., Jaquette, O., & Marx, R. (2014). Missing the (student achievement) forest for all the (political) trees: Empiricism and the Mexican-American studies controversy in Tucson. American Educational Research Journal, 51 (6), 1084-1118.

Cammarota, J. (2007). A social justice approach to achievement: Guiding Latina/o students toward educational attainment with a challenging, socially relevant curriculum. Equity & Excellence in Education, 40 (1), 87-96.

Carter, D.J. (2008). Cultivating a critical race consciousness for African-American school success. Educational Foundations, 22 (1-2), 11-28.

Carter, P.L. & Welner, K. (2013). Closing the opportunity gap: What America must do to give every child an even chance. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Coates, T. (2015). Between the world and me. New York, NY: Penguin Random House.

Dee, T. & Penner, E. (2016). The causal effects of cultural relevance: Evidence from an ethnic studies curriculum. CEPA Working Paper No. 16-01. https://cepa.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/wp16-01-v201601.pdf

Diemer, M., Rapa, L., Park, C., & Perry, J. (2014). Development and validation of a critical consciousness scale. Youth & Society, 1-23.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Herder & Herder.

Ginwright, S. (2010). Black youth rising: Activism and racial healing in urban America. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

O'Connor, C. (1997). Dispositions toward collective struggle and educational resilience in the inner city: A case analysis of six African-American high school students. American Educational Research Journal, 34 (4), 593-629.

Rogers, J. & Terriquez, V. (2013). Learning to lead: The impact of youth organizing on the educational and civic trajectories of low-income youth. Los Angeles, CA: Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.

Sanders, M.G. (1997). Overcoming obstacles: Academic achievement as a response to racism and discrimination. Journal of Negro Education, 66 (1), 83-93.

Watts, R., Diemer, M., & Voight, A. (2011). Critical consciousness: Current status and future directions. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 134, 43-57.

Watts, R., Griffith, D., & Abdul-Adil, J. (1999). Sociopolitical development as an antidote for oppression: Theory and action. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 255-272.

Originally published in February 2017 Phi Delta Kappan 98 (5), 18-23. © 2017 Phi Delta Kappa International. All rights reserved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Critical consciousness: A key to student achievement - kappanonline.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Black students can achieve at higher levels when schools teach them how to see, name, and challenge racial oppression.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An analysis of teaching standards in all 50 states to better understand whether states incorporate culturally responsive teaching.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: How to Talk "Taboo" Topics with Young Students

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: How to Talk "Taboo" Topics with Young Students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's the last trimester of the school year, and we are in the middle of a unit on the social construction of race. I ask my students, who are 8 and 9 years old, to think about the first time they learned about race. Many share that they notice and wonder about skin color but thought it was rude to discuss. A few remember learning about race through lessons about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Some have been called racially biased words and names. Others ask questions about racial struggles Brown people face and why we don't have more lessons about them.

I'm often asked by eager teachers how to facilitate conversations about difference and inclusion. Although my students demonstrate comfort with sharing their thoughts on topics such as race and gender, we do not begin the school year by diving into the deep end.

To cultivate a learning space where everyone feels comfortable sharing their experiences and asking tough questions, there must be mutual trust and respect between the students and facilitator, as well as intentional planning by the classroom teacher.

Do the Personal Work

Before planning your first lesson, ask yourself: Are you reflecting on your own identity, biases, and dominant culture beliefs and accepting what you don't know? Have you considered how these facets might affect the way you frame questions and respond to students?

You must also maintain awareness of yourself, your students' experiences, your community, and your history. For example, as a person of East Asian descent, I recognize the "model minority" stereotype that often follows Asian students but also have to be aware of my own implicit biases that may affect my Black students and their families. I completed the Me and White Supremacy Workbook by Layla F. Saad, which walks readers through personal reflection on racial bias. The Guide for White Women Who Teach Black Boys, edited by Eddie Moore, Ali Michael, and Marguerite W. Penick-Parks, was an important text as I examined how race and other aspects of identity affect Black students' school experiences.

Although this work is emotionally laborious, it is crucial to recognize that self-education is ongoing. Building comfort while leading lessons on "taboo" subjects can be intimidating. You will absolutely make mistakes. But it is humanizing for students to see teachers acknowledge when they don't have all the answers and to show that adults expect and inspect their mistakes.

