Discomfort and Engagement: How High School Students Experience Deliberations and Debates About Controversial Political Issues

• In Event: "Democracy Needs Democrats": What Can Schools and Teachers Do to Provide Good Civic Education?

Abstract

Objectives: When teachers introduce political issues in the classroom, one important decision they will make is how to structure the discussion. The structure can affect how many participate, the tone of the discussion, and what students learn. We present findings from a mixed methods study that compared two discussion strategies about public policy issues: small group deliberation and team debate. We ask: How does the discussion strategy change how students participate in and experience the discussion?
Perspectives. Civic educators have long argued that engaging students in discussions of controversial political issues (CPI) is essential for democratic education (Gould, et. al., 2011; Hess, 2009; Hess & McAvoy, 2015; Parker, 2003). Existing research on discussing CPI in the social studies classroom has primarily looked at how discussion affects the development of democratic skills and engagement (Avery, Levy & Simmons, 2014; Hess, 2009; Hess & McAvoy, 2015; Kahne & Sporte, 2008; Kawashima-Ginsberg, 2013; Lo, 2017; McDevitt & Kiousis, 2006). Some have noted that, in practice, students from marginalized groups are not equally heard during discussion (Beck, 2013; Hess & McAvoy, 2015; Gibson, 2020). This work investigates more precisely how two discussion strategies change the student experience.
Methods and Data Sources. The study includes data collected in fall 2019 from 165 high school participants involved in a civic education program that engages students from around the country in discussions of controversial political issues (79% white, 52% female, politically diverse). The data includes: pre-post survey responses (N=165), videos of the discussions from three focal groups of 20 students and interviews with eight purposefully sampled students from each group (N=24). This analysis primarily focuses on the videos and interviews with participating students.
Results. We build upon previous findings of the quantitative data that showed that students were more comfortable and more willing to participate in the deliberation than the team debate. We found that this difference was especially true for girls, regardless of social class. For many girls, the competitive aspect of the debate heightened anxieties. As one example, Caroline felt “a little bit scared” when it was her turn to make a point to the other side, but also felt that her group was “cheering me on.” A girl who identified as gay had the most negative experience when, during a concealed carry debate, she felt disrespected by a group of boys. Across social class, boys reported less fear and much more confidence with what they said and how they were heard. Alternatively, the collaborative nature of the deliberation felt “comfortable”--especially to girls who “felt heard” at about the same rate as boys. Students were more likely to report that they had modified their opinions about the issue within deliberation.
Significance. This analysis investigates the power dynamics within different discussion strategies. Our findings suggest that compared to team debate, deliberation created a more equitable gender/class experience by providing opportunities for perspective taking, active listening, and coming to consensus.

Authors

• Paula McAvoy, North Carolina State University

• Arine Lowery, North Carolina State University

• Nada Wafa, North Carolina State University