The Art of Civil Disagreements, or Don't Touch That Teachable Moment!

As you probably know by now, I work in a middle school.  I do spend two hours at the high school in the district, but I am actually realizing that high schoolers are far more mature (!) than their middle school counterparts.

One of the things I've noticed in my observation of middle schoolers is that they don't know how to argue properly.  When they have a disagreement, whether it be scholarly (used tongue-in-cheek here) or personal, the argument automatically becomes an attack on the other person's beliefs/customs/opinions/whatever.  So I began to take a little more notice, and I saw that not only do middle schoolers not know how to argue properly, most adults don't know how either.

What happened to the art of spirited debate?  I like to think of myself as a pretty open-minded person.  I love to talk to people whose views differ drastically from mine and get their perspective on issues that I find interesting or important.  We don't have to agree on these things.  I have several friends and acquaintances who are devout Christians - if you've read my previous posts, you know that I am NOT a devout Christian.  But that's okay.  My friends and I are able to carry on a decent conversation whether we agree with each other or not.  Once we air out our differences, we may revisit them, or we may not.  But I don't get all huffy if they say they went to church all weekend and started a prayer chain for someone, and they don't seem to get all huffy if I let my Hindu goddess tattoo hang out and talk about the benefits of Eastern religions.  We respectfully acknowledge each other's points of view, and then move on.

Kids (and adults) don't know how to do this, and no one is teaching them.  Come to think of it, I don't know who taught me; I guess it was my parents.  My parents are (Dad) and were (Ma) very liberal in some ways, conservative in others, but they always patiently answered my questions and my brother's questions, and I guess I assumed that all people grew up in a house where they were encouraged to be curious, if not expected to be curious.  This is not to say that my brother and I ruled the roost; we most certainly did not.  But there was a healthy dose of respect for each other coming from all sides.

The kids at school will automatically begin name calling once a disagreement has been established.  I think this is partly due to the fact that some of the kids aren't that bright and name-calling is their defense mechanism.  I am convinced that any child in the world would rather be the 'bully' than the 'stupid kid'.  No one wants to be thought of as dumb.  Yet they seemingly do nothing to advance their knowledge or skills.  But maybe that's because they're in ninth grade, and that's just what ninth graders do.  ;o)

Back to the adults, though, and teachable moments.  Last year, we were in math class.  We were discussing the number line (yes, in eighth grade) and how when you get to zero, the numbers go 'backwards'.  We discussed the calendar, and the years BC/BCE and AD/CE.  One of the kids I was working with asked why the years began to go backwards; why did we have BC and AD?  (I can't get into this PC BCE/CE crap.)  I said, "Well, Jesus was born in the year 1, and so our calendar is based on the year of His birth."  Now, whether you are Christian or not, whether you believe Jesus was the Son of God or not, this is a fact - our calendar is based on the year of Jesus' birth.  I looked up to see the teacher gesticulating wildly - stop! no religion in math class!  Danger!  Danger!

What?

It's what it is.  It's not like when the child asked me the question, I said, "That's the year that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was born, and if you don't believe it, then you are going straight to hell you little heathen!"  I gave the student a fact-based answer.  Now, we do have a very diverse student body; many of our students are Muslim.  But does that mean that we ignore all things religion-related?  Religion is part of history; it has shaped countries and economies and civilization, and it is unavoidable.  There is a difference between teaching religion in historical context, and teaching religious dogma, and this teacher (who has been a teacher for more than 10 years) did not get this.  How disappointing.

I see the avoidance of the teachable moment all the time.  Last year, my senior had a government class where some lively debates were held.  The teacher was nice and encouraged discussion, but her tolerance of debate was superficial at best.  She did not correct the students if they said something blatantly erroneous, I guess out of fear of 'treading on their opinion', or some such nonsense.  Is it not the role of a teacher to a) know just a smidge of info outside of your content area and b) correct students when they are wrong?  Call me crazy.

I also see the inability to argue at the adult level.  One of my favorite places at the middle school is room 200.  It's where teachers gather during their prep periods or lunches to eat, check email, make copies, get advice, gossip, complain, and do what most adults do.  There are many interesting personalities that one can find in room 200 at any given moment.  A couple of weeks ago, when it came out that the US government is revisiting the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy on homosexuals in the military, a discussion was begun in room 200.  I attempted to have a reasonable, mature conversation with a teacher regarding this topic, but it was out of the question.  Not only could I barely get a word in edge-wise, when I did, I was immediately struck down.  The person I was having the 'debate' with is not someone I particularly like on a superficial level, so I was especially eager to engage him to see if there was something more to him that I was missing.

There wasn't.

I felt it was made relatively clear that I was wrong because I am younger than he is, I'm not officially a teacher, and I'm not a male.  What made the debate especially interesting was when a sub joined the conversation.  I love the sub - he's a 70-something gay guy from Louisiana who speaks about five languages.  He has greasy dyed hair, clothes that don't fit properly, and is one of the most fascinating people I've ever met.  When he joined the conversation, the tone suddenly shifted and the first teacher toned it down a bit, I assume because the sub is gay and we were discussing gays in the military.  Finally, someone who could trump the first guy!

I could ramble on and on, as I am wont to do, but I'll wrap it up for now.  In the mean time, let's argue!