Tips for Tackling Controversy

Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Does this quotation also hold value in our Canadian History and Social Studies classrooms? Is the ultimate measure of a teacher and a classroom not how it tackles the everyday, but instead how it tackles the controversial?

I recently attended a session with OISE’s Jill Goodreau and Karen Pashby on Teaching Controversial Issues in our History and Social Studies Classrooms, and have been reflecting ever since on what a little controversy can bring to our classroom. It certainly does nobody any favours to avoid these challenging issues – in many ways, they promote the most valuable opportunities for critical thought and understanding of perspective.

But teaching controversial subjects is intimidating. There’s layer upon layer of assumptions, dominant and marginalized views, and perhaps the worst beast of all: peer pressure. Jill and Karen presented a remarkably simply methodology for tackling these subjects. The full methodology, created by Open Spaces for Dialogue and Enquiry (OSDE), can be found here, and I highly recommend reading it in full.

OSDE proposes a set of basic principles for teaching global and controversial issues:

1. “Every individual brings to the space valid and legitimate knowledge constructed in their own contexts.” That is, the opinions that your students bring are valid, real opinions and should be treated with respect by all. They were formed based on the information the student had access and exposure to.
2. “All knowledge is partial and incomplete.” Because our knowledge is formed based only on the information we have access too, we can never completely know or understand something. We have to accept that all our understandings are at best incomplete.
3. “All knowledge can be questioned.” Yes, even the teacher’s knowledge can be questioned. We should be encouraging critical discussion and engagement. It’s important to note that questioning does not equal disparagement of other opinions, but should rather be seen as the sharpening of our own understandings.

So how does this work in the classroom? In six (nothing is easy) steps:

1. Independently, students reflect on the different assumptions, implications and limitations of the issues and perspectives.
2. Independently, students inform their thinking – recognizing the dominant and marginalized viewpoints, and critically assessing why they are each so.
3. Independently, students reflect on their own view. What assumptions brought them to this decision? Are they open to new ideas?
4. In groups, students reflect on key tensions and explore ideas. Notice how they don’t talk with other students until step FOUR in the process! This gives students time to formulate their own opinions without the force of peer pressure.
5. Students reflect on the action elements of this issue. How would the four prior steps change your decisions and actions on this issue? Would they have acted differently without reflection?
6. Last, the debrief of the learning process. What have students learned about themselves, others and the importance of knowledge? And for teachers (or perhaps teachers and students) – how can we improve this dialogue around assumptions in our classrooms?

It’s simple but incredibly complex at the same time. Teachers would likely want to provide a number of different perspectives (gleaned from Primary Source documents, online news comment boards), and at least a beginning of questions for Steps 3 & 4. The class environment would have to be a safe one – where students and the teacher understand the principles and show respect.

There are, of course, a number of ways to teach controversial issues, and this is only one. Do you have another way? Please share it with us!