Was my son's teacher out of line?

February 24, 2016 2:23 PM

My son is a freshman in high school. During American History class he complained about the Tea Party Libertarians hijacking the "don't tread on me" flag. (We have an unpleasant tea partier in the family who has certainly influenced my son's thinking.) His teacher responded by printing out this chart for him. My son wasn't sure what to make of it and brought it home for me. I'm not sure what to make of it either.

The chart comes across as biased to me. If the teacher really wanted my son to know more about Libertarians I think he could have given him a more neutral source. It just strikes me as odd that he did it at all. He didn't discuss it with my son, he just printed it out and moved on with the lesson, so he didn't provide any context or offer my son an opportunity to ask questions.
Am I reading this wrong? Was it an appropriate response to my son's comment?

(This was during a lesson on the Revolutionary War, not current affairs or politics.)

posted by Biblio to Education (36 answers total)

I think it's a good starting point, but the missing piece here from the teacher is the question to your son: "What do you think about this chart?"

The other thing to consider is that teenage boys can be insufferable at times, and your son is old enough to work this out with his teacher.
posted by My Dad at 2:25 PM on February 24, 2016

Sounds like not especially deft teaching, but that doesn't look like a libertarian recruitment document or anything (though I agree it's not unbiased). Has your son asked his teacher why he gave him that chart?
posted by chaiminda at 2:29 PM on February 24, 2016

You have a discussion with your son about it (what does he think, what do you think) then tomorrow he goes to school and says to his teacher "This is really interesting! Can we talk about it?" Forget about being offended.
posted by ThatCanadianGirl at 2:34 PM on February 24, 2016

The site it's from is libertyviral.com which labels itself as "for people who love individual liberty and free markets." So from my perspective, it loks exactly like a libertarian recruitment document. But I myself am not unbiased (I have a knee-jerk allergy to Libertarianism), so take that into account.....
posted by primethyme at 2:40 PM on February 24, 2016

It's annoying to me but I don't know how to respond to it.
I'm Lefty and I don't want to ban guns.
The Republicans and Libertarians are the only ones that "give generously to those in need".
Boy, I could go on and on with that list.

grrrrr....
posted by ReluctantViking at 2:46 PM on February 24, 2016

This could be a good exercise for your son in learning to evaluate sources and identify biases. Ideally, his teacher might have taken the time to work through some of this with him but there are some definite inaccuracies in that chart, and the "libertarian" box isn't really representative of the Tea Party Libertarians that your son has a problem with.

I'd maybe point those out to your son and then encourage him to have a chat with the teacher about it outside of class time. I wouldn't advise bringing it up with the teacher or anything yourself.
posted by sparklemotion at 2:52 PM on February 24, 2016

It's a ridiculous chart. The Left stands for "special treatment for select minorities"? The Left bans guns? Please. (And those are only two of a number of stupid things on the chart.)

So no, it was not an appropriate response.
posted by merejane at 2:53 PM on February 24, 2016

This is a stupid, noneducational chart. I think if my son asked me what I thought I'd say that it looks like his teacher is either a libertarian who is into using his authority questionably, or an extremely ill-informed person who Googled a random chart and printed it off. Good object lesson about 1) authority means nothing if it's not wielded responsibly and 2) things on the internet look authoritative but are not.
posted by stoneandstar at 2:56 PM on February 24, 2016

Definitely leans libertarian to me. WTH is a "government charity", anyway?

If this is supposed to make generalizations, then it shows that Libertarians also can't spell (“seperation” ...?)
posted by scruss at 3:01 PM on February 24, 2016

This chart is Libertarian propaganda. It is totally inappropriate for a high school teacher to hand it to a student. The fact that he just gave it to him without comment would seem to indicate that he thinks it represents "the truth." I don't think my response will be popular, but I would give it to the principal and say I don't think teachers should be pushing their political beliefs on students. I would have the same response no matter what political party the teacher was supporting.
posted by FencingGal at 3:06 PM on February 24, 2016

Eh...I might flag the teacher for laziness w/r/t the chart being a shitty, biased chart, but having been a high school teacher at one point I've definitely seen more egregious and explicit biases conveyed to students.

Your son should absolutely follow up with the teacher and determine what the teacher intended by giving him this chart, and asking the teacher if the teacher feels this is unbiased -- basically, turn this question around and ask the teacher, "What do you think of this chart and Libertarianism?" That should tell you a lot about whether to be outraged or just a bit miffed.
posted by mosk at 3:07 PM on February 24, 2016

I would say out of line mostly because the chart is not at all a response to his question (which was about Tea Partiers specifically). Also, the chart is weirdly biased. Like, how is using eminent domain for private gain a left-wing thing? Even taking for granted a biased point of view, I don't understand that one. And "giving generously to help those in need" on the "right" side only is a big no.

