Walking the Labyrinth: Leaving the Controversy Out of the Presidential Election

This election season has been tense. Many have become quite heated about both candidates which has made others very tentative. With unimaginable accusations swirling around the two major parties’ candidates, many teachers have experienced consternation around discussing the election in their classrooms.

Presidential elections have generated positive excitement in the past, even when people vehemently oppose a candidate. Being aware of people’s heightened sensitivity surrounding this election, I contemplated what I should do in my classroom.

As a social studies teacher, I would feel negligent not bringing the election into my classroom during the race for the presidency. A presidential election generates meaningful and long-last learning opportunities for students while encouraging them to take steps in becoming active citizens.

My conundrum: how do we adequately discuss the election while keeping the enhanced controversies involved with this election outside the classroom door?

I decided we need not delve into discussion about the candidates and their imperfections. Rather I took the approach of students wrestling to identify where they stand on national issues. By avoiding the personalities of the candidates, I could better open the students’ eyes to the election.

Students looked at a broad range of issues, sought to come to a basic understanding of the issues, attempted to recognize opposing views on the issues, and strove to identify on which side they felt they may fall. Students struggled to fully understand - I told them they would, especially since most adults do - but I encouraged them to try to get some sort of sense as to each issue and their own view. I reassured them that they manner in which they happened to answer now did not define them, especially with limited understanding.

Student reflection on what she learned from our election 2016 activities.

After they analyzed the issues and determined where they stood, we discussed. Students moved to a side of the room based on their view - some started in the middle because they were torn or unsure. And then...conversation. The big realization for the students was that each side had legitimate reasons for their views. They respectfully listened to one another and considered the reasoning. Sometimes students directly addressed another’s point; sometimes they simply contributed another argument to their side. But sometimes students switched sides. Some in the middle were swayed to a side; some on the opposite side sometimes made the long walk over to the the other side of the classroom. Students in the middle were able to articulate how they were torn: noticing they felt reasons on both sides of an issue were equally strong.

Students next looked at some basic information defining liberals and conservatives. They again looked at some different issues and determined if they felt the reasons on the liberal or conservative side were more compelling. Next the students aligned themselves on a spectrum from liberal to conservative. The students were well spread out though many clumped on either side of the middle.

By first examining their own thoughts, students were ready to look a little bit at the candidates. Instead of determining which candidate they agreed with, the students determined - issue by issue - which candidates agreed with them. Students discovered two significant points. One was that the candidates, whom they only thought of as being opposed and disagreeing with one another, had some agreement on some issues. This was eye-opening for many. Another moment of revelation involved the candidates agreeing with the student views. Students saw that each of the four candidates on the Massachusetts ballot agreed with their own views on different issues. So, although they didn’t see themselves as a supporter of a certain candidate, they saw that there was some agreement - and disagreement - between themselves and EACH of the candidates.

To conclude their investigation into the election, prior to a mock election experience, students will practice media literacy skills. They will analyze political ads from different candidates looking for the techniques they have used to sway voters. Students will also propose alternative ways the candidates could have conveyed the same message. I anticipate similar success with this activity as was had with the others.

Clearly, I’m please with both my approach and the students' interactions with difficult content. The activities helped to show that understanding political issues is difficult, identifying our own views on the issues can be difficult, there are legitimate reasons on both sides of the issues, and there was no perfect candidate that matched all of their views.

Hopefully, this learning opportunity will inspire some of the students to become more concerned and active citizens.

If you have been teaching about the election, or if this post has generated some thoughts of your own, please share in the comments. I would appreciate hearing from you.