Question for anyone who is a teacher

[bluestateguy]

I am teaching for my first semester this year and I'd like to know from those of you who teach, what do you do when a student repeats right wing, talk radio taking points in class discussions? I have had this happen on a number of occasions, and sometimes the remarks are borderline or outright bigoted (which can get ME in trouble if I'm not seen as repudiating such remarks). Like when somebody says that blacks voted for Gore "cuz he's for more welfare", or that Muslims should "get the hell out of 'our' country". Or my favorite, in a discussion of inequitable funding of public schools on the basis of property taxes :"the rich deserve better schools because they work harder." Do you try and shoot those students down, or do you hope that maybe one of the other students will do it instead, or do you just kind of sidestep the remark and try to move on.

[rainy]

1. what grade level

College, you should make them read Howard Zinn's A people's History of America or The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. Make them read or watch a good liberal book or movie.

[DuctapeFatwa]

2. Nobody is a teacher, everybody can make resources available and

watch people learn.

I would encourage the student to make his case, to research it, develop it, provide evidence for it, and share it with the class, each of whom will do the same research and developing, etc, according to his or her own hypotheses.

Bigoted arguments put in the chair and analyzed fairly and dispassionately are (after cute grandchildren) the best weapon against bigotry for anyone listening.

And if they are talking, they will listen to themselves, at least sometimes :)

edit to add another thing you can do is like that exercise they have with the life size 8 pound alarm dolls that the kids have to "get married" and carry around all week.

Divide the class into rich and poor, give them little handouts with their situation, assets, or lack thereof, have them look up the rules etc regarding public assistance, price apartments, houses, food, all that stuff, and of course you make the right wing kids be minimum wage workers with no health insurance, and then give them appendicitis or broken ankles and raise their rent and make them actually go to where they would have to live and ride the bus (es) to the job at the McDonald's near the rich folks office park on the other side of town, and back, and time it door to door, and generally torture them while the rich kids get to buy fancy houses and practice finding hot deals on last minute airline tickets for a spontaneous weekend in Paris.

[Scottie72]

13. awsome idea!!

That could be a great teaching tool.

[BlackVelvetElvis]

15. this is great advice

if they have an arguement to make, have them back it up with facts. Develop a project around it. Make them see and research every side to an issue. Open their minds. Here is an opportunity to TEACH and expand their minds!
I had a communications class once where one of the students was a big proponent of "revisionist history". Funny, he couldn't back up anything with facts so no one took him seriously, he was regarded as the "class nut". Take advantage of this and if they are so passionate about this, make them prove their point.
Keep your class under control though, don't let anarchy rule. You are the boss.

[BlackVelvetElvis]

21. I wanted to add...

Again, YOU are in control of that classroom. Don't let anyone make some offhand parroted remark unless they can back it up with facts.
One of the other teachers in my department had an issue like this recently: They were designing billboards. One of the students did one along the lines of "Repent...go to hell if you aren't saved" Of course, everyone has to present their designs to the class during a critique. The other students were open minded! They suggested ways to appeal to EVERYONE to "save their souls". This one student wouldn't budge on her presentation (isn't that typical?). Most students have their heads on straight. God, good luck with that one.

[JasonBerry]

3. The "rich" comment

Makes me think of Sam Walton, who said that any good employee of Wal-Mart works harder than he does. He said, "I might have to make decisions that impact more people, but work harder? That's ridiculous." Good 'ole Sam. Would he not be rolling in the grave at the Wal-Mart of the 21st century? My hat is off to you - and every - teacher who must deal with these dilemmas on a daily basis. There's no doubt in my mind that K-12 teaching is as tough a job as there is these days. What grade do you teach?

[Mikimouse]

4. What level and what discipline?

n/t

[tlcandie]

5. Good question to start with ...

Personally, I would maybe keep some reference books around and ask them to research that topic and get back to the class with their INFORMED opinion ..

Suggest some reference materials maybe and/or have some within the room..

Again, depends on age and discipline.

[bluestateguy]

6. I teach an introductory class at the university level

[JasonBerry]

7. That isn't so easy either!

~

[alcuno]

10. I taught college freshman when I was a grad student.

Not much different from 8th grade.