That said, it is not clear to me whether the teacher was trying to push libertarian propaganda on your son, or whether he googled "libertarian" and this is what popped up. (Note, when I do a google image search for "what is libertarian" this image pops up a lot!) The lack of any additional discussion leads me to believe that it is possible the latter is the case. It sounds like your son's question, while potentially interesting, was pretty far off topic and the teacher probably wanted to get things back on track as quickly as possible so that the actual material for the day could be fully covered. From the teacher's perspective, a better approach would have been something like "we don't have time to discuss this right now, but feel free to swing by after school/after class/during a free period and we can talk more." But, as a teacher myself, I can definitely understand getting annoyed with off-topic questions, especially if your son makes a frequent habit of this (I'm not clear if that's the case).

In any case. Your son is of an age where I think he can handle this himself. At the point where the teacher was, say, grading him down for his political beliefs, I think that would be a reasonable point for a parent to get involved. But being able to confront an authority figure and talk through things with a person who has different political view points -- those are good skills and there's no reason your son can't work on those things. Heaven knows I did in a school where we were not taught evolution (the devil's work) and plenty of other ridiculousness (grew up in a very rural area). My parents were aware and quite annoyed with the biased state of science education in my school, but mostly left me to work it out with teachers myself (as well as giving me some solid science sources to read on my own). In this case, I would point your son toward some better sources on libertarianism generally and the Tea Party in particular, and tell him to go back to his teacher to talk more (OUTSIDE of class, not interrupting the material for the day).
posted by rainbowbrite at 3:17 PM on February 24, 2016

Honestly, if it's Revolutionary War history, the correct response to your son trying to hijack it to talk about libertarian politics was to say "this is not the class for that." I think the teacher was probably, "I don't want to get into this mess of worms, here's an info graphic, peruse on your own time." Which has its own issues. But this is definitely not a recruitment document - seems much more like lazy Google search.

What's the teacher like generally?
posted by corb at 3:22 PM on February 24, 2016

Libertarians are anarchists with bow ties. Left of center does not want to ban guns. they want them regulated at a national level. To site this one example is to indicate the worthlessness of this simplification of the chart.
I don't want to knock the teacher. they get enough hits" without one more. An explanation might instead have been more useful. The teacher doubtless also has a bias. We all do.
posted by Postroad at 3:34 PM on February 24, 2016

Dude I dunno, when I was a freshman in high school I had such a poor understanding of government and politics and I'm sure I spouted off something that just parroted what my parents said at home. I would have appreciated a chart that broke things down so simply. Looking at it with 30 year old eyes I do see that it is biased, but maybe the teacher was intending it to be a resource for a kid who could appreciate a general overview of what left/right means?
posted by pintapicasso at 3:39 PM on February 24, 2016

I probably should have mentioned that this is the same teacher that showed a Kirk Cameron "documentary" about the founding fathers. He told the kids that he found it on Netflix and didn't watch it first.
So is he just lazy?
posted by Biblio at 3:40 PM on February 24, 2016

Taxpayer funding of faith-based charities? Really?

My impression is that the right wants to reduce or eliminate taxes so that people have more money of their own, with the idea that they will contribute voluntarily to faith-based charities.... but then I don't follow that stuff.

Not sure this is unbiased.
posted by amtho at 3:42 PM on February 24, 2016

Yeah, I think just lazy/overworked. I looked up that movie and was starting to say "Hey that sounds cool" when I got to the rest of the Wikipedia article and was like OH HELL. So I think he sounds like he's phoning it in for some reason rather than having an agenda.
posted by corb at 3:51 PM on February 24, 2016

I think I'd need a third data point to be able to tell whether the teacher was dodderingly clueless or had An Agenda. Because honestly it could go either way -

"Oh, hey, there's a movie about the Founding Fathers that Kirk Cameron's in, he was famous with teen girls once, wasn't he? I remember something like that...." and "Oh, say, that young lad seems interested in debating issues about the Tea Party, let me show him this since he sounds interested...here you go, son!"

Versus

"Ah, good, Kirk Cameron released a godly video about the Founding Fathers, just what I need!" and "Ah, this young mind needs to be molded, let me reveal the TRUTH about the libertarians!"

