Political messages at school

[Mickey'snewestfan]

My son attends a public charter school where they study a single topic in depth for a period of time, and integrate math, and literacy into that topic. This fall the topic was related to political advocacy. They studied several historical advocacy movements, and then went on to look at a current movement.

The issue they chose is one that has great meaning locally. It's also one where locally there's not much debate -- every single person I know who lives where I live feels the same way, I think it's a fair assumption that every single parent in the school feels the same way.

Anyway, the class studied this topic in depth. They wrote stories about fictional characters involved in the "movement", and heard from speakers in the "movement". He came home from school with bumper stickers proclaiming the "cause". They didn't hear any from the opposing side.

I'm not sure how I feel. I know that if my child's school was doing this with a movement I didn't agree with, or even a movement that I did agree with, but that I felt was controversial, I'd be livid.

How would you feel?

 

[Diva of Dragons]

I'm with you! I think that they are giving kids an unrealistic view of politics if they are not providing more than one view point. Also, it doesn't promote any real learning like, how to formulate questions and find answers about such things, or allowing kids to come up with their own opinion about a topic.

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

If it was a message that everyone agreed with, I think it was the RIGHT thing to bring to school.

You have seen how politics can divide and how ugly the arguments can be. Heck I have seen friendships become strained due to this.

The school taught advocacy in a safe way (as long as they mentioned that most issues have two very vocal sides).

 

[powellrj]

If they are middle and high school aged, I think its great. My kids have studied things in school and been involved with causes we didn't agree with and found them to be great teaching moments.

Funny story. Last year my DS who was in high school became involved in the POTUS campaign. He was working for a candidate we didn't support. Heck, we didn't even belong to the same political party as his candidate. Because he had done work for this candidate, he was invited to here them speak. It was an eye opening experience for him. He found out that he really didn't support what the candidate believed and had just been overwhelmed with excitement because his friends were.

He left that campaign and went to work on another. He did work for this candidate and once again was invited to hear them speak. It was so exciting for him to get to see 2 major candidates this year.

Another time they were learning about something at school we didn't believe in, but once again, the kids were able to see the other side and make an educated choice. So much so, that one kid had tee shirts printed supporting the position the teacher didn't. The teacher was very supportive of the kids because he had taught them to think for themselves.

 

[DawnCt1]

Unless they are in a political science or social studies class, politics have no place in the classroom. Even if everyone appears to be on the same page, where does political advocacy cross the line into indoctrination. When my kids were in elementary school ages ago, they would come home with messages, verbal and written to "SUPPORT THE SCHOOL BUDGET". Well some parents may not want to support the budget. Some families may not be able to afford the tax increases. It wasn't long before those messages were stopped.

 

[Acklander]

I guess for me it would depend on the age. By the teen years I'd have no problem with it - as a matter of fact I love for kids to see opinions different than my own - it helps them develop their OWN opinions and where they stand on things.
Now if it was elementary age I'd have a harder time with it because for the most part they see everything in black or white - If the teacher says its true, it MUST be right.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Politics are a part of our lives. Our children have been exposed to many different view points throughout their education - mostly from teachers, but now from other students as they develop their own ideologies. I have no problem with it because I talk to my kids.

I don't tell my children what to believe - I just want them to understand why they believe as they do, and why others might disagree. In short, I want them to think for themselves and have empathy for others.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Just to be clear, this isn't about my child being exposed to an alternative point of view -- I share the same point of view as the teachers and everyone else, which was the only point of view that was offered in the classroom, the only point of view for which they brought home bumper stickers. While I would have no problem taking him to a rally for this cause, or whatever, I feel like it's my job to politically indoctrinate him not the school's.

To be more clear -- he's in 5th grade. The issue is DC voting rights. They studied other suffrage movements (the American Revolution, civil rights, women's suffrage) and then they studied this. I can't explain to him the opposing point of view because I don't get it AT ALL (if someone here can explain it to me, please do because I don't really understand how someone can be OK with a large number of American citizens not having representation in Congress).

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...I feel like it's my job to politically indoctrinate him ... not the school's...

