The tyranny of political correctness in schools

[ed316]

MARY-ELLEN LANG:
The tyranny of political correctness in schools
CBC News Viewpoint | Aug. 30, 2006 | More from Mary-Ellen Lang (http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_lang/)


Mary-Ellen Lang delights in being a mom, grandma, writer, teacher, gardener, and equestrian, usually in about that order. She has been teaching since 1972, and writing since 1980. Two of her three (award winning, Young Adultnovels are published in many languages in Europe, the USA and Canada.




In some provinces, according to the teachers' unions, good teachers will advocate for women's rights, abortion rights, native rights, same-*** marriage rights, secular humanism, feminism, multiculturalism, diversity, the environment, the Earth, meditation, co-operation, wild whales, wild salmon and moral relativity. If you happen to believe in the rights of the unborn, or the traditional definition of marriage, or if you dare question the joys of diversity, feminism or homo******ity, or believe anything that is not on the bandwagon of the politically correct, you should keep your mouth shut, or you may be admonished by the high priests of correct thinking.
Teachers whose views run contrary to their union's opinions hardly ever suffer censure from fellow teachers. For one thing, those contrary views seldom find their way into a classroom and never into a curriculum. Teachers are as various as individual members of any group. Their personal opinions and beliefs span the full range of thinking on any issue. This is not a problem. Most teachers know very well how to draw the line between having personal beliefs and promoting them to students.
However, when a teachers' union makes a public statement supporting abortion rights, same-*** marriage, the Kyoto accord or whatever, it is crossing a line in education and seriously inhibiting a teacher's right to differ, and (more importantly) limiting students' rights to an unbiased education.
Matters of opinion
No one argues that politically incorrect views are unbiased. Most of us have no trouble understanding that preaching the rights of the unborn, or the sanctity of traditional hetero****** marriage, or the joys of big-game hunting in the spring has no place in the public school system. But the same people who claim to see the folly of one point of view and the need to avoid promoting it in classrooms have no problem endorsing the opposite point of view and transplanting it into the curriculum.
My point here is that these issues are matters of opinion. Perfectly nice, reasonable, intelligent people have opposing ideas about things. This is good. Every one of these and many other issues are legitimate material for student debate, exploration and discovery. What is not good is how a point of view becomes a mantra that the self-declared enlightened put forward as required or even optional course content.
For example, the issue of same-*** marriage has been a topic of debate in B.C. school systems for years. People who are for and against the issue have been competing to have their particular beliefs included somewhere in the curriculum while at the same time insisting the opposing beliefs be excluded. Just recently in B.C., a gay teacher and his partner won a concession from the B.C. Ministry of Education to have course content in an elective course include a unit on gay-lesbian issues. While I am sure this issue should be explored by students at some point in their education, I am also convinced that it should be presented to students minus either side's agenda.
When teachers are expected to promote one side of an issue of any kind, students are denied the chance to carefully assess the full range of thinking on the subject. Virtually every issue out there has at least two sides — otherwise it would not be an issue. It is therefore important that students explore the complexities and nuances that exist by finding out what they are in the first place. This will not happen if the teacher responsible for the topic comes at them with an agenda or a bias that is presented as fact, or as the "right" way to think.
I personally don't have a lot of trouble with most politically correct issues or agendas. I even agree with some politically correct thinking. What I take exception to is the presumption that I must promote one side of an issue when teaching. I deeply resent any teacher's union taking a firm position on issues and expecting teachers to toe the line. I don't believe in lock-step thinking. Rather, I think it's my duty to advance the range of students' understanding of how many valid, however contrary, ways of thinking there are in the real world.
Promote learning, not bias
This does not mean that I think myself free to be a loose cannon and blast away with every contrary view out there. It means I think it's my job to encourage students to discover the range of thinking on issues and leave the decision about which are valid or off the wall up to them.
It is not the school system's job, in my opinion, to teach students to believe in fetal rights, same-*** or polygamous marriage, salmon farming, euthanasia, the death penalty, the gun registry, the glories of war, or the sanctity of the ozone layer. It is not the school system's job to teach students to believe in their "opposites" either. It is the school system's job to promote learning, and surely this means, when it comes to issues, that there are many ways of seeing the world, and the more you know about that, the better.
And eventually, the more you know about how other people think, the better you'll be able to defend your own well-considered views.


