Politics in the Classroom?
From the Editors:
In this post we consider whether or not professors should aim to remain neutral on potentially charged topics in the classroom. Is it okay for them to step beyond the objectives of their course? Can they talk politics, religion, ethics and their opinions on matters beyond their areas of expertise?
Pro
In its mission statement, Dartmouth says that it “fosters lasting bonds…which encourage…collegiality.” Dartmouth and other Universities have made it clear that their mission is not just to educate and publish research, but to create a supportive community, as well. Definitionally, communities have common issues and values that are important to them. Cohesiveness requires the entire community coming together to address these issues. Professors make up a large part of the Dartmouth population and share many common values with the student body. My engineering professors espouse Dartmouth’s liberal arts focus. I have heard them speak freely and deeply on history and literature. Faculty thereby value their role as a large and significant part of the campus community. They also have the most visibility on campus during lectures. While faculty members can speak with students in other places such as housing communities or discussion panels, these events are optional to students and have lower attendance than class time. Professors’ role in the Dartmouth community would be significantly diminished if it were compartmentalized to optional events. Their use of class time to speak on issues of politics, ethics, etc. that affect campus life may be the most effective way to facilitate Professors’ participation in the college community.
Dartmouth’s mission statement also says that it “encourages independence of thought within a culture of collaboration.” When professors speak about subjective topics beyond their curriculum, students should weigh this as an individual’s opinion instead of as dogma, according to a mission statement that encourages freedom of thought. A Professor’s voicing of political opinion could motivate students to research politics and form their own thoughts, instead of blindly looking up to faculty as their superiors and adopt their thinking. Particularly in STEM subjects, where there is little scope for subjective discussion, hearing a professor’s opinions on extracurricular topics is a great way for students to learn how faculty think. When a professor respectfully voices opinion on subjects outside their expertise, their human and personable side is more visible. Professors who speak relatively freely in class may seem more accessible and trustworthy. Trust between students and faculty strengthens the campus community. Trust also facilitates conversation, bolstering and supplement curricular learning.
If professors were not allowed to use class time to speak on areas outside their expertise, an issue arises when defining areas of expertise. Many professors and courses at Dartmouth are inherently multidisciplinary. During my classics course, my professor openly lamented Trump’s election. Classics is a far cry from American Politics. However, classical ethics provides a framework for judging political discourse. The professor’s digression interestingly tied into our class’ study of Aristotle. Analogously, the rigors of engineering appear extremely distinct from the subjectivity of ethics. However, structural and environmental engineering courses weigh the human impact of innovation. Thorough understanding of engineering principles such as risk mitigation and safety standards not only involves but requires ethics. Discussions of contentious current events could bolster an understanding of these topics. In a range of fields, seemingly off-topic discourse can actually provide useful and refreshingly illustrative perspectives.
Con
The question of whether professors should be allowed to talk about politics, religion, and ethics in the classroom can only be answered by looking at the core role of education in a student’s life. A proper education should give students the tools that they need to view the world around them critically, as well as give students rational problem-solving skills. In short, education helps students be individualist thinkers rather than conformists. By extension, the best teachers are those who strive to nurture creative thinkers who question the world around them and to guide students as they form personal value systems and moralities. Rather than being forced to accept the truth as it is told by others, students should be allowed to be intrinsically curious about what they learn and seek the truth for themselves. Thus, a teacher’s role is not to teach students what to think; it is to teach them how to think and to prepare them to go off into the world ready to think for themselves.
Professors, then, need to remain impartial in the classroom. This doesn’t mean that professors cannot speak about politics, religion, or ethics if it pertains to their subjects. Rather, they should present the facts about the topic at hand and allow students to make their own opinions. In order to truly help students understand topics and questions being presented to them, professors need to be able to play “devil’s advocate” and argue for both sides of the topic. However, this is impossible to do convincingly if the students already know what their professor believes.
For example, suppose a left-leaning professor is presenting a lecture on healthcare in America. Democrats and Republicans would certainly have differing ideas on the subject. If the professor remained neutral, students would be given the opportunity to debate amongst themselves. Democrats and Republicans discussing the topic would both be forced to make arguments based on their fundamental understanding of the ideas being presented to them and to challenge the other’s arguments using ethics and logic. This both forces students to truly understand the material the professor is trying to teach and helps students build critical debate skills, as well. However, if the professor had opened the discussion by telling the students that she agreed with the Democratic Party, then Democrats in the class would simply agree with the professor and move on, while Republicans wouldn’t speak up for fear of receiving poor grades from the professor or starting a debate. The students would lose the opportunity to deepen their understanding of the topic and wouldn’t be able to have important conversations that helped them become better thinkers and debaters.
Professors who are able to effectively give their students the tools to debate and think creatively do not need to give students their opinions on political, religious, or ethical matters at hand because it is counterintuitive; it keeps their students from growing intellectually. Instead of simply giving students dogmatic answers to complex questions with no true right or wrong, they should steer students onto a path of curiosity and learning, making their students true citizens of the world who are as informed as they can possibly be, and who are equipped to handle an increasingly divided world.