Politics within university courses is a tricky, but timely, topic for most students and professors.
In a society where one comment can cost you the respect of colleagues and students, or even your job in some cases, we’ve learned to be tight-lipped. If we can’t have these conversations in the setting in which critical thinking, discussion and intellectual formation and development is prioritized, then where can we?
A professor of political science describes well the nuance of setting in this context.
“I approach and present my politics differently when I’m standing in front of the classroom than when I am at a dinner party, or I’m a political scientist. And so, when I read executive orders coming out of the White House about K-12 indoctrination, I might talk about that differently to students than I would to my gender non-conforming teenager who lives in my house,” the professor told me.
So, what is the role of all things political inside the classroom or the confines of office hours? One that stimulates critical thinking, according to several JMU faculty. It’s less about professors sharing their opinions versus not, and more about the intent behind sharing and method of doing so.
A political-science professor provides insight into what these conversations could look like and what role the professor should play in them. They suggest that their role is mainly to facilitate, to challenge the student to sharpen their own beliefs through challenging them – an important distinction from saying it is their job to challenge them.
“My goal is to help students see and understand multiple perspectives on issues, and so I think that when I’m doing my job well, I’m not telling students what to think, I am encouraging them to think critically and to engage with the best versions of arguments on the side that they disagree with,” the professor said.
Samuel Davis, a senior JMU finance student, still remembers and admires a class from his freshman year in which the professor facilitated discussion well by “always playing devil’s advocate,” and forcing him and other students to articulate their opinions thoughtfully and listen to others do the same.
This emphasizes the beneficial impact professors allowing contemporary political discourse in the classroom setting can have on students if handled well.
That being said, this should not be a stand-out experience in our college education, it should become the norm, and the expectation of academia.
Professors are as human as the rest of us, and they can’t remain entirely unbiased, and nor should they, in my opinion. Students can benefit from learning what the figures guiding them think politically.
Dr. Mark Rankin teaches British literature, focusing mainly in the early modern period. The main way politics exist in his classes is through looking at the way that the politics of the authors and readers from that time period affected the creation and reception of the texts.
“I try not to talk about contemporary politics with my students, and that’s my choice, because I feel like it isn’t my place in a literature class to make connections to contemporary politics unless the text itself makes the connection,” Rankin said. “And I sometimes do follow those connections, but when I do, I tread lightly and I try to help students understand the text, rather than use my position to try to impose a political view on my students, who themselves are, I hope, thinking about making good choices. And so for me, I don’t want to forestall that critical thinking. I’m not going to just stand up there and wag my finger. I’ve tried to glance in the direction that the discussion points without being dogmatic about it.”
Rankin puts it aptly. When the texts or course subjects lead him to discuss contemporary politics, he doesn’t jump ship. So, while he doesn’t “wag his finger” or get “dogmatic” about it, he gives political topics, even controversial ones, a space.
“I think students, in my experience, feel that I’m trying to respect them, and I try to respect the human side of politics,” Rankin said. “And so, I didn’t vote for Trump, I’ll say that, and the reason I didn’t vote for him, the reasons are many, but he doesn’t seem to care very much about the human. When I intimate that as such to students, then I feel like students feel at ease, because that’s a very positive, very popular, and very identifiable position. When I try to show students that’s what I value, it tends to grease the wheels, and even students who maybe support Trump, I’ve never had an angry student come to me telling me that I was, you know, being too political,” Rankin said.
The political-science professor doesn’t assert such identifiable positions, but they do act out of their values, which is also how they form their political opinions. From this, they think most students naturally ascertain their political stance. They wouldn’t forgo their values to sterilize their classroom from the murk of political ideology, nor would their political science of institution courses allow that.
“If a student comes into my class and they’re transgender or they’re non-binary, I’m going to use the pronouns they ask me to call them what they want to be called,” the professor said. “And I think that there are some students for whom that is a giveaway of my politics. I would not stop doing that to conceal my politics, because a broader value to me is treating people with dignity and respect. And I think you show people dignity and respect by calling them what they ask you to call them, referring to them the way they want to be referred to, talking about political issues in language that doesn’t dehumanize people.”
What it comes down to is not if politics have a place in the classroom or not, but more so that critical thinking and care for students as people and formative learning minds certainly has a place.
Politics being included in discussion or lectures, or even that office hours conversation, are then redefined – reforming from a weapon of indoctrination and bias to a tool that cultivates thought development and analytical exploration.
Support AFP
Share
