The Censorship of Controversial Topics in Schools

When I was first introduced to school at the old age of four, my mom told me three things: one, that I have to go even when I don’t want to; two, that if she got a call from the school nurse during the middle of the school day and had to come pick me up only to find out I was faking, she would be pissed (having previously learned from my two older siblings); and three, objectively the most important of all, that school would prepare us for the real world - though I would argue my mother’s anger still reigns supreme. And so, I walked into Kindergarten not knowing what hell I was getting myself into. Homework assignment after homework assignment, I’ve grown up alongside the developing school system believing that what I was learning would genuinely help me foster necessary skills for my future. Yet, the closer I get to graduating high school and entering college (thank god), the more I realize the school system failed me even more than my self-respect. Think about it, with all that’s going on in the world currently, like the presidential election, the ongoing genocide in Palestine and economic crises in most parts of the world, why are we stuck in school listening to lectures about why the green light was important in The Great Gatsby? 

        World problems weren't the only things that made me start to think this way. Required books for English did too. The Awakening, by Kate Chopin, for example, egged on my thoughts. The novel, centering around a woman in the late 1800s, illustrates her facing and escaping harmful societal roles, having affair partners and her eventual suicide. I was truly surprised reading it, as I'd never really touched on topics like this. But why was this piece the only one I’d ever read that revealed the harsh realities of the world? Why didn’t I see more raw and unfiltered ideas in my high school career that did a great job at tackling other social issues that wreak havoc on modern society?

        It’s a fact: school does a great job addressing abstract concepts and understanding math problems, but it fails to acknowledge important topics that, without fail, will prove to be much more useful in the long run out in the real world. But, in order for kids to transition from the habitual environment of school to the ever-changing one of the world, schools should be more open to promoting a safe space where controversial topics are addressed and taught about. Without this, students have no way of learning about life and forming logical thoughts on it, and will therefore make it harder for them to grow into educated members of society. 

One of the biggest things impacted by the limitation of debating controversial topics in schools are the chats held in classrooms. Reacting to the California senate trying to block the discussion of these topics in school districts in 1947, writer Royce Brier was inspired to write a satirical piece based on this problem. Using students “Johnny and Mary”, he depicts a student dialogue that follows strict censorship of controversial topics. Unfortunately for us though, it’s not too far-fetched, as I’ve definitely had experiences similar to Johnny and Mary where they weren’t allowed to say words like “slavery” and “revolution” (Johnathan Zimmerman and Emily Robertson). I cannot count the amount of times that I’d be in class and when speaking, students and teachers alike would pause after saying something even slightly controversial, stutter, and quickly change their word choice or divert the conversation, strictly out of fear. Fear of social “cancellation” or fear of what those higher up would do if it got out that ideas that go down any path other than a school-regulated one were muttered. I’m going to be completely transparent for a moment: it’s weird that there is such a heavy restriction with word choice in public schools when literally the first amendment of the United States constitution is free speech. Not only that, but the prevention of problematic exchanges only limits students' views. Think about it: if you’re taught one thing from a source and it goes undisputed by schools - where its purpose is to educate and prepare you for life - or adults who have different viewpoints, you’re always going to follow that one idea, not knowing any other and living through a limited perspective. 

    Now, as someone who aspires to be a teacher, the censorship of controversial topics in schools has always been an interesting conversation for me. Who decides what is appropriate versus what’s not for a classroom? And then, I realized as much as social norms and school administrators try, what’s taught in rooms also depends on teachers themselves. According to WPDE ABC15, almost 55% of teachers self-limit themselves from teaching disputed subjects, even without restrictions placed on them (Cory Smith). When looking at this statistic, I finally understood my older sister’s common quote. Based on her time spent as a Graduate Student Instructor at the University of Michigan, she often says “Teaching is politics”, and I can’t help but fully agree. According to the Oxford Dictionary, politics is “the activit[y] associated with the governance of a country or other area…”. Choosing what content enters a classroom is governance in and of itself, and will therefore always affect students. While I can understand the certain hesitancy that comes along with teaching complex ideas about the world that will 1000% shape kids for their lives, I can’t help but disagree with this willful censorship, especially with the more abstract subjects like English and history.