http://www.cbc.ca/news/viewpoint/vp_lang/20060830.html

[Dasein]

Why should one be tolerant of those who promote discrimination against homo******s any more than we should tolerate those who promote discrimination against people based on race, rleigion or nationality. How much support would you get if you promoted the sanctity of traditional marriage between a white (or black, asian, etc) man and women?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Most of us have no trouble understanding that preaching the rights of the unborn, or the sanctity of traditional hetero****** marriage, or the joys of big-game hunting in the spring has no place in the public school system. But the same people who claim to see the folly of one point of view and the need to avoid promoting it in classrooms have no problem endorsing the opposite point of view and transplanting it into the curriculum.


This is very true. These are values, and values are matters of opinion. While our society is pretty much decided on many values (such as the right to life of people outside the ******) we still argue about others (the right to life of those still up the hoo-hoo). Yes, I just referred to woman's bidness as a "hoo-hoo". We can preach atheism, but not theism, etc.

I think that most of this has no place in school, one way or the other. It should be left to the parents to teach children tolerance or intolerance of whatever you care to mention. And if the school insists on picking up one side of the debate and running with it, fairness and equality demands the opposing viewpoint get equal time, right?

[Dasein]

And if the school insists on picking up one side of the debate and running with it, fairness and equality demands the opposing viewpoint get equal time, right?

Should schools give equal time to Holocaust deniers or to proponents of slavery and Jim Crow laws?

[vryhpyammoadded]

Really, the guberments, commissions, councils, societies, etc should quit bitching and get out of micromanagement but in fact, the PC'rs cannot do this. They feel it is there mission to force every square peg to fit in there round orifice.
Go take a look at how this insanity is brewing to the point in California where the PC'rs are trying to pass laws making it illegal to teach anything other than same *** union acceptance. Simply uttering the words “some people disagree with same *** marriage” in class could result in censure or worse.
I predict the fruit loop district court will allow this blatantly unconstitutional law to pass.

[remo williams]

When did any of the social issued facing those who've graduated from school , become important enough to override the educational instruction needed to graduate in the first place? WTF does some kid care about PC issues when he can't fcuking read, spell, or count? People are totally derailling the future of this country with sideshow bullshyte.

[Fargin]

Teachers need to teach tolerance according to the law and to teach discrimination is bad. Whether it's telling colored people when to sit in the bus or dictating who you can marry in the name of god. They should also teach young women, that their bodies are their own, that their wombs doesn't not belong to a reactionary goverment or church, so they can get help in hostpitals instead of backally doctors in dirty kitchens.

[Eddy]

Teachers need to teach tolerance according to the law and to teach discrimination is bad. Whether it's telling colored people when to sit in the bus or dictating who you can marry in the name of god. They should also teach young women, that their bodies are their own, that their wombs doesn't not belong to a reactionary goverment or church, so they can get help in hostpitals instead of backally doctors in dirty kitchens.

I totally agree with that.

[shocker1]

Teachers need to teach tolerance according to the law and to teach discrimination is bad. Whether it's telling colored people when to sit in the bus or dictating who you can marry in the name of god. They should also teach young women, that their bodies are their own, that their wombs doesn't not belong to a reactionary goverment or church, so they can get help in hostpitals instead of backally doctors in dirty kitchens.
I am sure Dr. King being a Pastor himself would take great offence to equating the civil rights struggle to the homo******/abortion rights agenda. As far as my children are concerned I will decide their moral foundation, hence the private schools they now attend.

[Fargin]

I am sure Dr. King being a Pastor himself would take great offence to equating the civil rights struggle to the homo******/abortion rights agenda. As far as my children are concerned I will decide their moral foundation, hence the private schools they now attend.
My moral foundations is the current law, not some law written 2000 years ago or 50 for that matter. You, you pay for that right on a private school, just like parents in Denmark sends their children to muslim private schools, because our public schools teachs individual freedom and a secularism. A teachers job is primarily to create an interlectual foundation, which is more than just reading and math.

I'm not intelligent enough to speak on the behalves of Dr. King(MLK?), but I would suspect he knows a thing or two about discrimination.