I wouldn't be surprised if it's the former kind of case, to be honest, where you've got someone who's about 20 years behind the times and thinks that teenagers still think Kirk Cameron is the dreamboat guy from Growing Pains, and that the first image hit on Google is all you need. But one more case study would help me know for sure.

Either way, your son is just fine nodding and smiling in class and then dishing the dirt over how ridiculous the teacher is with his friends at lunch the way I did with my history teacher.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:11 PM on February 24, 2016

- Why didn't the teacher simply re-direct the lesson back to the Revolutionary War? He did not need to comment on your son's comment at all.

- That document is weird because I thought Libertarians aren't for helping others, but I stopped paying attention a loooooong time ago because it's all noise, anyway. So who knows what any group says vs what they really believe! That's a whole intellectual investigation on its own!

In short, you can be annoyed the teacher left the lesson/curriculum to get distracted by this. Absolutely, I don't think anyone's personal party politics belong in high school (although, this guy just seems clueless! Which is why he should not be misrepresenting anything he doesn't understand. )

I don't think there is anything to do other than point out why "stuff on the Internet" is often oversimplified or biased. Teach your son to think critically and ask himself the right questions to parse information from "authorities." Then teach him the value of knowing when to speak up, and when to go along.
posted by jbenben at 4:19 PM on February 24, 2016

The biggest problem with high school teaching is the dependency on secondary sources, quite often ones which have often been carefully boiled and diced to avoid given offense.

This graphic is a great primary source for how (many American) libertarians conceive of the political spectrum and where (and implicitly why) they fit. Properly framed it is a good thing for a teacher to hand someone who is asking a question / making a comment about Libertarianism, just like you'd want them to start their analysis of Democrats and Republicans with Democrats' and Republicans' own documents.

(I also think your son is thinking a bit ahistorically if he thinks Libertarians are misappropriating the Gadsen flag. Say what you will about rock-ribbed independence fighters of the 18th century, but the society they built was radically libertarian by 21st century standards: the amount of government intervention in the economy or the lives of individuals was very, very low indeed.)
posted by MattD at 5:52 PM on February 24, 2016

An anecdote: In my year 7 geography class, I had a teacher who was not only biased but also a pretty bad debater. She started a number of discussions in class by stating her opinion and also stating that it was "obvious" that this was true.* As an adult I lean left, but I found myself arguing with her in increasingly reactionary ways because the notion of presenting one side of an argument as being "obviously" true got my goat to such a great extent. I got a reputation for being a good debater and a serious thinker, which had its advantages (I was probably the least popular kid ever nominated for Student Council), but I was also seen as being very conservative and a bit of a weirdo, which I could have lived without.

So, if I were you, I would not intervene, and if I knew your son, I would probably suggest he take a step back and think about what he wants to achieve before going toe-to-toe with the teacher on his favourite political hobbyhorse. It may be maddening not to say something, but consider it practice for using the internet, where people are wrong all the time!

*FWIW, the two I remember are: It's obviously a waste of money to have a census, and tighter gun laws in Australia will obviously lead to fewer firearms massacres. Evidence suggests she was right about the second one, but I maintain that this was not "obviously" the case.
posted by Cheese Monster at 6:26 PM on February 24, 2016

I think there are two problems, [maybe more] 1. that the chart provided without context is wildly partisan, opening the teacher up to criticism for some kind of political proselytising, and (2) the pedagogy of the encounter. Your son responded to class themes by veering into Tea Party politics which could have been smoothly re-integrated into discussion via probing type questioning [why do you think that? That's interesting, why do you say that?] or general class discussion about possible overlays with the current topic being explored etc, finding linking ideologies via the questioning and going back on topic OR, acknowledging the strength of your son's interest in this topic and suggesting that he do some reading overnight to bring to tomorrow's class, and going back on topic with the rest of the class. ie warm, engaged responsiveness and an authoritative hold on the teaching points of the lesson.

As others have said, there is an element of pedagogy that requires a teacher to shepherd students towards the busy lesson in front of them. Lots of teachers don't know how to say 'hmm, I don't know about that, but it sounds like a good thing for both of us to look up when we have time.' I think the teacher interactions you describe are, as others say, a bit phoned in, rather than methodical. The thing about these kind of interactions for students - say when a teacher hands out such a chart - is that they gain authority and everyone can remember a time when their teacher told them one thing that stayed with them a long time, was difficult to shift and bewildering. These moments are often very significant and the teacher's role is one that definitely should be guided by modulating the experience of information and sources for growing brains.

