❓Why do we notice recurring suggestions for removing certain literacy pieces from the curriculum? ❓What additional tasks should teachers take on for contextualising debated educational content? ❓Is cancel culture the only way for educating children nowadays?
You may have also noticed some recurring initiatives bubbling to the surface from time to time, which suggest withdrawing certain literary pieces, for example, on behalf of their lack of political correctness, as we define it nowadays.
I remember my first shock related to such proposals during a seminar while I was studying “Intercultural Communication and Education”. I learnt then about on-going discussions on removing Uncle Tom’s Cabin or, Life Among the Lowly by Harriet Beecher Stowe from being read and discussed in school. Together with the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, this was one of the standard recommendations in my home-country for the reading list during the long summer breaks.
If you prefer to listen to this article instead of reading it, I recorded it for you at the end of this page.
In the same seminar, I also learnt about some of the reasons for requesting this removal of canonic literacy pieces, such as the promotion of inappropriate attitudes towards vulnerable communities, racist formulations and lack of additional guidance at home for pupils who come across these texts in school. Given the higher and higher pressure on teachers to include so many aspects in their daily teaching practice – inclusion, linguistic support, addressing individual needs etc. etc., it becomes less and less realistic for them to find the time to thoroughly explain the historical context in which these literacy pieces were written.
In many cases, presenting the circumstances accurately implies knowing more than the details on the on-going literary movement at that time – for example, key-facts about the historical setting are essential as well. At least some of the teachers I have so far worked with considered the extended research on the topic and organising the output in a comprehensible way for pupils an overwhelming task. Continuing teaching about these topics in the “traditional” manner seemed more appealing for them, but it collided with the raising voices showing the negative side-effects of this approach.
Without a clear picture of the context in which a literary piece was written, we can easily imagine that some children could feel justified or even encouraged to call their colleagues of colour “negro”, given that the character in the book also spoke this way. And others might follow their example and do the same, thus perpetuating this discriminating attitude and vocabulary.
On the other hand, continuously removing everything that is not politically correct according to the ever-changing rules in this area is a never-ending job requiring a lot of effort. I find it similar to removing all obstacles from a child learning to walk.
Could there be another way of handling this situation?
In my view, a sustainable method would be guiding learners to navigate their way by noticing and correctly assessing the interferences. The stairs of learning can be built by teachers and parents joining hands in offering the necessary support for children to develop their critical thinking. Thus in time they can research and understand by themselves the circumstances in which literacy, music, art etc. was created and decide for themselves to which extent it is still appropriate. It’s not an easy task at all, but, considering its long-term aim of raising critical thinkers, I find it’s worth all the effort.
What alternatives do you find suitable? I’m interested in your experience and suggestions.
Yours confidently,
Corina
Hi Corina, interesting topic, thank you for a great read! I reckon that the cancel culture is reminiscent of Idiocracy (excuse my cynical comment). You are right, censorship is uncalled for and it takes time to purge, plus, it is inefficient and superficial. Political correctness, if I can call it this way, happens in formal environments mostly and less behind the curtains.
What happens if you censor these works in school? Great, the institution is not to be blamed, impeccable reputation (or is it, due to censorship?). But is this the goal?
Children/teenagers will find these words or concepts written on walls, or on hate messages/fake news on Facebook and will not be prepared to react. School is the safe/right place to expose children to such situations, explain their context, leave room for debate/thought on the morality of things and of course such discussions would have a nice rounding up to them at home if possible – as a strong foundation for adulthood (the reverse learning can occur as well: teenagers in this case can also be nudging parents to change old views, once reaching a critical age). Cultivating critical thinking in turn has also other advantages, helping long term with adopting healthy behaviors (so less medical or mental health expenses) and with more purposeful living which can serve society better overall. It takes time and it’s not easy, but it’s a must, going beyond comfort or facades.