Religion and Sexuality in the Classroom
It has been a long time since I updated this blog and I blame the end of term. End of term comes with the hustle and bustle of grading and submitting grades and panicked student emails. Teaching both at the college and the elementary/secondary level means that I have many end of terms. Though one of my college terms is now over, the next one is just beginning and the elementary/secondary term is about to end in a month or so. All this is to say that being an educator in my particular position means constant change and adapting to situations.
Speaking of change (how is that for a segue!)...a lot has gone on pedagogically in past month and I feel the need to write about it. The Ontario government's plan to revamp the sexual education curriculum and then their decision to scrap (see here) what they proposed was really, in the words of my friend, "a lunch bag let down". Since this blog and my teaching philosophy is about ethical interactions and ethical pedagogical strategies, I believe that the original revamping of the curriculum was the most ethically viable solution. As educators it is our responsibility to present all the information that is available, and to give our students the skills to access and critically engage with what is presented. As a society, we are often too quick to place barriers to education. These barriers present themselves not only physically but in the form of curriculum changes as well.
One parent was upset that her child would be learning the proper anatomical terms for genitalia. Though I would never disregard a parent's opinion, I would definitely ask what motivates this opinion. Why is learning scientific terms bad? Why does it make them feel uncomfortable? In the end a lot of the feedback that I read centered around fears of too much discussion in the classroom about homosexuality.
This issue has also appeared in the past month in two separate yet related news events. The first is the well publicized firing of a lesbian teacher from a religious school in BC(seen here). The second is the news articles that have been seen in the media about many educators converting to Catholicism in order to secure teaching positions (seen here).
Where to begin. Ethically an educator should be evaluated (I use this term very loosely for evaluations come with their own set of ethical issues) based on their performance within the classroom and in relation to pedagogical activities. This ability usurps all other criteria. Therefore, if a teacher in a religious school performs well as an educator there should be no need for dismissal, regardless of sexual orientation. However, we are delving into some ethically murky water here, because both sides could easily be argued.
I firmly believe that what goes on outside the classroom environment does not have to necessarily inform what goes on inside the classroom environment. To lead an ethical life, one should definitely inform the other, for why should one be different inside or outside a pedagogical space (in fact I feel life is one big pedagogical space). However, the importance here (and of this blog in general) is what goes on within pedagogical confines which is understood most often as a classroom environment. I don't think it is ethical to perform a sense of religiosity that one does not have in order to find employment. But that being said I am also not a believer in religious schools period; for in general their curriculum is exclusionary and therefore unethical. An ethical classroom and ethical pedagogical strategies are inclusionary and take into account all available positions and possibilities.
A good educator will be able to teach within the set curricula provided. That means a lesbian teacher can teach Catholic religion even if that religion finds her sexuality problematic. Whether that is ethical on the educators part is another question, for why would you want to teach something that excludes you as an individual separate from your identity as an educator. All this to say that the ethical burden here rests on the educator not on the school board. The religious schools and school boards should listen to Trudeau: "the state has no place in the bedroom of the nation".
It is a complex ethical issue, but in summary:
1. Sexual education should be something that is given to all students in classrooms for it is important for them to both know the nomenclature as well as the range of sexual identities. This will create students that are critically aware, accepting, and will decrease such unethical behaviors such as bullying, homophobia, sexual assault, and sexual violence.
2. Teachers in religious schools should not be fired from positions based on sexual orientation. If they are performing their duties pedagogically then this is all that matters. The ethical burden here rests on the educators themselves. If they can deal with the fact that they are denying a part of themselves teaching a curriculum that might be exclusionary to their beliefs or identity, that is their responsibility.
and 3. I personally would have difficulty teaching in a religious school. I would feel very pedagogically stifled. However, this is because my personal and ethical beliefs run counter to most of the curricula offered there.
As you can see these issues are very personal and are dependent on decisions the educator makes. Educators should not be excluded from positions because of their personal beliefs, for then we enter a very slippery pedagogical slope. Are we all to submit to brain scanner assessments to see if our beliefs gel with those of the "administration"? Are we all to believe the exact same thing? Are we all supposed to educate in the exact same way? I know that curricula and school boards basically exist to create these cookie cutter pedagogs, however having flexibility within these confines and the ability to create a safe and ethically viable pedagogical space is what makes teaching such a rewarding experience.
