The Democracy Education article by Diana Hess includes a recommendation from a Civic Mission of the Schools report, which suggests that schools incorporate discussion of current events at multiple levels. Students having the ability to discuss “local, national, and international” issues promotes greater interest in politics, improved critical thinking, communications skills, and civic knowledge. I can attest that such discussions promote student-centered learning, and can be very useful for building an engaged classroom. At Garner Magnet High School, we had a Paideia class which was centered around active discussions and research of current events. In this class, students were tasked with reading and annotating a series of documents before coming into class to discuss them. This type of discussion ensures that students are informed and prepared to add to the conversation. In this type of classroom, teachers act as moderators, asking questions and ensuring that the discussion stays civil and on track. In this manner, teachers can be a neutral party and avoid discussing their own opinions in favor of a student-focused learning session. The article mentions that feigning neutrality is impossible, but for teachers using the “balance” approach, playing the devil’s advocate for all viewpoints can promote critical thinking and more active discussion by students.
The strategy of privilege has teachers point toward a particular viewpoint as the clearly right answer. The article criticizes this method as being unbalanced and this can be interpreted as brainwashing students. Similarly, denial avoids teaching a certain topic as controversial. This method may be deceiving to students, as this also only teaches one side. I think that the best method is balance, as approaching an issue head-on with acceptance of varying opinions can be useful in fostering a constructive class discussion. For this method, teachers should take a neutral stance, and introduce common material for students to read and take notes on before a class discussion. This would ensure that all students are prepared to interact with the subject from an informed perspective.
Great analysis of the material! I had never heard of a Paideia class prior to this post, so I believe that the only thing I would ask for would be a slightly deeper elaboration on that point, as there is much to be learned from the very idea of a class like that. For example, how would you define “Paideia”? How would your instructor define it? What made the course so important? I think that the addition of that context would have strengthened your argument for using balance as a method of teaching controversy, as it would have drawn on more specific personal experiences. Overall, however, you have very sound logic.
Being involved in a discussion is one of the most gratifying feelings for a student. Whenever I was in middle/high school I never really was intrigued by general facts until a teacher brought up something that I was familiar with online or heard brought up previously. Giving someone the chance to speak on a topic that they find valuable is crucial, so I definitely agree that teachers should be able to give some amount of their general input on an issue but for the most part they should rely on the students to formulate answers to pressing matters.