tp20.xml
Title
tp20.xml
Source
born-digital
Media Type
story
Date Entered
2003-02-24
TomPaine Story: Story
One year after September 11th, the debate over what to teach kids about 9/11 reveals a continued climate of intolerance and hate
As the anniversary of September 11th approaches, flag factories work overtime and political alchemists prepare to turn real pain and grief into cries for continued war. But perhaps most dangerous of all, cultural conservatives (and even many liberals ) scramble to load their weapons with propaganda and disinformation aimed point blank at the minds of American kids.
Among those involved in the education business (as it is fast becoming one), debate has raged in the last week about what Sept. 11th s lessons plans will look like in classrooms across the country. Should multiculturalism and psychological healing be stressed over patriotism and civics? Should U.S. policies and the history of American intervention abroad be critically examined? Should motives besides pure evil be broached?
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman says no. In his piece on 9/11 Lesson Plans, Friedman proposes class discussions that stress the superiority of our Western democratic system (despite some transgressions) while reminding kids that although most people in the world are good and decent, there are evil people out there who are not poor, not abused just envious (NY Times, 9/4/02).
As Mr. Bennet, former education secretary, echoes, A careful, complete reading of our nation s history shows that, while we have surely had our failings, on the whole America s record is one of promoting peace and justice at home and abroad. Teachers must be willing to say there are moral absolutes (NY Times, 8/31/02).
While throwing around words like democracy and morality, such declarations are actually the epitome of un-free and uncritical thought. They concede that the U.S. s hands are not clean and that the state of the world is one of increasing inequality and disparity. But when the likes of Friedman and Bennet confront the really tough, uncomfortable questions, they resort to the conclusion that there is such a thing as pure evil.
In the classroom, when one student is mean to another for no apparent reason, teachers usually look for the root causes of such behavior, examining factors such as the students frustrations with school, family life or past history. Somehow, when we begin to talk about adults, especially those in far away countries that look different, unexplainable evil becomes an option. Even homegrown combatants of the John Walker Lindh variety are afforded humanizing CNN specials that speak to the root causes and complexity of his story while terrorists with darker skin are just B-A-D.
One year after Sept. 11th, the dispute over lesson plans reveals an enduring climate of racism and hate that should worry us more than any recurring attack. The National Education Association, the country s largest teachers union, got so much heat for a proposed lesson plan on tolerance that it removed the material from its website. So unless you re going to promote the chief American values of revenge and intolerance, you had better shut your mouth.
Beyond the quibbles between the right and the center about what teachers should infuse into the minds of kids next Wednesday, the recent debate also exposes a frighteningly condescending and conservative attitude about pedagogy. Students are treated as receptacles of previously thought out bits of information rather than dynamic thinkers capable of sophisticated and complex dialogue. When in fact, anyone that has taken the time to really talk and listen to young people knows their amazing capacity for fairness and love, something adults could surely learn from.
In a 6th grade Journalism class, we came across the word manipulate and I suggested that one of my students look it up. When we discovered that the word was left out of the children s dictionary, I explained what it meant and asked the class why they thought it was not there. One student replied, Because they want to do that to you.
Kids are not born hating others. Racism and intolerance are taught.
Aside from the debate surrounding the lesson plans of a single day, we need to discuss and resist the increasingly standardized and a-historic nature of curriculum as a whole. In such an overwhelmingly conservative time, when the rhetoric of the mainstream and our school textbooks are backdrops for war without end, critical dialogue between educators and students can be a tool for meaningful thought and action. Despite Lynn Cheney, John Ashcroft and their fellow crusaders, the right to think is one that no amount of PATRIOT Acts can restrain. Let s use it.
As the anniversary of September 11th approaches, flag factories work overtime and political alchemists prepare to turn real pain and grief into cries for continued war. But perhaps most dangerous of all, cultural conservatives (and even many liberals ) scramble to load their weapons with propaganda and disinformation aimed point blank at the minds of American kids.
Among those involved in the education business (as it is fast becoming one), debate has raged in the last week about what Sept. 11th s lessons plans will look like in classrooms across the country. Should multiculturalism and psychological healing be stressed over patriotism and civics? Should U.S. policies and the history of American intervention abroad be critically examined? Should motives besides pure evil be broached?
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman says no. In his piece on 9/11 Lesson Plans, Friedman proposes class discussions that stress the superiority of our Western democratic system (despite some transgressions) while reminding kids that although most people in the world are good and decent, there are evil people out there who are not poor, not abused just envious (NY Times, 9/4/02).
As Mr. Bennet, former education secretary, echoes, A careful, complete reading of our nation s history shows that, while we have surely had our failings, on the whole America s record is one of promoting peace and justice at home and abroad. Teachers must be willing to say there are moral absolutes (NY Times, 8/31/02).
While throwing around words like democracy and morality, such declarations are actually the epitome of un-free and uncritical thought. They concede that the U.S. s hands are not clean and that the state of the world is one of increasing inequality and disparity. But when the likes of Friedman and Bennet confront the really tough, uncomfortable questions, they resort to the conclusion that there is such a thing as pure evil.
In the classroom, when one student is mean to another for no apparent reason, teachers usually look for the root causes of such behavior, examining factors such as the students frustrations with school, family life or past history. Somehow, when we begin to talk about adults, especially those in far away countries that look different, unexplainable evil becomes an option. Even homegrown combatants of the John Walker Lindh variety are afforded humanizing CNN specials that speak to the root causes and complexity of his story while terrorists with darker skin are just B-A-D.
One year after Sept. 11th, the dispute over lesson plans reveals an enduring climate of racism and hate that should worry us more than any recurring attack. The National Education Association, the country s largest teachers union, got so much heat for a proposed lesson plan on tolerance that it removed the material from its website. So unless you re going to promote the chief American values of revenge and intolerance, you had better shut your mouth.
Beyond the quibbles between the right and the center about what teachers should infuse into the minds of kids next Wednesday, the recent debate also exposes a frighteningly condescending and conservative attitude about pedagogy. Students are treated as receptacles of previously thought out bits of information rather than dynamic thinkers capable of sophisticated and complex dialogue. When in fact, anyone that has taken the time to really talk and listen to young people knows their amazing capacity for fairness and love, something adults could surely learn from.
In a 6th grade Journalism class, we came across the word manipulate and I suggested that one of my students look it up. When we discovered that the word was left out of the children s dictionary, I explained what it meant and asked the class why they thought it was not there. One student replied, Because they want to do that to you.
Kids are not born hating others. Racism and intolerance are taught.
Aside from the debate surrounding the lesson plans of a single day, we need to discuss and resist the increasingly standardized and a-historic nature of curriculum as a whole. In such an overwhelmingly conservative time, when the rhetoric of the mainstream and our school textbooks are backdrops for war without end, critical dialogue between educators and students can be a tool for meaningful thought and action. Despite Lynn Cheney, John Ashcroft and their fellow crusaders, the right to think is one that no amount of PATRIOT Acts can restrain. Let s use it.
Collection
Citation
“tp20.xml,” September 11 Digital Archive, accessed May 18, 2024, https://911digitalarchive.org/items/show/607.