As an adolescent, I found it really hard to figure out what Right and Left meant in politics. Maybe the best takeaway for you and your son is to make your own attempts at a chart - test some of the assertions in the chart provided by the teacher and add some of your own research. This is not to undermine the teacher in your son's eyes, but to take up the warm, engaged, responsive element missing in his classroom experience, and take his objections and confusion seriously. In terms of communication with the teacher, maybe at the next parent/teacher interview you could mention this situation as one that your son found confronting as part of a wider review of his learning in that subject.
posted by honey-barbara at 6:41 PM on February 24, 2016

First, I think the teacher is lazy and did not really look at the chart. But, that is the only explanation that fits other than the guy is a moron. Second, I think the mistake is not in giving the chart to your son, but in not giving him whatever documents that could have presented liberals, libertarians and conservatives in either neutral light or each of the three presented both favorably and negatively. Depending on your own point of view, that document is either biased for or biased against or "fair". He may have viewed it as 'fair' and that is why he should have presented documents that represent the differing views on the subject. That chart alone, without context and without presenting alternative views is by itself worthless to me.

I am not a teacher (but my mother and ex are/were) but if it were me, rather than give your son any document without comment, I would have suggested that your son research the original meaning of the flag, what the Tea Party intends it to represent and then to either come present his finding to the class or write something up either for extra credit. Seems to me that a teacher should be encouraging inquisitive minds and critical thinking.

Having said that, being somewhat of a liberatarian myself, I agree with your son that the Tea Party has sort of hijacked the meaning of the Don't Tread on Me Flag. They are certainly using it for their own purposes that are not necessarily consistent with the original intent.
posted by AugustWest at 9:11 PM on February 24, 2016

I think the political compass may be useful to give more detail.
posted by blue_beetle at 9:18 PM on February 24, 2016

I think the teacher was trying to make a point and didn't do it very well. In class, your son referred to "Tea Party Libertarians." But the people who call themselves the Tea Party are not Libertarians at all. The teacher was trying to help your son better understand what Libertarians are and why they are not the same as the Tea Party, but that chart is biased, and giving it to your son was a poor choice.

Perhaps your son could look up information about the Tea Party and about Libertarians and he could figure out how they differ.
posted by islandeady at 9:43 PM on February 24, 2016

What's worse I think than the bias ("banning guns", "special treatment") and the misspellings is the teaching style: just toss the kid some sloppy off-the-rack list or graph.
posted by Rich Smorgasbord at 10:08 PM on February 24, 2016

This was weird and lazy and...weird. The teacher could just redirect back to the subject at hand, and/or guide and encourage their student to do some research to formulate an answer to their (highly-derailing) question.
posted by desuetude at 10:50 PM on February 24, 2016

I don’t think there’s any doubt that the chart is biased, but I think it can be read in 2 different ways; that the Libertarian view encompasses certain aspects the ascribe to the Left and the Right, or that there are distinct parties of Libertarians, the Left and the Right. Not that this addresses the appropriateness of the teachers actions, but may influence your view of the material.
posted by bongo_x at 1:23 AM on February 25, 2016

I don't think it was an appropriate response to your son's comment because it's (1) a libertarian recruiting document and (2) not relevant to the lesson.

On the other hand, while it was sloppy teaching on the teacher's part, it's much more of a learning opportunity for your son than the simple "we'll talk about contemporary political parties next term, pay attention now" would have been, so all's well that ends well. But it will require some work on your part to discuss the chart and its nasty inaccuracies with your son.
posted by fingersandtoes at 3:01 AM on February 25, 2016

As others have pointed out the document clearly uses biased language and thus is a poor source for an all-purpose introduction. I am actually much, much more alarmed by a teacher who shows a documentary in their subject matter that they have not pre-screened. That is what I would send a concerned message to an administrator about. I am a teacher, albeit at the university level, and I pre-watch every video I show in class. I do want to be careful not to show a video that may contain distracting material, and I teach at a public university, so it's not like I have official strictures against any kind of content. Still, I don't want students to be derailed by potentially controversial topics that are not germane to the class content. More importantly, I need to watch the video so that I know what kinds of things I am trying to teach the students. How could I possibly lead a discussion if I haven't looked into the claims made in a video presentation (or a guest lecture, etc.)? Rather than "lazy," I would categorize this teacher as "negligent," which is a shame, because 90% of the teachers I have been privileged to have in my education were not like that.
posted by Slothrop at 7:43 AM on February 25, 2016

The teacher was making the point that the Tea Party are not libertarians, they are right wing Republicans.
posted by w0mbat at 8:05 AM on February 25, 2016

I appreciate all the advice. This is a county school for kids with mental health, special ed and discipline issues. The teachers are Special Ed teachers, not necessarily trained in the subject areas they are teaching. Most of the history class so far has been spent watching John Adams. I don't believe my son was trying to start anything or be a smartass. He had just been on the freedom trail and seen the flag on sale at Faneuil Hall and was generally thinking about the topic. He has Nonverbal Learning Disorder and as such has difficulty with abstract thinking. He tends to be very black and white in his thinking. The more I think about it I am persuaded to view this as a pedagogical issue rather than an ideological one. The teacher has my son's IEP, he should know that a chart like that without explanation would be difficult for him to interpret.

