Censorship of Critical Perspectives in American Schools
Summary
A recent study examined what and whose knowledge is being restricted in U.S. K-12 schools, and how and why this is happening. The findings indicate that in 16 Republican-dominated states, policies have been enacted to restrict the teaching of critical perspectives on race, sexuality, and other controversial subjects and to perpetuate a positive view of U.S. history.
Since 2021, nearly one-third of states have banned K-12 school curricula that offer critical views of the racial past of the U.S., with some of these laws explicitly mentioning critical race theory (CRT) or specific materials like the 1619 Project. Legislatures in 40 states have introduced over 200 bills that would restrict curricula, and some of these laws would penalize teachers for teaching certain ‘divisive concepts’ (e.g., topics related to race, gender, diversity, oppression, and/or sexuality).
The study found that 16 states – in which Republican politicians control the government – are using their formal authority to remove critical perspectives in schools. Relatedly, these states are actively seeking to prevent or dissuade schools/students from engaging in critical thought, in large part by encouraging or requiring them to steer clear of content that might be sensitive or controversial.
The study also found that all students in these states, and especially marginalized students, are likely to lose or miss key information and perspectives as a result of these policies. Regarding why this is happening, data reveal that key actors frame targeted curricula as being “divisive,” “racist,” “ideologically motivated,” and as promoting feelings of “guilt” and “shame” among students. Finally, the study identified three means through which Republicans have sought to ban or censor certain topics from being taught in schools: state legislation, executive actions by governors, and actions by state boards of education.
The study reveals that state actions limiting the inclusion of critical historical perspectives in schools are partly driven by politicians’ professed belief that there is a single accurate or correct interpretation of history. These state actions not only impinge on teachers’ professional freedom and discretion to deliver a more balanced, accurate perspective of history, but they may also jeopardize the breadth of knowledge produced and shared by scholars and experts who are often consulted for their expertise when creating K12 curricula, thus stunting students’ ability to develop critical thinking skills.
The findings showed that within every state examined for this study, new policies around this topic used language which denies the existence of systemic racism or bans curricula that is said to cause guilt or shame based on race. Further, quotations from governors and state representatives often focused on the idea of “saving” students from the potential of being indoctrinated by ideas such as critical race theory, with some officials using words like “pernicious”, “divisive”, “Marxist”, and “distorted” to describe the perceived indoctrination.
There is virtually no evidence to support that CRT or other critical perspectives are pervasive in schools or that they are problematic, suggesting that politicians and associated advocates have largely manufactured a political problem to garner support with their base, uphold the status quo, or scare parents for political gain.
In the 16 states that have formally restricted critical perspectives in schools, students of color and LGBTQ students particularly stand to lose valuable perspectives in school that demonstrate the reality of the historical struggle of marginalized citizens and the barriers they have faced. More broadly, all students can benefit from inclusive curricula, which can help them to develop more complex and holistic interpretations of the past and present, whereas restrictive curricula are likely to lead to simplistic, distorted understandings.
In conclusion, the study demonstrates the ways that states that are controlled by conservative actors are using their official power to remove historical knowledge that questions or critiques dominant narratives in school curriculum. There are implications for future policy in this area, suggesting state governments are using the narrative of indoctrination to prevent the teaching of a more accurate, honest history of the US.
This brief is based on an article published as:
Hornbeck, D., & Malin, J. R. (2023). Demobilizing knowledge in American schools: Censoring critical perspectives. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02161-4
Authors
Dr. Dustin Hornbeck is an Assistant Professor of Leadership and Policy Studies at the University of Memphis.
Dr. Joel R. Malin is a CEEP fellow and an Associate Professor of Educational Leadership at Miami University.
Edited by: Adina Heisler, Center for Evaluation and Education Policy