[Mikimouse]

12. OK, now, in what discipline do you teach? It is important

to know that because students respond differently to Poli.Sci, for example, than to sociology. Intro. courses can be difficult if you have students who tend to parrot what they hear without thinking about it critically. I have been teaching at the university level for some time now, and have experienced the things you describe (I teach at one of the most conservative universities in the south, and am a sociologist, one of the 'most hated' species of academics). I have taken a number of approaches to the problem, depending on the class (each class is different). With some classes, it is helpful to assign some essays or articles from the research literature and give the class a quiz a few days later; I always leave room in my syllabus for such quizzes. Another possibility is my favorite, though. I always have my students write a term paper, 20-30 pages, about a topic chosen from five or six that I approve. I make them write the papers as a group and they sign a form that they will be self-policing (I can tell the difference in quality from one section to another, and if one student does not do what they are supposed to do, I will post a lower grade for that individual). Having made the assignment, I make clear that the citations are to come from bona fide research material (refereed journals) and that opinion pieces are not acceptable (i.e., Dr. Laura, Rush Limbaugh, and that ilk). It is amazing how group interaction during the writing of these papers tends to enlighten students who are not accustomed to thinking for themselves.

[LearnedHand]

8. Whenever a student makes such a statement...

...in my class discussions (whether it's a RW statement, such as yours above, or even a statement I agree with), I write it on the board and present it to the class for discussion.

First, I warn the students about the dangers of simplistic, "straight-line causality" thinking, then I ask the students to identify any ways in which someone could argue with the statement. Here are some of the questions I ask:

"Does this A directly cause this B? How could that happen? Can we identify any other factors that might also be responsible or might contribute to B? Is there any part of this statement that simply is an untruth? You know, we cannot talk about causality if neither A nor B are true; we MUST begin with a true situation." ...etc.

I talk about the crucial importance of building a logical argument; when a student insists on making a statement such as "Clinton descimated the military, so we failed in foreign policy" (one of my students said this), I insist that the student find reputable, documented proof that these two items are true and, in fact, related.

Continue to insist that the student produce REPUTABLE, DOCUMENTED PROOF in order to let such a statement stand. The standards whereby statements are allowed to stand in the context of a learning environment should be whether they are true, and whether the parts that need to be proven are based on reason, logic, and reputable proof.

Simply do not accept anything else for consideration. If a student has reasonably, logically thought through an idea, and considered all the relevant documentation, but STILL makes a statement that opposes your own belief structure, THAT is okay. She or he has arrived at an opinion that is well-thought-through.

In short, you don't have to "re-educate" them; you simply have to insist on a policy of close examination, reasonableness, and logic for any ideas presented. You can dismiss anything else as simplistic, illogical thinking not worthy of your classroom environment.

[ComerPerro]

16. That is outstanding

It strikes me as funny the way I can sometimes take for granted the number of professors on this board. But it is very impressive.

Great advice. Very good policy.

[edzontar]

20. Yes-deconstruct the statement..and try to do it in a friendly manner...

I teach university level in Central Pa and the RW hate radio stuff is getting worse.

We have to FIGHT it without teaching dogma ourselves--it is a tough job, but the real trick is to get the students to question ANY kind of received dogma--to encourage them to think for themselves, not to parrot their idiot parents who listen to Rush, etc.

[alcuno]

9. Generally, I have other students who will squash them like a bug.

But I live in a very liberal area; Gore took 80% of the vote in our city.

I will not accept personal attacks on minorities so the blacks and welfare (there are more whites on welfare) argument or the Muslims getting out of the country are not acceptable. Whoever is making statements such as these needs to be pulled aside before the next class discussion and told that they will not be tolerated and told why. We're here to have a discussion, not offend classes and races of Americans. Where teachers can get into trouble is when they humiliate students in front of their peers. If you do it, do it without witnesses.

As for the "rich deserve better schools" argument, that can be knocked out of the park. Shouldn't there at least me a minimum of public funding for public education? The same as health care? We are founded as a democracy, not an aristocracy. The wealthy will always have better health care because they can afford it, the same goes for schools. But does that mean that we can't agree that a standard for all shouldn't be in place? Have we no responsibility for our fellow citizens?

[Yupster]

11. I taught high school

I sure didn't want to get into political discussions in class. I would deflect such comments with something like "well, I bet they wouldn't agree with that," but back to what the lesson is about.

I sure would not allow myself to argue politics with a student. Lots of bad things could come of that, because the school board doesn't care if a student spouts a one-sided political line, but they sure do care if the teacher does.