Create Community, Not Hierarchy

Diversity advocate Vernā Myers is noted for saying, "Diversity is being invited to the party; inclusion is being asked to dance." To be able to take on the tough topics, you must create a classroom culture based on autonomy, trust, and mutual respect-not hierarchy. How are you creating space for students to take ownership of their learning and operate with autonomy?

During the first few weeks of the school year, I prioritize social-emotional lessons and community building over academics. You can always go back and reteach a math lesson, but creating a positive classroom culture from the start is something you cannot afford to get wrong.

To develop trust and prepare my students for upcoming conversations on topics such as race and gender, I want them to know that I am accountable to them. One of my first lessons involves reading Patricia Polacco's book Thank You Mr. Falker and charting what qualities make an effective teacher. My students list their expectations for me, which I write into a contract for them to review. When they agree on a final draft, I sign the "teacher agreement" in front of them. Throughout the year, I remind them that our community only operates well when both trust and mutual respect are in place.

The first time I created a multi-lesson unit on race and racism, I wanted my 4th grade students to understand the importance of conversations, so I set them up to listen and discuss issues that many adults try to avoid. We brainstormed about the environment and behaviors we would need to cultivate for everyone to be vulnerable and created an agreement that we followed for every lesson:

Share what you're comfortable with.

Ask questions and ask them with positive intent.

Seek to understand; don't criticize others if they don't understand.

Show respect to everyone, regardless of opinions.

Give positive suggestions.

don't share other people's personal business.

Expect and respect mistakes.

Avoid jumping to conclusions and judgmental words (e.g., good, bad, right, wrong).

Use a Social Justice Lens

If you're passionate about issues of equity and inclusion, it's easy to want to take on everything at once. Educators often ask how I manage to teach about difference and inclusion in addition to core subjects and required standards. Equity and inclusion issues should not be confined to a single block in your agenda. Instead, think of them as a lens through which you can teach other subjects. If you're teaching a nonfiction reading unit on biographies, choose texts that feature the lives of Black people, indigenous people, and other people of color. If your students are crafting opinion essays, why not have them write about current events or social issues? If you're a STEM teacher, how can you incorporate equity issues like financial literacy and environmental justice?

When I taught 2nd grade, I integrated a unit on gender stereotyping into our reading and writing curriculum. To introduce the concept of stereotyping, my students brainstormed how the media portrays teachers and kids and reflected on these representations' validity. They cut up advertisements for Halloween costumes and sorted them based on boy and girl stereotypes, then questioned the effect of these marketing messages (see table). The children read folktales and classic fairytales from all over the world and noted how the stories portrayed men and women. As part of our persuasive writing unit, students wrote letters to toy and clothing companies, asking them to be mindful of perpetuating gender stereotypes.

Talking Stereotypes: Halloween Costumes

We addressed all curricular requirements and standards, but the lens through which we studied expanded students' worldview on gender difference and inclusion. In the past few years, I have also expanded the conversations to include how people who are non-binary or transgender are affected by gender stereotypes.

What to Do When Issues Arise?

Many teachers avoid talking about race because they worry about confrontation or other difficult situations. I experienced this when one of my 4th grade students made a racially insensitive remark. Rather than discipline the student, I explained to the class that this moment was an example of why we need to learn about racism in the first place. I highlighted that racist words and acts stem from stereotypical and biased beliefs about people of color, often rooted in physical characteristics. Drawing attention to this truth was uncomfortable, but in order for students to unlearn racial biases, we have to put a spotlight on those problematic beliefs.

I shared this experience during my TED Talk, " How to Teach Kids to Talk About Taboo Topics ." Some teachers who watched the talk admitted they wouldn't have known how to handle the incident and their "fight or flight" instincts would have kicked in. Others sent me angry messages that my reaction toward the student wasn't harsh enough, that I shouldn't protect the feelings of my white students, and that I shouldn't let such ignorance stand.

What I didn't share in my TED Talk is that my classroom is incredibly diverse and the student who made that comment isn't white. Even when working in a racially diverse community, stereotypes, biases, and prejudices are always present. This was an opportunity to remind my students that people who are Black or Brown can still harm one another, and we need to be aware of the ways we marginalize each other.

During these conversations, ignorant comments and questions will most likely arise. Remember that all questions come from a place of ignorance, and both children and adults have a lot to learn about discussing race, gender, and religion.

We should question, rather than shame, students for their ignorance:

"I'm curious: Where did you hear that word, and do you know what it means?"

"What was your intent by making that comment?"

"How do you think it makes your classmates feel when you use that word?"

