Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T01:25:21.046Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

35 - Teacher Neutrality, Pedagogical Impartiality, and Democratic Education

from Part Four - Challenges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2023

By
Bruce Maxwell
Edited by
Julian Culp ,
Johannes Drerup  and
Douglas Yacek
Julian Culp
Affiliation:
The American University of Paris, France
Johannes Drerup
Affiliation:
Universität Dortmund
Douglas Yacek
Affiliation:
Universität Dortmund
Get access

Summary

When teachers address controversial issues with their students in class, parents, society, and the teaching profession often expect them to adopt a neutral or impartial pedagogical stance. However, scholars have expressed doubts about whether this duty of impartiality is realistic and questioned whether it is educationally desirable. This chapter defends the duty of impartiality by arguing that the key reservations voiced against it in the academic literature are based on different misconceptions about impartial teaching and teacher neutrality: about the meaning of “controversial issue,” about the educational value of being flexible about neutrality in teaching situations, and about what constitutes a reasonable standard of impartiality. Drawing on the legal concept of evenhandedness, the chapter concludes by putting forward an alternative standard of teacher impartiality that walks the line between the inevitably value-laden nature of teaching and the expectation that teachers exercise their authority in a reasonable and responsible way.

Keywords

teaching about controversial issueseducational ethicssocial justice educationteacher neutralityteacher impartialitycivic educationsocial studies education
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Democratic Education , pp. 607 - 627
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agostinone-Wilson, F. (2005). Fair and balanced to death: Confronting the cult of neutrality in the teacher education classroom. Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 3(1), 1–17.Google Scholar
Appelbaum, B. (2009). Is teaching for social justice a “liberal bias”? Teachers College Record, 111(2), 376–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apple, M. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ayers, W., Hunt, J. A., & Quinn, T. (1998). Teaching for social justice. A democracy and education reader. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Barrett, D. E., Casey, J. E., Visser, R. D., & Headley, K. N. (2012). How do teachers make judgments about ethical and unethical behaviors? Toward the development of a code of conduct for teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 890–98.Google Scholar
Bialystok, L. (2014). Politics without “brainwashing”: A philosophical defence of social justice education. Curriculum Inquiry, 44(3), 413–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camicia, S. P. (2008). Deciding what is a controversial issue: A case study of social studies curriculum controversy. Theory & Research in Social Education, 36(4), 298–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, P. T., Anderson, M., & Yoh, A. (2022). “Hey Mom, I missed school today to save the planet!”: Mandatory attendance and student activism – A Canadian perspective. International Journal of Educational Reform, 31(1), 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dearden, R. F. (1981). Controversial issues and the curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 13(1), 37–44.Google Scholar
Gardner, P. (1984). Another look at controversial issues and the curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16(4), 379–85.Google Scholar
Goldston, M. J. D., & Kyzer, P. (2009). Teaching evolution: Narratives with a view from three southern biology teachers in the USA. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(7), 762–90.Google Scholar
Gravel, S., & Lefebvre, S. (2012). Impartialité et neutralité autour du programme québécois éthique et culture religieuse. Le programme d’éthique et culture religieuse: l’exigeante conciliation entre le soi, l’autre et le nous, 191–213.Google Scholar
Hand, M. (2007). Should we teach homosexuality as a controversial issue? Theory and Research in Education, 5(1), 69–86.Google Scholar
Hand, M. (2008). What should we teach as controversial? A defense of the epistemic criterion. Educational Theory, 58(2), 213–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hand, M., & Levinson, R. (2012). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6), 614–29.Google Scholar
Hess, D. E. (2004). Controversies about controversial issues in democratic education. PS: Political Science & Politics, 37(2), 257–61.Google Scholar
Hess, D. E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, D. E., & McAvoy, P. (2014). The political classroom: Evidence and ethics in democratic education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heybach, J. A. (2014). Troubling neutrality: Toward a philosophy of teacher ambiguity. Philosophical Studies in Education, 45, 43–54.Google Scholar