[WilliamPitt]

14. First of all, what do you teach?

The easiest way to deal with this is to always, always argue the counterpoint. If someone gives a wingnut perspective, argue the liberal perspective. If someone argues the liberal perspective, argue the wingnut perspective. Always be Socratic, and thus achieve balance, and let them decide for themselves. That's your job.

[janx]

17. What grade level? Not that it matters much.

I usually try and keep politics out of the classroom. I teach college composition. Every once in awhile, a student will make a remark, but I find it works best to 1.) ignore the comment and move on, 2.) let the other students chime in for a short while if they want to (but not enough to waste class time), and/or 3.) suggest to the student that any of his or her remarks will be taken very seriously with more writing practice and a lot more reading.

What do you teach, and what level?

I tend to leave it out altogether and let the education do the work.

[janx]

18. Actually though, let me qualify that...

Tonight we were practicing basic research on the 'Net (I don't advocate a lot of this because the library is better both for 'Net and for print), and a gay student suggested we look up Fred Phelps, and we did.

[SOteric]

19. Such discussion would be outside the purview of my courses

They're welcome to develop their opinions in essay format. I encourage any with legal aspirations to write legal opinion, those with political or social aspirations to write essays and articles relevant to their goals.

The university and the department set rigourous standards for acceptable supporting research, even in essays and article submissions. Those standards of research pretty much whip the ignorant screed right out of them. The most vitriolic right-wingers find they cannot bolster their bigotry within the parameters of accepted academic source.

[Lisa]

22. it's a great way to introduce students to "informal logic"

During my lectures I make a point of stressing the need for evidence (and the fact that even scientific studies can be biased). I also note the difference between "logically valid" not necessarily being the same thing as a) correct or b) moral.

In class discussions, or in the textbook, I demand evidence when an entire group of people is characterized as acting in a uniform way. Given that practically everyone in class will have experienced being treated (or mistreated) in a particular fashion by people who just made assumptions about them based on appearance etc., they tend to think twice when reminded about how amused/indignant/outraged they were by this. It's something one can refer back to again during the semester, since the memories are often so powerful.

Last month one of my students was going on about "welfare moms". Three other students had grown up in families on social assistance and rushed to refute her points. I managed to calm people down, and we spent several minutes looking at the difference between anecdotal evidence and comprehensive studies ... it was pretty educational. I think you may find that if you approach the propaganda points raised by your students (on both the left and the right) and analyze them from the perspective of the different ideologies involved (for example, Michael Moore tries this in his new book), without laying blame or making people feel stupid, it will raise the level of discussion.

I've had one student say that she's confused because she doesn't know "which side I'm on". I explained in class that while I am a liberal secular humanist, and am quite up-front about it, I also believe in fair assessment of problems, because it makes for more sensible solutions that actually work.

The chances are that the very hard-core right-wingers will sulk and accuse you of undermining them (and marking them down -- I once had a guy who went off on a racist rant in his final exam, just to see how I'd react -- I'm Japanese-Canadian by birth -- and I had 2 other faculty members sign off on the grade just to provide a "safety check" that I wasn't "discriminating" against him).

So there's not much you can do about them, if they're bound and determined to classify you as being out to get them. But through reason and argument, you CAN provide a defense for the other students who are watching to see how you react.

[legin]

23. A possible depending on what you are teaching

Civilisation and its Discontents by Freud. I read it on a philosophy course about 15 years ago. I was never that keen on Freud but I liked this. It's only a short essay. I keep thinking about it for some reason.

I think it is because bush* is taping into something that is more attractive to some people than civilisation, and I think that is talked about in Freud's essay. It seems to me that these right-wing statements are a form of what is now very acceptable interlectual laziness. Keeping an open mind and putting yourself in other peoples shoes, requires work by the person doing it, whereas just writing people off, "turning the middle-east into glass", doesn't require any effort at all, and with these social/political problems solved one can get on to more important things. The problem is that when I was at school you used to get yelled at for being that lazy, now this behaviour is merit gaining behaviour.

The only problem with the Freud essay is that i have been looking at some of the books I have read in the past, and I don't know how the hell I managed to read them all the way through. The language of the internet, this straightfoward, tell it like it is, efficient, brutal (wrong word but almost right), has almost evolved into a different dialect of English. I can't read these books Clauswitz, Thucydides, etc anymore, I just don't understand a single fucking word of them and they are so slow at getting to the point. Basically I know what I want Freud's essay to say, but it probably won't.