This approach holds students accountable without shaming them. (The Teaching Tolerance article " Speaking Up Without Tearing Down " by Loretta J. Ross also has effective strategies.)

Expecting these lessons and conversations to unfold perfectly is unrealistic. Nevertheless, it's important to be prepared to respond and facilitate when issues arise.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Talk "Taboo" Topics with Young Students - ASCD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's the last trimester of the school year, and we are in the middle of a unit on the social construction of race. I ask my students, who are 8 and 9 years old, to think about the first time they learned about race.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: Helping Students Discuss Race Openly

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: Helping Students Discuss Race Openly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Julie Landsman has contributed to Educational Leadership.Learn More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Helping Students Discuss Race Openly - ASCD

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the November after the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, a national news broadcast showed two combined classes of high school students discussing the incident, the police, and the protests. The combined class was evenly distributed among Latino, African American, and white students

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: Taking a reasoned stance against misinformation

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: Taking a reasoned stance against misinformation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Teachers need a framework to help them determine what issues are open for discussion and what evidence is worthy of consideration in the classroom.
In spring 2020, a conflict erupted across the United States over how best to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. As state-mandated shelter-in-place orders pushed into late April 2020, "reopen rallies" began popping up in state capitals. While many protesters at these rallies were rightly concerned about the economic implications of these shutdowns on their livelihoods, interviews with attendees and photographs from these events showed that many were using faulty evidence to make their case. Among their assertions were such scientifically debunked claims as COVID-19 being no deadlier than the common flu, or the virus posing no risk to otherwise healthy people under 65 years old. Across social media, people who supported the shutdowns reacted to these protests with a mixture of disdain and incredulity, citing evidence that illustrated both the lethality of COVID-19 and the effectiveness of the shutdowns on slowing the spread of the virus.

The controversy surrounding the COVID-19 response is just one example of how political polarization has come to encompass the news Americans consume, the perspectives we encounter on social media, and even our daily interactions with our neighbors. To understand those who protest against shutdowns, one must consider what they are hearing within the media echo chambers in which they choose to reside. In the spring of 2020, these echo chambers were filled with cable news pundits, radio hosts, and politicians using scientifically dubious claims and outright falsehoods to downplay the threat of COVID-19, with some even dismissing it as a hoax perpetuated by mainstream media outlets (Bump, 2020). Many religious leaders across the United States downplayed the virus, holding services in defiance of shutdown orders and claiming that COVID-19 could be eradicated through prayer alone (Jenkins, 2020). During his daily televised press briefings, then-President Donald Trump would regularly contradict or dismiss advice given by medical professionals based solely on hunches that he had at the time (Shane, 2020).

As the reopen rallies attest, relying on information sources that ignore or contradict science and other forms of expertise can have real-world consequences. It also poses challenges to K-12 education. Students encounter much of the same misinformation that adults do, and research shows that they often bring such heavily biased or inaccurate information into classroom discussions (Segall et al., 2019). When teachers attempt to broach contested issues in the classroom, they often find themselves having to address poor information, prejudices, or beliefs that cannot be objectively evaluated.

Fortunately, the literature on teaching controversial issues offers a road map that can help teachers navigate such tensions. If they can point to clear and reasonable guidelines that explain why they will entertain some arguments but not others - including arguments that may be popular with some students and parents - then that puts them on firmer ground. They can show that they've been principled and fair-minded in deciding which ideas deserve to be taken seriously in the classroom, and they can protect themselves from the accusation that those decisions are politically partisan, or that they're trying to indoctrinate students.

Determining what issues are open for discussion

One of a teacher's most important roles is that of curricular gatekeeper (Thornton, 1991). There is not enough time in the school day or space in the curriculum to give credence to every possible opinion or disagreement; therefore, teachers have a responsibility to determine which issues and beliefs are worthy of exploring. At the same time, the open exchange of ideas is a hallmark of a democratic education, and teachers should not take the decision to silence a student's beliefs lightly (Callan, 2011).

When teachers attempt to broach contested issues in the classroom, they often find themselves having to address poor information, prejudices, or beliefs that cannot be objectively evaluated.

Diana Hess's delineation of "open" versus "settled" issues is helpful here (Hess, 2009; Hess & McAvoy, 2015; Richardson, 2017). According to Hess, open issues are those on which more than one rational or reasonable position can be taken, and settled issues are those on which there is only one such position. When teachers broach open issues in the classroom, all rational or reasonable positions should receive a fair hearing. With settled issues, however, teachers should avoid debates and instead provide students with the settled position and describe any competing beliefs as unreasonable.

