These Laws Allege That We Can't Be Trusted: The Culture Wars and the Teaching Profession

• In Event: "Walking on a Tightrope": Social Studies in an Era of Restrictions on Teaching Divisive Issues

Abstract

Objectives
The social studies curriculum is a preeminent site of the “culture wars” in the United States; classrooms are the battlegrounds where Conservative ideals of national unity and heritage confront notions of truth and critical patriotism (Nash et al., 2000).Teachers remain unclear on how to resolve the tension between the new ‘divisive issues’ laws and their responsibilities as educators (Pollock et al., 2022; Lopez, 2021). How might this emergent situation influence the work of teaching?
Research Questions
1. How do teachers anticipate legislation influencing the technical work of teaching?
2. How do teachers perceive current and anticipated emotional effects of the legislation?
3. How do teachers anticipate the legislation influencing the teaching profession on the whole?
Perspectives
Teachers are curricular-instructional gatekeepers (Thornton, 2005). They transform “official” curriculum materials (i.e., textbooks, content standards, curriculum maps) into the “operational curriculum” experienced by students (Thornton, 1989). The teacher is the prism through which these official materials must pass and be reshaped into subject matter. Thus, teachers’ perceptions of and reactions to outside levers on their agency matter.
Methods
We conducted interviews with eight teachers from states that have passed ‘divisive issues’ legislation.
Data Sources
Four researchers independently conducted in vivo coding (Miles et al., 2019) of transcribed interviews. We met in small groups to compare, collapse, and expand codes, then did the same as a whole group.
Results
Perceived Effect on Teaching
Participants fell into two broad categories regarding how they anticipated state influencing their curricular-instructional decisions. Some were deeply concerned, anticipating altering their practice to protect themselves: “I can think of some [materiakls] I will take out, because I guess they're too provocative… [like] the 1619 Project…” Others remain defiant: “I don't know whether it's foolhardy, but I've decided I'm going to teach history. If that means I end up losing my job over it, at least I'm going out with my dignity intact."
Emotional Effect
Fear was a prominent theme. One interviewee noted: “[The legislation is] for us to second guess ourselves… Is this going to get me fired?” Another participant added feeling surveilled: “I think I'd be more fearful of saying the wrong thing or just that Big Brother is watching idea.” Another noted a significant and negative influence of the laws on community morale: “I think it's more about the way [the school] runs. I think more about the morale and the interactions between teachers, but also parents and teachers, students and teachers.”
Status of the Profession
Participants reported concerns about the future of the profession, including a perceived loss of trust from their communities and a loss of the intellectual autonomy traditionally associated with the profession: “Suddenly, all of the trust of every educator has just gone out the door…these laws allege that we can't be trusted.”
Scholarly Significance
The recency of these efforts to codify the Conservative agenda in social studies precludes the knowledge necessary to understand the phenomenon. This work is an invaluable step to understanding the landscape of social studies as it confronts ‘divisive issues’ legislation.

Authors

• Taylor M. Kessner, University of Texas - Arlington
  Presenting Author

• Sarah J. Kaka, Ohio Wesleyan University
  Presenting Author

• Anthony Tuf Francis, Oakland University
  Presenting Author

• Joshua Littenberg-Tobias, GBH
  Presenting Author

• Katrina Kennett, University of Montana Western
  Presenting Author