Free speech in the classroom
A moral framework must presuppose civil discourse in a classroom
Speech within the walls of a school is not protected by the First Amendment. Students can be reprimanded for certain forms of speech, namely when it disrupts the function of the school, in ways that it cannot be (or should not be) in the public square. This poses limits for preparing students for life outside of the classroom. To some extent, students just need to learn about and come to know what speech is protected by the First Amendment—and what is not—without necessarily experiencing such speech play out within a school. Instructing students in how to engage in civil discourse, and allowing them to practice it, while adhering to the limits of speech in a school setting, is one way that educators prepare students for civic life to the extent that they can. Preparation in a liberal society entails entertaining views from a variety of perspectives about what is right and wrong and how one should live, meaning disagreements and the clashing of views are inevitable.
A hallmark of a classroom that invites and actively promotes civil discourse is the openness it provides students to share their opinions on a range of topics, including those that are most contentious. And not just opinions, but also one’s deeply held beliefs. In these classrooms, students are provided the space and freedom to share their opinions on current events and political debates and the beliefs that they hold most near and dear. Their fellow classmates, in turn, are provided the freedom to challenge those opinions and beliefs. The openness to share and challenge comes with the caveat that the discourse remains civil—no name calling, no accusations of an -ism, and no responses of disgust. Instead of judgement, students are encouraged to maintain an attitude of curiosity, of wanting to know why a fellow classmate thinks what they think or believes what they believe. And the one sharing their opinions or beliefs, in many of these sorts of classrooms, is encouraged to remain open to being wrong.
Sharing an opinion or deeply held belief is typically optional, but even so, this sort of openness can be risky. A young person’s beliefs, more so than their opinions, may be shaken, but more than that, the views that her family holds may be challenged. Civil discourse then has the potential to put the young person at odds with his or her family, the people who care for them. If the student changes their mind, concluding through discourse with fellow classmates that their deeply held beliefs, and thus those of their parents, are wrong then they are also concluding that their parents are wrong, their upbringing is wrong, and so forth. This risk is especially high in our liberal society because most children attend schools with students who do not share their family’s religion or philosophy on living.
Granted, many educators who encourage the discussion of contentious topics tied to particular belief systems aim for understanding, not consensus. They aren’t necessarily attempting to get students to change their mind, but, nonetheless, having your beliefs shaken can be jarring. And, anyway, contentious topics that arise from a particular belief system cannot be resolved through civil discourse when a classroom is filled with students who hold different dearly held beliefs about what is right and wrong and what is the best way to live. Thus, another risk of a school committed to practicing civil discourse about contentious topics is the potential for unending conflict within the classroom.
Ideally, a school is embedded within a community with a shared tradition—a shared belief system. A community where school administrators, teachers, parents, and students all operate within the same moral framework. When this happens, establishing and enforcing norms regarding how everyone should be treated is done with ease because the norms are embedded in the community writ large, and beliefs about what is right and wrong are agreed upon, implicitly and explicitly, inside and outside of the school. When it comes to challenging deeply held beliefs, what fellow students are really challenging in this sort of community is how shared beliefs are interpreted, and they are pushing each other to go deeper into their understanding of these beliefs. They are not saying or implying that the belief is wrong because it’s understood that the beliefs are shared among everyone within the classroom.
In a liberal society most schools aren’t comprised of administrators, teachers, and students who share a set of beliefs. Thus, how can conflict be kept at bay if a subject area or course of study necessitates discussing controversial topics? How can schools prepare students for the ideal of civic life, where controversial topics are navigated with a clear head and with minimal conflict?
Children should walk into school, especially when they are older and faced with topics that challenge their beliefs, with a strong foundation. The strong foundation helps them stand firm in what they believe so that they are not easily pushed into accepting a differing opinion on the matter without careful consideration. By standing firm in their beliefs, a young person can listen to and read about how others view the world and consider that point of view in a way that allows them to question it and compare it to how they view the world with thoughtfulness rather than defensiveness. This strong foundation may be supported by curriculum presented in a school in the case of religious schools or selective schools embedded in a moral framework, but by and large, this foundation is developed at home.
When I think about this foundation, a specific image comes to mind. A yoga pose, to be exact: tree pose.
In tree pose, the yogi balances on one foot, while turning the non-balancing leg out, thus opening their hips, and placing the other onto their ankle, calf, or thigh (never the knee!). Beginners start with their non-balancing foot on their ankle so that they can have their toes on the ground, assisting with balance. Once their body, and focus, is strong, not shaky, they can begin to lift their toes off the floor and bring their non-balancing foot to their calf or thigh, relying solely upon their standing leg to maintain balance. The yogi’s hands begin on their hips, and once they are balancing steadily, they can move their hands to a prayer pose at the center of their chest or, in full expression, extend both arms in the air.
While practicing any balancing pose, a yogi’s gaze is fixed on one spot, referred to as their drishti. A yogi’s drishti helps them calm their mind and maintain their focus. If they take their gaze off of their dristi to look at someone else, even if just to sneak a glance out of the corner of their eye, they can lose focus and consequently, lose their balance.
Developing a foundational moral framework works in much the same way as mastering tree pose, and its development must presuppose a young person’s engagement in civil discourse within a school and civic life outside of school. They need to develop strong roots to maintain their balance when presented with views that counter their own, and they need to keep focus on their dristi, the core of their belief system, to withstand attempts to lead them astray.