Most Americans feel this way. It has created the divide that we have today. I am okay with the schools teaching them anything, as long as we discuss those things at home. If I were not an involved parent, then it might concern me. Then again, if I were not an involved parent, it probably wouldn't.

Schools teach - sometimes things that parents feel should not be taught. For me, they are free to teach anything. My job is to teach my boys to think for themselves - to turn data points into something more. If I am successful, the schools can only help them by exposing them to more ideas - even if those ideas are not the type that I support.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

I think it's a great lesson to learn how to argue both sides of an issue. (I don't remember formally learning that until college. ) I teach it to my kids at home. I also don't have a problem with my kids discussing current events in school if they're discussed in an objective manner - as opposed to anyone pushing an agenda one way or the other (which, admittedly, can happen with some frequency). Of course, we'll be discussing the same things at home so I can make sure both sides are heard. We have great fun when everyone seems to agree on one issue, but then you bring in the view from the other side and everyone agrees they have a point, too.

he's in 5th grade. The issue is DC voting rights. They studied other suffrage movements (the American Revolution, civil rights, women's suffrage) and then they studied this. I can't explain to him the opposing point of view because I don't get it AT ALL (if someone here can explain it to me, please do because I don't really understand how someone can be OK with a large number of American citizens not having representation in Congress).

I don't think you have to "get" or agree with a view in order to help explain why and how others did. I think it's imporant that, for whatever reason, so and so had this view, but others had a different view and worked for change. What drives it home is how some - make that many - even lost their lives because of their views. And how fortunate we are in this country to be able to have the freedoms we enjoy.

I remember distinctly how we started these conversations with our kids in the car one day. My kids at the time were pretty young, but we were driving by the USS Constitution and the Bunker Hill Monument and it led to discussions the American Revolution. We talked about it all the way to NH and they wound up loving those conversations, and every time we got in the car my DS asked to hear more. So often on long trips we get a history/political discussion going. It made for some interesting conversations during the last election, when the kids were old enough to understand some of the issues and think about how they felt about them. Good stuff.

I always crack up when news people do the "Man on the Street" interviews and it becomes clear how many people are completely clueless when it comes to local, regional and national issues before them.

But back to the original post. I would be ok with the fact that these discussions are taking place. I'd like to know that an opposing view is at least being discussed. How about an assignment in which you have to argue a view that is not your own?

 

[Pea-n-Me]

Funny story. Last year my DS who was in high school became involved in the POTUS campaign. He was working for a candidate we didn't support. Heck, we didn't even belong to the same political party as his candidate. Because he had done work for this candidate, he was invited to here them speak. It was an eye opening experience for him. He found out that he really didn't support what the candidate believed and had just been overwhelmed with excitement because his friends were.

He left that campaign and went to work on another. He did work for this candidate and once again was invited to hear them speak. It was so exciting for him to get to see 2 major candidates this year.

This is great.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...But back to the original post. I would be ok with the fact that these discussions are taking place. I'd like to know that an opposing view is at least being discussed. How about an assignment in which you have to argue a view that is not your own?

Loved that in my debate classes. You really have to do your research if you are going to win a debate and are taking the side that you would naturally oppose.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Most Americans feel this way. It has created the divide that we have today. I am okay with the schools teaching them anything, as long as we discuss those things at home. If I were not an involved parent, then it might concern me. Then again, if I were not an involved parent, it probably wouldn't.

Schools teach - sometimes things that parents feel should not be taught. For me, they are free to teach anything. My job is to teach my boys to think for themselves - to turn data points into something more. If I am successful, the schools can only help them by exposing them to more ideas - even if those ideas are not the type that I support.

I agree with you 100%, and what I'm objecting to is them teaching only one side of the issue, even though I very strongly support the point of view their teaching. I want him to know that issues have two sides, and that you should listen to both of them and make up your own mind, rather than following along blindly.

This is complicated by the fact that I really don't understand the opposing point of view. I have never heard any one speak out against voting rights in a way that makes any sense at all, and therefore I can't fairly represent that point of view to my kid.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

I just want to be clear. If my son's school looked at the issue from both sides, asked them to debate from both sides, etc. . . I'd be thrilled. They aren't though.