We have a meeting with the school coming up next month. I will mention these concerns.
posted by Biblio at 8:20 AM on February 25, 2016

My son decided to bring this up to his teacher on his own. I have the sense they have a lot of down time in this class. He says he told the teacher that he thought the chart was biased and the teacher told him that his (the teacher's) positions were right in the middle of the chart. He then gave a copy of the chart to the paraprofessional in the class and she responded by giving him a quiz to determine his political party-out loud so the whole class could hear his answers. Yeah, I'm going to have to say something.
posted by Biblio at 5:44 PM on February 25, 2016

Wait, the paraprofessional too? This seems a bit weird.
posted by corb at 6:17 PM on February 25, 2016

This sounds like a crass lack of professionalism here Biblio.

1. Your son has special learning needs, in particular with abstract thinking (although on political spectrum stuff, who the hell doesn't?) and the teacher did not help parse the idea of 'bias' through questioning, engagement of the child's capacities in a non-self focussed manner. (I assess teachers and watch hundreds of lessons and the majority of my notes on classroom observation concern the lack of student centred learning programmes and pedagogy. Sooo frustrating.)

2. Questioning and student centred learning moments would possibly look like: 'wow, you've done more thinking about this, it's great to see you so motivated to go deeper. [esp since abstract thinking is an area of focus!] Well done!'' 'It sounds like you've done a bit of research. What did you find out?' 'What do you think the chart should include to be less biased? What should removed?' [evaluation, synthesis] 'I'd like to see your thoughts in a new chart that we can add to throughout the year. Would you like to start a new chart that we can add to as we go on with the unit?' [not defensive, eliding or 'it's all about Meeeeeeeeee']

3. The amanuensis attempted questioning, but did so in a shaming manner. On the right-ish track at least for foregrounding a student's assumptions and beliefs. But, gah, why in front of the whole class. If I was in this situation as a teacher I would have noted a child asking three times to explore a topic and used the 'downtime' to do a quick activity on political tenets associated with the chart. Maybe cut the uncoloured chart into separated pieces for several groups to try to paste/ assemble based on their own understandings, and compare notes afterwards between groups. It'd be a student centred way of allowing some arguments, problem identification, new information etc, AND as a teacher I'd have a better idea of where students are coming from and therefore how I could integrate this knowledge into the unit of study. Student focussed. Not 'well I'm a centrist so this chart is legit.'

4. Teachers need to manage their defensiveness when a child without the words for nuance 'accuses' them of bias. Your son didn't have the words for 'can you explain to me why some points on this chart don't track with other stuff I've been reading and thinking about lately.' The teacher shut down the inquiry because it was delivered as 'accusation' and as I said above a lot of teachers find it difficult to shepherd their own responses to apparent attack towards warm responsiveness to a genuinely curious child.

What I'd do about it: don't undermine the staff to your child (even though there's pause for this from your perspective, take up the position of listener and intellectual encourager - shaming the teacher in front of him may encourage more interpersonal difficulty) but continue to focus on their inquiry and abstract thinking. If your child feels shamed for being overheard in class, note that lots of people find declaring their political thoughts in front of others difficult, and it sounds like he did a thoughtful job of giving it a brave try. I'd also show pride that your son took up the challenge other commenters suggested, which was to ask the teacher for more help. That is a good start to taking responsibility, even if sometimes it can not be guaranteed to be easy or resolved. At least the para tried questioning, so maybe take that further at home in a safer, exploratory way. For now, I'd also try to weave back your son's attention to what the class is studying right now. Maybe explain that most people's politics evolve through time and study and experience, so it's a good idea to consider a few ideas at a time, let them sit for awhile, see how they stack up against other observational data in his life in coming months and years. What the unit at school is doing hopefully, is giving a backdrop to this line of thinking and not necessarily telling him what to think - that may be how he's feeling right now.
posted by honey-barbara at 7:06 PM on February 25, 2016