At first glance, it may seem straightforward enough to distinguish between settled and open issues. In practice, however, that distinction can easily blur. For instance, issues often "tip" from open to settled - until the passage of the 13th Amendment, the right to enslave people was very much an open question to many Americans, but it has been a settled matter ever since. So, too, can issues tip from settled to open, and issues can even tip multiple times. To borrow an example from Hess (2009), when President Franklin Roosevelt issued the executive order to imprison Japanese Americans during World War II, it was largely a settled issue - most people agreed with the decision as a matter of national security, and the Supreme Court affirmed Roosevelt's order. In the decades following the war, people began to question the morality of the order to the point that the legacy of Japanese American internment became an open issue. By the mid-1970s, the issue began to tip again, this time toward a settled position that Roosevelt's executive order was immoral, a position that was cemented by multiple public apologies by the federal government and the Civil Liberties Act of 1988, which paid reparations to living survivors of the internment.

Further, just because an issue is open, that doesn't mean all arguments about it are valid. If students make claims that lack evidence, are based solely on personal prejudice, or are otherwise unreasonable, then teachers are obligated to point that out. For example, the question of when to end shutdowns during a pandemic is an open issue; people can take very different but equally reasonable positions on what to do, and it would be appropriate to discuss those options in a classroom. But it would not be reasonable for a student to argue, in support of the idea that lockdowns should be outlawed, that COVID-19 is no more dangerous than the flu. Among the vast majority of epidemiologists and other medical experts, the severity of the coronavirus is a settled matter.

In the heat of a national debate or when passions are inflamed, it is even more important to not conflate settled and open positions. Determining the openness of issues, however, can be difficult. Unfortunately, there is no single, agreed-upon method for determining which issues are open. However, scholars have identified four criteria for making these judgments - one of those criteria is generally viewed to be faulty, and three are viewed as helpful.
An issue isn't open just because someone contradicts it
It is instructive to begin with the criterion that scholars usually dismiss as unhelpful: the behavioral criterion, which suggests that issues should be framed as open (i.e., worthy of deliberation) if any contradictory positions exist (Bailey, 1971). The problem is that one can find a contradictory opinion to even the most settled of issues. For instance, although the roundness of the Earth has been considered scientific fact for at least 500 years, there are still some people who believe the Earth to be flat (Wolchover, 2017). Using the behavioral criterion, we would have to tell science teachers that since a few of their students believe outrageous theories about the danger of sailing off the edge of the planet, they should "teach the controversy" about the Earth's shape - but that would be ridiculous.

Moreover, people sometimes take contradictory positions even when they know the evidence doesn't back them up. For instance, consider the unfounded claim that President Barack Obama was born outside the United States. Even in 2016, at the end of Obama's second term in office, approximately 30% of Americans believed he was born in Kenya (Frankovic, 2017). It may be tempting to assume that those people are simply misinformed, like students who insist that the Earth is flat. However, researchers have found that Republican voters who are relatively knowledgeable about political affairs are more likely than those with less political knowledge to claim that Obama was born in Kenya (Jardina & Traugott, 2019). Presumably, then, many "birthers" are not misinformed at all, and they are well aware that they have no evidence to support their case. They don't make that assertion because they're confused or have been misled. Rather, they do so for rhetorical effect, or perhaps because they want it to be true.

If students make claims that lack evidence, are based solely on personal prejudice, or are otherwise unreasonable, then teachers are obligated to point that out.

When I work with pre- and in-service teachers on teaching controversial issues, I often use those two examples. Almost without exception, teachers are quick to agree that the shape of the Earth is a settled issue and that there's no reason to consider the flat-Earthers' perspective. But those same teachers waffle as to whether they should entertain discussion of the birther claim - not because they believe it to be valid, but because they worry that many of their students (and the parents of those students) hold that belief and appear to have strong convictions about it. Yet, if the goal is to determine whether a topic is worth deliberating, it shouldn't matter how strongly students insist on false beliefs. That's no way to decide whether a controversial issue belongs in the classroom.
Three helpful ways to decide
The scholarly literature offers three more useful approaches to determining whether an issue is open for deliberation, each of which has strengths and limitations. The epistemic criterion (Hand, 2008) contends that openness should be determined solely on the basis of empirical data and what can be reasonably proven. For instance, the epistemic criterion would consider the question of whether evolution should be taught as part of the biology curriculum as a settled issue given the overwhelming amount of empirical data to suggest that the theory of evolution is scientific fact. However, critics have argued that this sets the bar for openness too high, particularly given that much political and social discourse is fueled by convictions that may lack empirical backing, such as religious beliefs or individual experiences with racism, sexism, or homophobia (Hess & McAvoy, 2015). Many people, for example, disagree with the theory of evolution and believe it should not be taught in public education classrooms due to their religious beliefs.

