Politics in School.

[John McPain]

*Note*
This is not the thread to discuss your feelings toward any of the political issues mentioned. Please stick to the questions stated.



Learning about how our government works is very important. Discovering your own feelings toward issues like abortion, gay marriage, and the death penalty is a step (I belive) toward adulthood and is equaly important.

Here are the questions.

1. Is it ethical for teachers to tell childern what is right and what is wrong in the context of political issues?

2. At what age group do most children start figuring out how they (not their parents, not their friends or peers) feel on certain issues. This is the age group that I belive would be acceptable for a teacher to bring up issues for a report, debate, or class discussion and state his/her opinion on political, or religious issues (but not tell students what is right and what is wrong).


I belive that teachers (especialy thoes that teach young children) should not be permited to discuss political or religious issues. I say this because of how impressionable young children are. They don't understand that authority figures make mistakes, and are imperfect. I belive that a first grade teacher that expresses his/her opinon (from the child's perspective) is expressing the "correct" way to feel about that issue.
Seriously, can a child in the first grade even partialy comprehend what abortion or gay marriage is?
Number two I will leave up to you.

[rzr]

Anyone can contemplate abortion, religion, or politics. As long as they can understand the fundamentals enough to grasp the concept of the term, they can ponder. Adults wil naturally dismiss the validity of underage people. Children can just as well. So, I do believe politics should be taught in schools, not morals though. To me, there's a line between morality and logic. Most people don't see that line. It may be morally excusable to teach a child right from wrong, but not logically. I can expand on this if desired.

[John McPain]

Please do, and "It may be morally excusable to teach a child right from wrong"
there are different opinions about right and wrong and that is what I am getting at.
I think its wrong for a teacher to say "gay marriage is wrong/right"

[devonin]

1. Is it ethical for teachers to tell childern what is right and what is wrong in the context of political issues?

Teachers should never include their own personal opinion on any subject, especially politics, religion or philosophy. The job of a teacher is to expose you to all sides of a given issue, and teach you the analytical tools to gauge those sides and draw your own reasoned conclusion.

I had an Ethics professor in University who even outside lectures, in class discussion simply outright refused to tell us his personal stance on any of the issues we discussed. It wasn't his place to try and influence us one way or another, and he didn't want us thinking that on papers we would do better to agree with him.

a teacher to bring up issues for a report, debate, or class discussion and state his/her opinion on political, or religious issues (but not tell students what is right and what is wrong).

As above, I think that teachers simply shouldn't provide their own personal opinion on these issues. They should provide all sides in as neutral a manner as possible, and let the students draw their own conclusions.

[Ground_Breaker]

Originally Posted by John McPain

I belive that a first grade teacher that expresses his/her opinon (from the child's perspective) is expressing the "correct" way to feel about that issue.

"Correct" for whom?

This question reminds me of the debate surrounding religious beliefs taught in school. The discussion is the same in that instance as it will be here. I agree with Devonin in that it's not a teacher's job to tell you what he/she thinks is "right" or "ok", but to present all sides of an issue and let you make the decision for yourself.

I'm finishing up a philosophy course at the junior college near where I live, and the professor has never taken either side of any issue that we've discussed. I'm thankful for that, because most of the time there are arguments among members of the class, and I'd rather have that than arguments between the professor and some other student.

Originally Posted by John McPain

At what age group do most children start figuring out how they (not their parents, not their friends or peers) feel on certain issues.

I'm sure there isn't a specific age group where children suddenly realize they have an opinion about things. Most likely it varies from person to person.

Originally Posted by John McPain

state his/her opinion on political, or religious issues (but not tell students what is right and what is wrong).

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if you have an opinion about issue, wouldn't that imply that you feel one side is right and the other is wrong?

[John McPain]

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

"Correct" for whom?

I'm sorry if this wasn't clear, but I think the answer was in the part you quoted me on.
(from the child's perspective)

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

I'm sure there isn't a specific age group where children suddenly realize they have an opinion about things. Most likely it varies from person to person.

I agree 100%

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but if you have an opinion about issue, wouldn't that imply that you feel one side is right and the other is wrong?

You have a very true point, but I'm looking at this from the child's perspective. I belive that if an authority figure says somthing or does somthing then a child will assume that that is the correct behaviour.

I graduated last year. In my last 2 years of highschool I had countless one on one debates with teachers. Every one had solid points and in each discussion we gave a little and saw an issue from a different perspective.
This was in my last years of highschool though. I had already made my own personal choices and knew the issues very very well. I was mature enough to understand that just because the authority figure had a different opinion than I did did not mean that I was wrong (or that they were wrong for that matter). There is a maturity level that you just accept that people come from different backgrounds and will have different ideas.