Journell, W. (2011a). Teachers’ controversial issue decisions related to race, gender, and religion during the 2008 Presidential Election. Theory & Research in Social Education, 39, 348–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Journell, W. (2011b). Teaching politics in secondary education: Analyzing instructional methods from the 2008 Presidential Election. The Social Studies, 102(6), 231–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Journell, W. (2011c). The disclosure dilemma in action: A qualitative look at the effect of teacher disclosure on classroom instruction. Journal of Social Studies Research, 35(2), 217–44.Google Scholar
Journell, W. (2012). Ideological homogeneity, school leadership, and political intolerance in secondary education: A study of three high schools during the 2008 Presidential Election. Journal of School Leadership, 22, 569–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Journell, W. (2016). Teacher political disclosure as parrhēsia. Teachers College Record, 118(5), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazepides, T. (1983) Socialization, initiation and indoctrination. In Kerr, D. H., ed., Philosophy of education 1982: Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the philosophy of education society. Normal, IL: Philosophy of Education Society, Illinois State University, pp. 309–18.Google Scholar
Kelly, T. E. (1986). Discussing controversial issues: Four perspectives on the teacher’s role. Theory & Research in Social Education, 14(2), 113–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, D. M., & Brandes, G. M. (2001). Shifting out of “neutral”: Beginning teachers’ struggles with teaching for social justice. Canadian Journal of Education/Revue canadienne de l’education, 437–54.Google Scholar
Loyola High School v. Quebec (Attorney General), 2009 SCC 12. Available at: https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/14703/index.do.Google Scholar
Maxwell, B., & Schwimmer, M. (2016). Seeking the elusive ethical base of teacher professionalism in Canadian codes of ethics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 468–80.Google Scholar
Maxwell, B., McDonough, K., & Waddington, D. I. (2018). Broaching the subject: Developing law-based principles for teacher free speech in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 196–203.Google Scholar
Moglen, H. (1996). Unveiling the myth of neutrality: Advocacy in the feminist classroom. In Spacks, P. Meyer, ed., Advocacy in the classroom: Problems and possibilities. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 204–12.Google Scholar
Morris, R. W. (2011). Cultivating reflection and understanding: Foundations and orientations of Québec’s Ethics and Religious Culture Program. Religion & Education, 38(3), 188–211.Google Scholar
Niemi, N. S., & Niemi, R. G. (2007). Partisanship, participation, and political trust as taught (or not) in high school history and government classes. Theory & Research in Social Education, 35(1), 32–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noddings, N. (1993). Educating for intelligent belief or unbelief. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Norman, R. (1975). The neutral teacher? In Brown, S. C., ed., Philosophers discuss education. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 172–87.Google Scholar
Oulton, C., Day, V., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. (2004). Controversial issues – teachers’ attitudes and practices in the context of citizenship education. Oxford review of education, 30(4), 489–507.Google Scholar
Parker, W. (2010). Listening to strangers: Classroom discussion in democratic education. Teachers College Record, 112(11), 2815–32.Google Scholar
Payne, K. A., & Journell, W. (2019). “We have those kinds of conversations here…”: Addressing contentious politics with elementary students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 79, 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, R. S. (1965). Education as initiation. In Archambault, R. D., ed., Philosophical analysis and education. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 87–110.Google Scholar
Reboul, O. (1977). L’endoctrinement. Presses de l’Université de France.Google Scholar
Swalwell, K., & Schweber, S. (2016). Teaching through turmoil: Social studies teachers and local controversial current events. Theory & Research in Social Education, 44(3), 283–315.Google Scholar
Tanchuk, N., Rocha, T., & Krus, M. (2021). Is comprehensive liberal social justice education brainwashing? Philosophy of Education, 77(2). doi: 10.47925/77.2.044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warnock, M. (1975). The neutral teacher. In Brown, S. C., ed., Philosophers discuss education. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 159–71.Google Scholar
Westheimer, J. (2015). What kind of citizen? Educating our children for the common good. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, J, & Robertson, E. (2017). The case for contention: Teaching controversial issues in American schools. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×