[c62]

Should schools give equal time to Holocaust deniers

Denying the Holocaust existed would be factually incorrect. There is clear proof that it happened.



When did any of the social issued facing those who've graduated from school , become important enough to override the educational instruction needed to graduate in the first place? WTF does some kid care about PC issues when he can't fcuking read, spell, or count? People are totally derailling the future of this country with sideshow bullshyte.

I gotta go with remo on this one. Reading/Writing/Math/Science/History take precedence over everything else.

Social and Moral lessons should be taught in the home. Parents have responsibilities too.

[shocker1]

My moral foundations is the current law, not some law written 2000 years ago or 50 for that matter. You, you pay for that right on a private school, just like parents in Denmark sends their children to muslim private schools, because our public schools teachs individual freedom and a secularism. A teachers job is primarily to create an interlectual foundation, which is more than just reading and math.

I'm not intelligent enough to speak on the behalves of Dr. King(MLK?), but I would suspect he knows a thing or two about discrimination.

Well this is Georgia USA, not Denmark, and your post justifies my educational investment for my children. Being a Christian of Jewish ancestory, I am well versed in what discimination feels like. It is telling how you preach tolerance in one sentence then belittle someones faith to some dusty 2000 year old story.


Teachers need to teach tolerance according to the law and to teach discrimination is bad. Whether it's telling colored people when to sit in the bus or dictating who you can marry in the name of god.

[remo williams]

[quote=c62;1896054
I gotta go with remo on this one. Reading/Writing/Math/Science/History take precedence over everything else.

Social and Moral lessons should be taught in the home. Parents have responsibilities too.[/quote]

Agreed. I'm still amazed that parents want teachers to ,in part raise their kids. And going to private school is no different. i went to one for the first 9yrs of my life. As far as the morals being taught there, I'd say they were no more embedded than in the public schools I went to after. I'd say parents need to square their kids away at home,so they can learn the true skills needed to survive in the world. That or they need to start teaching kids how same *** unions, and PCness can't change the fact that they are poor,half educated, and homeless.

[sferrin]

This homo****** rights sh!t in grade school always makes me shake my head. They have "gay alliance" clubs in grade school. Can you imaging the fallout if some straight kid wanted to setup a club extolling the virtues and need for understand of wife-swapping, orgies, or scat and was allowed to? I'm all for teaching tolerance, no doubt about it but when people graduate who can't even read I'd say we need to get our priorities straight.

[remo williams]

Imho, things like the gay marriage sues and such that aren't related to the acquireing of that which is necessary to survive and thrive, are things that nned to be encountered and individually processed. On your own. They can be explained, but i don't think they can be taught or re-taught. Alot of what people learn about outside issues,they are usually learned from their parents. Even the bad things that I think some who are advocating for this, believe can be retaught. I'm all for doiong something to maybe make people able to cope better with eachother and be able to exist an a way that benefits all of us. But I think the application of it will make it harder than it possibly should be. It's actually taking away alot of what is really going to be useful in order to ensure personal financial/career stability in or wonderful new "global economy." Add to that the obvious amount of dischord and political /social division. I just don't think anyone's got things squared away enough to do something like this right and make progress. Some things people just gotta learn on their own. Just my bleak .02.

[americanbychoice]

Agreed. I'm still amazed that parents want teachers to ,in part raise their kids.In general, a lot of folks in these parts want to pass along the responsibility for their lives over to someone else... including parenthood. People here love freedom, but hate responsibility, which is why so many people will never be free (when you abdicate responsibility over your life to someone else, you are that person's servant).

The PC education is just another part of that abdication of responsibility over one's personal code of ethics & social purpose... it's ANOTHER form of morality that should already be learned at home.

Now, I don't object to morals, ethics, civics being taught in school... but I'd rather that the school reinforce my own brand of ethics instead of the crazy ass sh!t that goes around here, which is why I will probably send my children to private school rather than public schools here in California.

[Dasein]

I'm still amazed that parents want teachers to ,in part raise their kids.

Everyone children come in contact with will have a part in raising them. It's not something parents have any direct control over - children are not robots to be programmed, but are capable of making their own decisions and judgements.