The political criterion (Gutmann, 1999) suggests that, when determining whether an argument belongs in the classroom, teachers should entertain some views - such as arguments based in religious beliefs - even though they cannot be empirically verified. That is, teachers should not suppress students' arguments unless they are in clear violation of settled stances that have been widely agreed upon within society. For example, a 2017 report by Equality Now found that in a number of countries, it was legally permissible to rape one's spouse; in the United States, however, rape of any kind has been deemed unacceptable by society and the legal system, which should prevent teachers from validating any belief to the contrary. In short, what distinguishes the political criterion from the behavioral criterion is that teachers have some latitude to censor extreme or abhorrent beliefs, while still permitting students to make arguments grounded in their personal convictions.

But of course, determining what issues are socially settled requires some subjective judgment, and critics have argued that this ambiguity opens the door to bigoted positions being deemed acceptable (Hand, 2008). For example, the political criterion would frame the question of whether a business owner could refuse service to someone based on their race as a settled issue because, as a society, it has become widely agreed upon - based on court cases and overwhelming societal sentiment - that such forms of racial discrimination are wrong. However, society has not yet reached that same conclusion regarding same-sex couples; under the political criterion, it would be acceptable for a business owner to refuse service to a same-sex couple if they feel as though doing so would violate their private religious views.

The politically authentic criterion (Hess & McAvoy, 2015) takes a more pragmatic approach. It suggests that teachers should frame issues as open to deliberation if they have traction in the public sphere, such as appearing on ballots or being debated by legislatures. However, while this approach makes it easier for teachers to identify open issues that they might want to bring into the classroom, there is no guarantee that such issues are being debated using empirical or trustworthy evidence. Politicians and pundits often form opinions based on convictions that are not defensible, and being elected into positions of power does not automatically make one qualified to properly analyze data. The questioning of the validity of mail-in ballots in the wake of the 2020 presidential election is a perfect example. All of the available data suggest that mail-in voting is a secure way to cast one's ballot; however, it became an open political issue for those who did not want to accept the results of the election.

While all three of these criteria have their limitations, they are all useful for teachers to consider when trying to determine what issues to raise for discussion in their classrooms and what kinds of evidence to take seriously in those discussions: Do the empirical data show that the issue is settled, or is it still open? If it's not an issue that lends itself to data-driven conclusions, then is it an argument that's appropriate to consider at all, given our cultural values and laws? And is it an issue that the public and its political representatives are actually debating?

For many, perhaps most, of the issues that teachers might consider bringing up for deliberation in the classroom, all three of these criteria would point in the same direction. Consider, for example, questions such as whether we should legalize the selling of marijuana, abolish the death penalty, lower the voting age, or make assisted suicide legal (see www.procon.org for more possibilities). Scientists haven't settled any of these issues (epistemic criterion), none of them are clearly inappropriate topics for discussion (political criterion), and all have been raised in public and political forums in recent years (politically authentic criterion). Further, teachers can easily use these criteria in concert to help justify potentially difficult or unpopular pedagogical decisions. For example, in a previous article (Journell, 2018), I made the argument that although same-sex marriage may feel like an open issue given that there are many Americans who still oppose it, teachers can use all three criteria to make a case that same-sex marriage should be framed as settled post Obergefell v. Hodges.

Still, though, there will be times when one of these criterion suggests that a topic is appropriate for a classroom deliberation, but another criterion suggests it isn't. In that case, what should teachers do?

When the criteria disagree

Typically, when the criteria diverge, it is in response to an issue that is settled under the epistemic criterion but open under one or both of the other two. Consider, for example, the issue of climate change. The overwhelming majority of scientists (97%) agree that the Earth is warming, likely due to human activities (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, n.d.). From the perspective of the epistemic criterion, then, the issue is settled. However, some students may object due to religious beliefs (e.g., James, 2008), and global warming continues to be debated at the highest levels of the government, perhaps most famously by Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe bringing a snowball onto the Senate floor as evidence that global warming is a hoax (Barrett, 2015) or, more recently by President Trump, who described global warming as a hoax and repeatedly questioned the scientific consensus on the issue (Cheung, 2020). Thus, a case could be made that the issue is open according to the political or politically authentic criteria.