Speaking of change (how is that for a segue!)...a lot has gone on pedagogically in past month and I feel the need to write about it. The Ontario government's plan to revamp the sexual education curriculum and then their decision to scrap (see here) what they proposed was really, in the words of my friend, "a lunch bag let down". Since this blog and my teaching philosophy is about ethical interactions and ethical pedagogical strategies, I believe that the original revamping of the curriculum was the most ethically viable solution. As educators it is our responsibility to present all the information that is available, and to give our students the skills to access and critically engage with what is presented. As a society, we are often too quick to place barriers to education. These barriers present themselves not only physically but in the form of curriculum changes as well.
One parent was upset that her child would be learning the proper anatomical terms for genitalia. Though I would never disregard a parent's opinion, I would definitely ask what motivates this opinion. Why is learning scientific terms bad? Why does it make them feel uncomfortable? In the end a lot of the feedback that I read centered around fears of too much discussion in the classroom about homosexuality.
This issue has also appeared in the past month in two separate yet related news events. The first is the well publicized firing of a lesbian teacher from a religious school in BC(seen here). The second is the news articles that have been seen in the media about many educators converting to Catholicism in order to secure teaching positions (seen here).
Where to begin. Ethically an educator should be evaluated (I use this term very loosely for evaluations come with their own set of ethical issues) based on their performance within the classroom and in relation to pedagogical activities. This ability usurps all other criteria. Therefore, if a teacher in a religious school performs well as an educator there should be no need for dismissal, regardless of sexual orientation. However, we are delving into some ethically murky water here, because both sides could easily be argued.
I firmly believe that what goes on outside the classroom environment does not have to necessarily inform what goes on inside the classroom environment. To lead an ethical life, one should definitely inform the other, for why should one be different inside or outside a pedagogical space (in fact I feel life is one big pedagogical space). However, the importance here (and of this blog in general) is what goes on within pedagogical confines which is understood most often as a classroom environment. I don't think it is ethical to perform a sense of religiosity that one does not have in order to find employment. But that being said I am also not a believer in religious schools period; for in general their curriculum is exclusionary and therefore unethical. An ethical classroom and ethical pedagogical strategies are inclusionary and take into account all available positions and possibilities.
A good educator will be able to teach within the set curricula provided. That means a lesbian teacher can teach Catholic religion even if that religion finds her sexuality problematic. Whether that is ethical on the educators part is another question, for why would you want to teach something that excludes you as an individual separate from your identity as an educator. All this to say that the ethical burden here rests on the educator not on the school board. The religious schools and school boards should listen to Trudeau: "the state has no place in the bedroom of the nation".
It is a complex ethical issue, but in summary:
1. Sexual education should be something that is given to all students in classrooms for it is important for them to both know the nomenclature as well as the range of sexual identities. This will create students that are critically aware, accepting, and will decrease such unethical behaviors such as bullying, homophobia, sexual assault, and sexual violence.
2. Teachers in religious schools should not be fired from positions based on sexual orientation. If they are performing their duties pedagogically then this is all that matters. The ethical burden here rests on the educators themselves. If they can deal with the fact that they are denying a part of themselves teaching a curriculum that might be exclusionary to their beliefs or identity, that is their responsibility.
and 3. I personally would have difficulty teaching in a religious school. I would feel very pedagogically stifled. However, this is because my personal and ethical beliefs run counter to most of the curricula offered there.
As you can see these issues are very personal and are dependent on decisions the educator makes. Educators should not be excluded from positions because of their personal beliefs, for then we enter a very slippery pedagogical slope. Are we all to submit to brain scanner assessments to see if our beliefs gel with those of the "administration"? Are we all to believe the exact same thing? Are we all supposed to educate in the exact same way? I know that curricula and school boards basically exist to create these cookie cutter pedagogs, however having flexibility within these confines and the ability to create a safe and ethically viable pedagogical space is what makes teaching such a rewarding experience.
Comments
Post a Comment