From the fights about the teaching of evolution to the details of sex
education, it may seem like American schools are hotbeds of controversy.
But as Jonathan Zimmerman and Emily Robertson show in this insightful
book, it is precisely because such topics are so inflammatory outside
school walls that they are so commonly avoided within them. And this,
they argue, is a tremendous disservice to our students. Armed with a
detailed history of the development of American educational policy and
norms and a clear philosophical analysis of the value of contention in
public discourse, they show that one of the best things American schools
should do is face controversial topics dead on, right in their
classrooms.
Zimmerman and Robertson highlight an aspect of American politics that we
know all too well: We are terrible at having informed, reasonable
debates. We opt instead to hurl insults and accusations at one another
or, worse, sit in silence and privately ridicule the other side.
Wouldn't an educational system that focuses on how to have such
debates in civil and mutually respectful ways improve our public culture
and help us overcome the political impasses that plague us today? To
realize such a system, the authors argue that we need to not only better
prepare our educators for the teaching of hot-button issues, but also
provide them the professional autonomy and legal protection to do so.
And we need to know exactly what constitutes a controversy, which is
itself a controversial issue. The existence of climate change, for
instance, should not be subject to discussion in schools: scientists
overwhelmingly agree that it exists. How we prioritize it against other
needs, such as economic growth, however--that is worth a debate.
With clarity and common-sense wisdom, Zimmerman and Robertson show that
our squeamishness over controversy in the classroom has left our
students woefully underserved as future citizens. But they also show
that we can fix it: if we all just agree to disagree, in an atmosphere
of mutual respect.