In this time of widespread dissemination of alternative facts and misinformation, teachers have a responsibility to turn classrooms into spaces where reason and inquiry trump ignorance and hyperbole.

Given such conflicting guidance, what teachers choose to do will depend on multiple factors, such their subject area, the political context in which they teach, and the safety of their students. For instance, a science teacher may choose to take the epistemic position and inform her students that climate change is a settled issue. A civics teacher, on the other hand, may treat the issue as open, encouraging students not just to deliberate it but, as they do so, to think critically about the differing types of evidence and sources of beliefs policy makers must consider when making decisions. I would argue that either approach is acceptable, given the contrasting pedagogical aims of those courses.

I've found that in these contested cases, teachers often lean instinctively toward the political or politically authentic criteria because they validate multiple worldviews and allow more students to feel comfortable sharing their perspectives. However, teachers should be aware that many issues touch on students' personal identities, and framing them as open when no empirical data exist to warrant doing so could be harmful. Consider, for example, the issue of laws banning transgender individuals from using the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity (which I have explored in greater detail elsewhere; Journell, 2017). These laws are based on the premise that public safety is at risk if transgender individuals use the bathrooms they prefer; however, there are no empirical data to support those assertions. In fact, all of the available data suggest that it is transgender individuals who face physical and psychological danger if they are forced to use the bathroom that corresponds to the sex listed on their birth certificate.

As a result, I would not frame such laws as open issues in my classroom because, without data to support assertions of a risk to public safety, these types of laws play to unsubstantiated and transphobic stereotypes. Framing this issue as open in classrooms would, in my opinion, grant legitimacy to bigoted beliefs, which not only would be potentially harmful to any transgender students in the class but also goes against the purpose of a democratic education. I would argue that the same logic could be applied to the Obama birther issue; without legitimate data suggesting that Obama was born outside the United States, such claims are grounded solely in racism and xenophobia and do not deserve to be validated in a public classroom.

A time to be thoughtful

In this time of widespread dissemination of alternative facts and misinformation, teachers have a responsibility to turn classrooms into spaces where reason and inquiry trump ignorance and hyperbole. But doing so often requires teachers to take a stance regarding what issues are worthy of deliberation and what information warrants consideration, and the decisions teachers make may be risky, as teachers are generally expected to be politically neutral, and expressions of their political beliefs can expose them to accusations of bias (Journell, 2016). That's why it's important for teachers to follow established criteria for making pedagogical decisions.

Having a clear framework that enables them to justify their decisions to students, parents, and administrators will hopefully mitigate the risks that come with opening the floor to discussion of controversial topics. More important, modeling thoughtful discernment and being transparent about which topics are open for deliberation and what information is acceptable to bring to a discussion is a valuable lesson unto itself, one that students can use outside the classroom and into their adult lives.

References

Bailey, C. (1971). Rationality, democracy and the neutral teacher. Cambridge Journal of Education, 1 (2), 68-76.

Barrett, T. (2015, February 27). Inhofe brings snowball on Senate floor as evidence globe is not warming. CNN.

Bump, P. (2020, March 12). For weeks, conservative media joined Trump in downplaying the threat of the coronavirus. The Washington Post.

Callan, E. (2011). When to shut students up: Civility, silencing, and free speech. Theory and Research in Education, 9 (1), 3-22.

Cheung, H. (2020, January 23). What does Trump actually believe on climate change? BBC News.

Equality Now. (2017). The world's shame: The global rape epidemic. New York, NY: Author.

Frankovic, K. (2017, December 8). Republicans see little need for the Russia investigation. YouGov.

Gutmann, A. (1999). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hand, M. (2008). What should we teach as controversial? A defense of the epistemic criterion. Educational Theory, 58 (2), 213-228.

Hess, D.E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hess, D.E. & McAvoy, P. (2015). The political classroom: Evidence and ethics in democratic education. New York, NY: Routledge.

James, J.H. (2008). "Democracy is the devil's snare": Theological certainty in teacher education. Theory & Research in Social Education, 38 (4), 618-639.

Jardina, A. & Traugott, M. (2019). The genesis of the birther rumor: Partisanship, racial attitudes, and political knowledge. Journal of Race, Ethnicity, and Politics, 9 (1), 60-80.