I belive that debates are very good at helping people see things from a different point of view and that is somthing that most children can not contribute to. I belive that insted of putting up good cases for their beliefs they will adopt the stand of the other person 99% of the time..

**edit**
I dont think I answered that last one completely.
Okay hypotheticly speaking lets say that I oppose (to stay away from hot topics that I don't want flying around this thread) a 4 mill tax levy for the school. Just because I'm not for this does not mean that I think that anyone for said levy is wrong, nor do I think that I am right. I'm just trying to look out for my best intrests.

[Ground_Breaker]

Well, how early on are you talking about kids being exposed to these sorts of issues? I doubt politics and other controversial topics are being taught at such an impressionable age that children will instantly believe whatever opinion the teacher has.

Also, in your one on one debates with teachers, were you having them during class, where the teacher's opinion was visible to everyone, or were you having them privately?

Remember that a teacher may argue a point with you because you're arguing the counterpoint, and he/she is seeing how well you know/can defend your opinion. That doesn't necessarily mean the teacher believes whatever he/she is arguing.

[John McPain]

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

Well, how early on are you talking about kids being exposed to these sorts of issues? I doubt politics and other controversial topics are being taught at such an impressionable age that children will instantly believe whatever opinion the teacher has.

Also, in your one on one debates with teachers, were you having them during class, where the teacher's opinion was visible to everyone, or were you having them privately?

Remember that a teacher may argue a point with you because you're arguing the counterpoint, and he/she is seeing how well you know/can defend your opinion. That doesn't necessarily mean the teacher believes whatever he/she is arguing.

These were mostly in privet (I did have a stoner science teacher, but I made his job hell for him...) (((unrelated funny little story) I used to play a game with him. Every day I would open the science book to a random page and ask him the first question I could find. Not once in 180 days did he answer me correctly.))
Anyways the debates I was invited by either the world studies teacher or the math teacher (whom was about my polar opposite when it came to politics) but me and her had alot more in common (belief wise) at the end of my school career.

Originally Posted by Ground_Breaker

Well, how early on are you talking about kids being exposed to these sorts of issues? I doubt politics and other controversial topics are being taught at such an impressionable age that children will instantly believe whatever opinion the teacher has.

I had a teacher in kindergarden telling us (the students) about how she felt about how the rainforests and such should be managed.
I think in middle school students should be challenged to study the issues, and in highschool they should be challenged to back up their beliefs in a debate format.


(((I'm sorry if im rambling, I've been up sence 11 last night)))

[Afrobean]

I had never learned what the real political differentiation was between the left and the right. I took a government class in high school, and never was taught this. I went through high school thinking Republicans were utter trash.

Then I took a basic government class in college and learned the difference, just because the instructor was willing to TELL US. And now I consider myself a right leaning libertarian... and if not for having taken that class, I never would have given the right a chance.

The point here is that they shouldn't say "republicans are wrong", but they also shouldn't abstain from identifying what they are either. Politics should be discussed openly, but without bias. Tell the students what the politics are and let them decide which side of the issue is in line with their personal beliefs for how government should work.

I belive that teachers (especialy thoes that teach young children) should not be permited to discuss political or religious issues.

Such teachers have no reason to touch politics. Students needn't learn such things until high school (or MAYBE junior high at the earliest). If I had learned well enough in my 9th grade government class I had taken, I would be better off. But what is a 10 year old going to do with the knowledge of innate differences of political opinions?

I think its wrong for a teacher to say "gay marriage is wrong/right"

Right, but what should be happening is a clear stating of "Republicans are typically against same sex marriage" and "Democrats are typically in favor of it," at least assuming it is relevant to the class. Don't say whether something is right or wrong, but simply state the stances as they relate to politics.

As an aside, I think it is interesting to note that some students can hold their own in a debate format against these adults. Discussion of personal beliefs is OK in that case, I'd say, because then it ceases to be a teacher trying to influence a student, and it instead becomes two adults discussing their beliefs. Know what I mean?

[NFD]

There's this really, really, really fat kid in my school who ALWAYS where's a shirt supporting the democratic party in our city/state. He always has like, badges, and stickers and stuff, and nobody likes him. I tried talking to him one time, and he was like "*stuffs face* IF YOU'VE GOT NOTHING NICE TO SAY TO ME THEN LEAVE" after I had just walked over and was like "hey".

[John McPain]

Originally Posted by Afrobean

I had never learned what the real political differentiation was between the left and the right. I took a government class in high school, and never was taught this. I went through high school thinking Republicans were utter trash.

Then I took a basic government class in college and learned the difference, just because the instructor was willing to TELL US. And now I consider myself a right leaning libertarian... and if not for having taken that class, I never would have given the right a chance.