What’s interesting about the teaching of history specifically is that the subject has always been taught oddly in the U.S.. Think about it, using the controversy of oppression and genocide, what other cases are covered in World History classes (extra emphasis on “World” considering European history is the most or only covered one, just a small but extremely important note for you to mull about) other than the ones that happened in Europe? We learn all about World War II and the Holocaust (and as we should), but why don’t we learn about the Nakba, which was the displacement of around 800,000 Palestinians in 1948, only three years after World War II, and the ongoing genocide today that stemmed from it (Juwayriah Wright)? What about the Cambodian Genocide, where between 1.6-3 million people were killed under a forced Communist regime led by Pol Pot (Cambodian Genocide)? Or the Rwandan Genocide, where in the span of 100 days, over 1 million people were killed and massacred (Rwanda Genocide)? And the genocide in Guatemala? The one that killed around 200,000 citizens and left another estimated 40,000 gone without a trace (Genocides)? I would bet everything I had currently that 95% or more of the readers of this blog right now didn’t know what these events were before I listed them. This purposeful ignorance and censorship done by schools has left students unable to recognize important things in our world, like dictatorship, massacres and more. We grow up thinking that oppression needs to follow a pattern, like the one that took place during the Holocaust. But let’s face it: history doesn’t repeat, it rhymes. No other event will happen that exactly follows the Holocaust, or the Nakba, or the Cambodian, Rwandan and Guatemalan Genocides, and to believe that something does need to follow those patterns to be under the same umbrella is, quite frankly, ignorant. 

        Moving to a lighter topic, listen up kids: teachers not wanting to teach controversial topics in fear of accidentally sharing opinions is somewhat understandable, but I firmly believe that one person’s rights end as soon as they impede on another's. And in this case, a teacher’s right to not share these debatable themes obstructs a child’s to having access to learning about them. And yes, while there is the internet to act as a support, there’s too much dishonesty in it to depend on it. Students deserve an educator who can give them real-time information that is bias-free, helps expand their education, world views and fuel their personal opinions. While it can be difficult, it is completely possible and must be worked on for the good of learners. In fact, EdSource sets the stage for instructors to share info without bias, claiming that they “should learn how to 1) apply frameworks such as human rights to help students evaluate different perspectives and 2) find high-quality resources that inform students, represent diverse (and often marginalized) voices and encourage student engagement” (Judith L. Pace and Wayne Journell). As stated, one way a teacher can spread ideas while protecting their own thoughts is by having classroom discussions that expand on diverse opinions, while another could be researching reliable sources that refrain from sharing opinionated views and sharing them with students. Not all ways need to be strictly informative either. Like, a show that I absolutely adore called Abbott Elementary (on Hulu so go watch it as soon as you finish reading this, literally begging you to) explores the theme of underfinanced schools while being entertaining. The show is funny yet clearly shows the struggles faced by students and teachers alike in these learning facilities. Especially in season 1, episode 12, dubbed “Ava Vs. Superintendent”, where the episode focuses on the show’s school being threatened with pulling more money out of what little funds they already have. Even with its comedic portrayal, the show still addresses underfunding perfectly. (That right there folks is why Abbott Elementary is 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. Sitcoms, take notes.) It’s sources like this that are both educative and entertaining, having classroom seminars and sharing reliable pieces that are just a few of the many that support the conversation of controversial topics without hindering teachers. 

Even with all of the research I’ve put into this subject, I still cannot answer one lingering question: knowing just how important these controversial topics are to the crucial development of students, why do schools, and I mean those that deliberately place restrictions on curriculum, withhold the conversations of them? Is it because schools want to protect students from the harsh realities of the world? Is it because they’d rather leave us “ready” for college where we’ll then be slammed with the truth? Or is it because deep down, the education system, and those in charge, know how flawed the world is and refuse to reveal just how bad it is to their younger generation in hopes of ignoring the numerous problems that humanity faces today until they hopefully go away? I cannot say. All I know is, if we continue hiding from the truth the way that schools groom us to, we’ll never see the change that we want in the world.