Jenkins, J. (2020, March 13). Some Trump evangelical advisors offer tempered response to coronavirus. Religion News Service.

Journell, W. (2016). Teacher political disclosure as parrhēsia. Teachers College Record, 118 (5), 1-36.

Journell, W. (2017). Framing controversial identity issues in schools: The case of HB2, bathroom equity, and transgender students. Equity & Excellence in Education, 50 (4), 339-354.

Journell, W. (2018). Should marriage equality be taught as controversial post- Obergefell v Hodges? Teachers College Record, 120 (8), 1-28.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (n.d.). Scientific consensus: Earth's climate is warming. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Richardson, J. (2017). Using controversy as a teaching tool: An interview with Diana Hess. Phi Delta Kappan, 99 (4), 15-20.

Segall, A., Crocco, M.S., Halvorson, A., & Jacobsen, R. (2019). Teaching in the twilight zone of misinformation, disinformation, alternative facts, and fake news. In W. Journell (Ed.), Unpacking fake news: An educator's guide to navigating the media with students (pp. 74-91). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Shane, P.M. (2020, April 1). Trump shouldn't be able to fire Fauci for contradicting him. The Atlantic.

Thornton, S.J. (1991). Teacher as curricular-instructional gatekeeper in social studies. In J.P. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning (pp. 237-248). New York, NY: MacMillan.

Wolchover, N. (2017, May 30). Are flat-earthers being serious? Live Science.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Taking a reasoned stance against misinformation - kappanonline.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teachers need a framework to help them determine what issues are open for discussion and what evidence is worthy of consideration in the classroom. In spring 2020, a conflict erupted across the United States over how best to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

# data[].attributes.headline
Article: How to Lead Uncomfortable Class Discussions

# data[].attributes.subject
Article: How to Lead Uncomfortable Class Discussions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As educators, we want our students to be able to discuss sensitive topics that are centered in their own values and those of their classmates. This experience-particularly during emotionally charged times like the one we are encountering now-is a critical part of learning, and it's essential for students' personal and professional development.

Yet while we recognize the importance of these discussions, pursuing what could be an unpredictable and uncomfortable conversation is admittedly intimidating. After all, we have class dynamics, student relationships, and our own reputation on the line.

An important first step in encouraging these challenging yet necessary conversations is to establish a shared set of norms with students at the beginning of your course. The next step is to determine how to reinforce these norms throughout the course and lead difficult discussions when they happen.

Here, I'll suggest some strategies for how educators can effectively lead challenging classroom conversations. I'll also offer specific examples of what to say to students at particular moments in class.

At the Beginning of Class

If you plan to discuss a sensitive topic or anticipate a challenging conversation, refer back to the norms set at the beginning of the course, such as the four Cs: curiosity, candor, courtesy, and courage.

It's important to remember that by asking students to express their views candidly, we're asking them to be vulnerable. One of the fears students may have is being misunderstood or being unable to respond after making their initial point. I assure students that they will have a chance to come back into the conversation, and I always look for their raised hand in case they would like to respond.

Some other possible prompts include the following:

"It takes courage to voice our candid perspectives, and it takes even more courage to listen to and understand perspectives that are different from-or are in opposition to-ours."

"Listening and understanding is not the same as agreeing. Being willing to listen and understand is how learning happens. Learning takes courage."

"Let's be mindful to express our opinions and respond to others with courtesy, assuming good intentions behind each comment."

"While none of us mean to offend, it can happen unintentionally. Since we are in a learning environment, I ask you to let us know if you feel offended. I recognize that it is difficult to voice, and you might be concerned about coming across as overly sensitive. It is also hard to hear without feeling defensive. Yet voicing it and hearing it are important parts of our learning-so we must do so, and do so courteously."

If you discussed sensitive topics in earlier sessions, affirm and build on your willingness to engage in difficult conversations as a class:

"Remember that meaningful and impactful conversations are not meant to be comfortable. If we are all feeling comfortable, are we even talking about what truly matters? Or are we just raising points on which we can all agree?"

"Difficult conversations do not need to go smoothly-what's important is that we are working through it together as a class."

"Leading discussions about sensitive topics takes practice. You don't need to do it perfectly-what's important is that you keep doing it."

Alexandra Sedlovskaya

During Class Discussion

An opportunity to discuss a sensitive topic may arise unexpectedly in class. When these opportunities surface, I strive to recognize and approach them as learning gifts. This doesn't necessarily mean pursuing them in the moment-instead, you may acknowledge the important issue raised, and then let students know you will devote the time it deserves in your next session.

