Discussing Controversial Issues in Class
Within the last few years, twenty states have passed laws or issued statewide rules that aim to restrict the ways educators can teach difficult subjects, like the history of racism or sexism in America, with eighteen of these laws currently in effect (AL, AR, FL, GA, IA, ID, KY, LA, MS, MT, ND, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT & VA). Eight total states (AL, AR, FL, IN, IA, KY, LA & NC) have also passed bills restricting instruction or curricular materials related to sexual orientation or gender identity for certain grade levels.
These laws are political efforts to distract from the real issues facing our schools. There are multiple lawsuits now pending that challenge several of these laws, including lawsuits supported by NEA and its affiliates.
If you work in a state with one of these laws, check out NEA’s state-specific Know Your Rights guides to understand what the law in your state prohibits and, just as importantly, what it does not.
For all educators, remember that instruction on many controversial issues is part of existing state content standards and teaching students to think critically about issues and develop their own views is one of the overriding goals of public education. The following tips will help you develop a lesson plan that engages with controversial issues while minimizing the risk of any backlash from your school or community.
In general, if you are planning a discussion about current events that raise controversial issues, be sure that your curriculum is
- age-appropriate,
- aligned with state standards, and
- in line with past practices in your school.
If you expect that your lesson will be controversial, run the plan by an administrator first. This will give your administrator a chance to suggest changes or prepare for a negative response from the community.
Following these steps is particularly important in areas that skew more conservative or that have been targeted by far-right activists.
You should be aware that NEA and its affiliates have pushed back against extreme efforts by administrators to censor instruction, but the cases can be difficult and our efforts have not always been successful.
For example, a Texas school district told teachers that, in order to comply with their new law, they would have to teach both sides of the Holocaust. The district later reversed course, retracted the guidance and apologized.
More recently, a tenured Tennessee teacher was fired over his use of a Ta-Nehisi Coates essay and a spoken word poem called “White Privilege.”
The district claimed that the issue was that the language in the works was inappropriate for high school students and that the teacher did not present varying viewpoints on the issue.
NEA and TEA continue to press the teacher’s case to try to win his job back, but during the initial steps of the process—a hearing before an independent hearing officer and the action of the school board in reviewing the hearing officer’s report—the school district has prevailed. The appeal of his discharge is now pending in a Tennessee Chancery Court.
If you are in a state in which public sector collective bargaining is required or allowed, your
(CBA) may provide some protection for teachers’ academic freedom.
Often, CBAs recognize the role that academic freedom plays in encouraging students to think critically and independently.
CBA provisions may allow teachers to present controversial issues to their students, if they follow certain rules.
Common rules include:
- the lessons must relate to the teacher’s subject or the official curriculum;
- the lessons must be appropriate for the students’ age; and
- the teacher must be fair, balanced, and not advocate a particular viewpoint.
Some also require teachers to clear controversial lessons with administrators beforehand.
Like legislation aimed at K-12 teaching, anti-DEI legislation adopted recently in numerous states expands the grounds for discipline and removal of any higher education faculty or staff who engage in certain DEI-related activities. A number of states, including Alabama, Indiana, and Florida, have adopted laws that prohibit teaching on certain topics often labeled "divisive concepts," such as theories that “systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States.”
Several states, including Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Tennessee, and North Dakota, bar institutions from compelling students to affirm or adopt certain ideas related to race, sex, or other characteristics.