The point here is that they shouldn't say "republicans are wrong", but they also shouldn't abstain from identifying what they are either. Politics should be discussed openly, but without bias. Tell the students what the politics are and let them decide which side of the issue is in line with their personal beliefs for how government should work.

Such teachers have no reason to touch politics. Students needn't learn such things until high school (or MAYBE junior high at the earliest). If I had learned well enough in my 9th grade government class I had taken, I would be better off. But what is a 10 year old going to do with the knowledge of innate differences of political opinions?


Right, but what should be happening is a clear stating of "Republicans are typically against same sex marriage" and "Democrats are typically in favor of it," at least assuming it is relevant to the class. Don't say whether something is right or wrong, but simply state the stances as they relate to politics.

As an aside, I think it is interesting to note that some students can hold their own in a debate format against these adults. Discussion of personal beliefs is OK in that case, I'd say, because then it ceases to be a teacher trying to influence a student, and it instead becomes two adults discussing their beliefs. Know what I mean?

I think you and I agree more than any 2 people in the history of CT (in this specific thread).

Originally Posted by NFD

There's this really, really, really fat kid in my school who ALWAYS where's a shirt supporting the democratic party in our city/state. He always has like, badges, and stickers and stuff, and nobody likes him. I tried talking to him one time, and he was like "*stuffs face* IF YOU'VE GOT NOTHING NICE TO SAY TO ME THEN LEAVE" after I had just walked over and was like "hey".

I'm sorry, I think I completely missed your point.

[MDMAngel]

Originally Posted by devonin

I had an Ethics professor in University who even outside lectures, in class discussion simply outright refused to tell us his personal stance on any of the issues we discussed. It wasn't his place to try and influence us one way or another, and he didn't want us thinking that on papers we would do better to agree with him.

That's the way I would imagine a teacher who doesn't want to risk losing their job would act.

Not saying that's a bad thing... in fact, I think it's a good thing. Follow the rules, it's not your place to do anything (usually) outside of the rules.

(edit): Oh, I didn't mean to not post anything on topic... I just wanted to respond...

[devonin]

Oh, I didn't mean to not post anything on topic... I just wanted to respond...

Well, if you're going to not post anything on topic, you ought to just not post.

[lord_carbo]

Originally Posted by devonin

Well, if you're going to not post anything on topic, you ought to just not post.

Double negatives are a bitch.

(~Meant to (~post on topic)) = (meant to (post on topic))

[devonin]

Those were two seperate clauses my friend.

IF intention to post == !topic; !post

I mean, which negative were you advocating that I remove? I should have said "If you are not going to post on topic, you ought to post"? "If you are going to post on topic, you ought to not post"?

[MDMAngel]

Originally Posted by devonin

Those were two separate clauses my friend.

IF intention to post == !topic; !post

I mean, which negative were you advocating that I remove? I should have said "If you are not going to post on topic, you ought to post"? "If you are going to post on topic, you ought to not post"?

I think you just made a post just as irrelevant as my previous post. Is it that or are you just teasing?

(edit):

Originally Posted by devonin

Well, if you're going to not post anything on topic, you ought to just not post.

I was meaning to use this quote.

[devonin]

I was responding to the post directly above mine. The one where he accuses me of a misused double negative. I was addressing his objection. How was that not relevant?

[MDMAngel]

Originally Posted by devonin

I was responding to the post directly above mine. The one where he accuses me of a misused double negative. I was addressing his objection. How was that not relevant?

Oh, I used the wrong quote. I meant the quote before that one.

(edit): Oh. I see, sorry about the confusion... wasn't really planned on being that way.

[devonin]

Oh, well in that case, my comment that if you weren't planning on posting on topic, you should just not post, perhaps I should have coloured green, to indicate that I was "Moderator Devonin" posting that, rather than "User Devonin"

[somethingillremember]

Here's something to consider: if kids aren't subject to some sort of attacks because they are viewed as "just grade schoolers," then by the time they get to college, they will be completely chewed out because they don't know how to back themselves up, especially if they hold highly controversial viewpoints. And also, people should be careful not to subject children (that being people in twelfth grade or below) to only one side of arguments. At my school, a Christian school, I see many people who are subject to only one side of arguments (half of which being about global warming not existing and the world being 6000 years old. Way-to-go for destroying stereotypes!) and often don't hear anything on the other side. I can't be sure, because I haven't asked any of them, but I think that many people who graduate who are Christians and don't go to Christian collages (which are few, and I think that many of those who don't go to Christian colleges actually have looked up how to defend themselves) find it hard to argue points, because they don't know how to counteract them (actually, if you take the right courses, my school does a fairly good job at keeping people educated, but that's if you take the right courses).