Regardless of whether the discussion is planned or spontaneous, challenging moments can arise. Consistent with our fight or flight response, we might be prone to overreact or underreact. Reprimanding a student can adversely impact the student and undermine a safe learning environment. Not responding at all may signal that an instructor condones the comment or shares the bias, leading to a similarly negative outcome.

When considering how to respond to challenging moments, pay attention to the following:

Be aware of cultural differences and language barriers. It might be a matter of just paraphrasing the comment (referring to customers as "low-income" rather than "low-class," for example).

Remember that students might be forming and articulating their opinions for the first time, and how they phrase their thoughts might be different from how they mean to express their position. I tell students that the beauty of our classroom is that we have an opportunity to try multiple takes ("let's have another take at it") and learn in the process.

When a student brings up a controversial or unpopular opinion, acknowledge that others may hold the same viewpoint and feel reluctant to voice it. Consider thanking the student for raising the issue and sparking an important discussion that advances class learning.

When a comment comes across as inappropriate, recognize the role of our own interpretation and approach the comment with a benefit of the doubt and curiosity. You might say, "Tell us more about what you are thinking." "What underlying assumptions are you making here?" "Is it always the case?" "What do others in class think?"

Expect that emotions may get high. We get emotional about issues that are important to us, especially when our identities are implicated. Rather than shying away from it, we learn from those emotions. As an instructor, you can step back and say, "Look, we're getting very emotional about this. Let's step back and discuss why."

Know that you have powerful nonverbal ways to respond. Just a brief pause or a surprised look may signal to students a need to reassess their responses and can provide an opportunity to self-correct in the moment.

To help put this advice into practice, here's an example from my own experience. When an international student asked this question during one of my class discussions-"Why are we still talking about racism in the United States when the country had a Black president for two terms?"-many students were visibly shocked and outraged. I acknowledged the strong reaction and promised to come back to why we might have had this response.

Then, explicitly recognizing the importance of exploring this question, I asked the student to say more about the connection he was drawing before opening the discussion to the class. We also stepped back and discussed the initial class reaction-what inferences did we immediately make when hearing the question and why? This experience deepened class understanding not only of different forms of racism, but also of how the fear of being perceived as racist can hold us back from having these important conversations. I thanked the student for raising the question that sparked our discussion, and his hand went up: "I'd like to change my mind. I get it now."

At the End of the Discussion

Discussions of sensitive topics can feel especially scary if you don't have an exit strategy. I tell my students that our primary goal as a class isn't to achieve agreement at the end of our discussion, but rather to deepen our understanding and broaden our thinking. Here are a few things to consider doing:

Thank your students for engaging openly and respectfully with tough issues that truly matter.

Synthesize key insights that may elucidate underlying tensions, core arguments, assumptions, and implications.

Encourage students to continue reflecting beyond the session.

Preparing for challenging moments-both expected and unexpected-can ease the anxiety that often prevents us from pursuing difficult conversations. It helps to have a repertoire of strategies that you may adapt in those moments. Leading discussions about sensitive topics also takes practice. You don't need to do it perfectly-what's important is that you keep doing it. Your students then learn not only from these discussions but also from your approach to engaging with tough issues that matter.

For additional advice and useful prompts for managing challenging moments in the classroom, check out the Christensen Center for Teaching and Learning's collection of diversity and inclusion resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Lead Uncomfortable Class Discussions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As educators, we want our students to be able to discuss sensitive topics that are centered in their own values and those of their classmates. This experience-particularly during emotionally charged times like the one we are encountering now-is a critical part of learning, and it's essential for students' personal and professional development.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
 Developing An Action Plan for  Antiracist Leadership

# data[].attributes.headline
Ted Talk - Mellody Hobson: Color Blind or Color Brave?

# data[].attributes.subject
Ted Talk - Mellody Hobson: Color Blind or Color Brave?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Get a daily email featuring the latest talk, plus a quick mix of trending content.

By subscribing, you understand and agree that we will store, process and manage your personal information according to our Privacy Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mellody Hobson: Color blind or color brave?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The subject of race can be very touchy. As finance executive Mellody Hobson says, it's a "conversational third rail." But, she says, that's exactly why we need to start talking about it. In this engaging, persuasive talk, Hobson makes the case that speaking openly about race - and particularly about diversity in hiring -- makes for better businesses and a better society.