Can anyone explain to me how it's OK for a whole city of people to not have voting representatives in Congress or the Senate, and why you wouldn't want your Senator or Congressperson to vote to change the situation?

 

[LuvOrlando]

Indoctrinating children is nothing at all new. People with an agenda have always adored the idea of planting ideas without having bothersome parents around to act as filters. I think these zealots really need to keep their nonsense out of our kids heads, this is the whole reason behind the separation of c & state and I happen to think that some other belief systems need to be re-evaluated to come under those protections as well.

I wouldn't care if the topic were in agreement with me or not, in principle the practice is reprehensible. Parents are sovereign and our right to raise our kids as we see fit is sacrosanct, I would have an absolute cow over any event even remotely resembling this. I don't even like the idea of a 'both sides' approach because, as we can see from the news today, it is far too easy to demonize opposing points of view by putting polarizing untrue words in an adversaries mouth. As long as there is one side person voicing both sides it will never be a valid discussion.

An appropriate way to approach the subject would be through a hands off topic such as "for or against cupcakes" or "kittens and puppies vs exotic pets". No need to use real world topics to get the point across.

 

[LuvOrlando]

To be more clear -- he's in 5th grade. The issue is DC voting rights. They studied other suffrage movements (the American Revolution, civil rights, women's suffrage) and then they studied this. I can't explain to him the opposing point of view because I don't get it AT ALL (if someone here can explain it to me, please do because I don't really understand how someone can be OK with a large number of American citizens not having representation in Congress).

Washington DC is not a part of a State.

 

[sbell111]

My son attends a public charter school where they study a single topic in depth for a period of time, and integrate math, and literacy into that topic. This fall the topic was related to political advocacy. They studied several historical advocacy movements, and then went on to look at a current movement.

The issue they chose is one that has great meaning locally. It's also one where locally there's not much debate -- every single person I know who lives where I live feels the same way, I think it's a fair assumption that every single parent in the school feels the same way.

Anyway, the class studied this topic in depth. They wrote stories about fictional characters involved in the "movement", and heard from speakers in the "movement". He came home from school with bumper stickers proclaiming the "cause". They didn't hear any from the opposing side.

I'm not sure how I feel. I know that if my child's school was doing this with a movement I didn't agree with, or even a movement that I did agree with, but that I felt was controversial, I'd be livid.

How would you feel?

I think that it's unrealistic to think that every parent of every child in a school feels the same way about any political topic.

 

[sbell111]

Washington DC is not a part of a State.

Yup. Many people simply follow the Constitution on this issue. It clearly does not give people whose permanent residence is outside the States the ability to vote in Congressional elections.

 

[Pigeon]

I'd probably not be happy with the one-sidedness of the issue.

But I don think that the schools should be teaching critical thinking skills and how to evaluate information sources.

I'm fine with them assigning controversial political issues as a topic for research and writing. The kids should be able to research an issue, express their viewpoint and bolster their positions with credible information sources. They shouldn't be graded on their positions, but on how they present them.

I'm faculty at a university and it's disheartening to see how many students cannot evaluate information.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

Washington DC is not a part of a State.

You're kidding, I didn't know that.

OK, sarcasm aside, to me that's not an argument. I want to hear an argument that explains why you think the Constitution is correct on this point and shouldn't be changed.

I don't view the constitution as like the Bible. I don't think the people who wrote it had some kind of divine foresight which allowed them to foresee that Washington DC would grow into a city with as many people as it has, who pay large amounts of taxes, at the same rate as the rest of the nation, and would not be afforded equal rights and representation in the government that spent those taxes.

I understand what the constitution says, and that it currently does say that we don't have voting rights -- it used to say that slaves are fractional people. What I want to hear is an argument that explains why it's OK for such a large number of tax paying American citizens to not have representation, and that it's in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, and that therefore they want their legally elected representatives to continue to actively oppose a Constitutional Amendment.