Beyond allowing ventilation: How to connect the social-emotional and the cognitive in teachers’ handling of controversial political issues (CPI)? | Intellect Skip to content
1981
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Citizenship Teaching & Learning
  4. Volume 16, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 16, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1751-1917
  • E-ISSN: 1751-1925

Abstract

Twenty-first century teachers are expected to have a holistic approach to teaching including addressing students’ self-determination, interpersonal awareness, cultural sensitivity, empathy and self-regulation. Discussions of controversial political issues (CPI) provide opportunities to examine the interplay between emotional and cognitive components, the former having rarely been studied. As part of a larger study, teachers were asked to provide a description of a CPI discussion in class. The 387 valid responses were analysed qualitatively, and the model that emerged connected triggers, motivations, responses and outcomes. The students and teachers were found to have different motivations and needs: while students were concerned with emotional needs, teachers had educational goals in mind. Teachers wanted to quell the emotional unease, to prevent racist remarks, to keep control of the classroom, and to tie the discussions to the curriculum. Teachers mainly used cognitive responses and somewhat allowed students to ventilate, or used moderating responses, all of which produced partial results. Some teachers avoided the discussion altogether, which was the least useful. The smallest proportion used a mixture of responses, which met both educational and emotional needs. Implications to teacher training, including the importance of training in social-emotional aspects of teaching, are discussed.

© 2021 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
2021-06-01
2024-05-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barton, K. and McCully, A. (2007), ‘Teaching controversial issues where controversial issues really matter’, Teaching History, 127, pp. 13–19.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Benbenishty, R. and Friedman, T. (2020), Cultivating Social-Emotional Learning in the Education System: Summary of the Work of the Expert Panel, Jerusalem: Center for Knowledge and Research in Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Berkowitz, M. V., Althof, W. and Bier, M. C. (2012), ‘The practice of prosocial education’, in P. M. Brown, M. W. Corrigan and A. Higgins-D’Alessandro (eds), The Handbook of Prosocial Education, vol. 1, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 71–90.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Braun, V., Clarke, V., Hayfield, N. and Terry, G. (2019), ‘Thematic analysis’, in P. Liamputtong (ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences, Singapore: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. CASEL (2018a), ‘What is SEL?’, https://casel.org/what-is-sel/49. Accessed 12 June 2020.
  6. CASEL (2018b), ‘2018 state scorecard scan: More states are supporting social and emotional learning’, https://childcareta.acf.hhs.gov/ncase-resource-library/casel-2018-state-scorecard-scan-more-states-are-supporting-social-and. Accessed 12 June 2020.
  7. Catalano, R. F., Berglund, L. M., Ryan, J. A. M., Lonczak, H. S. and Hawkins, J. D. (2002), ‘Positive youth development in the United States: Research findings on evaluations of positive youth development programs’, Prevention and Treatment, 5:1, https://doi.org/10.1037/1522-3736.5.1.515a. Accessed 12 June 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Center for Knowledge and Research in Education (2020), Social-Emotional Learning (SEL): Challenges in Assimilation into the Education System, Tel Aviv: Mofet Institute.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Erlich-Ron, R. and Gindi, S. (2018), ‘Are civics teachers different from teachers of other disciplines in their handling of controversial issues?’, Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 14:2, pp. 1–13.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Garrett, H. J., Segall, A. and Crocco, M. S. (2020), ‘Accommodating emotion and affect in political discussions in classrooms’, The Social Studies, 111:6, pp. 1–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Gindi, S. and Erlich-Ron, R. (2018), ‘High school teachers' attitudes and reported behaviors towards controversial issues’, Teaching & Teacher Education, 70, pp. 58–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Håkansson, M. and Östman, L. (2018), ‘The political dimension in ESE: The construction of a political moment model for analyzing bodily anchored political emotions in teaching and learning of the political dimension’, Environmental Education Research, 25:4, pp. 585–600.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hess, D. E. (2009), Controversy in the Classroom: The Democratic Power of Discussion, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Hess, D. E. and McAvoy, P. (2014), The Political Classroom: Evidence and Ethics in Democratic Education, New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hochschild, A. R. (2016), Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right, New York and London: The New Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kahneman, D. (2003), ‘A psychological perspective on economics’, American Economic Review, 93:2, pp. 162–68.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kus, Z. and Öztürk, D. (2019), ‘Social studies teachers’ opinions and practices regarding teaching controversial issues’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44:8, pp. 15–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Lerner, R. M., Dowling, E. M. and Anderson, P. M. (2003), ‘Positive youth development: Thriving as the basis of personhood and civil society’, New Directions for Youth Development, 7:95, pp. 172–80.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson, R. and Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018), ‘Journal article reporting standards for qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report’, American Psychologist, 73:1, pp. 26–46.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Schonert-Reichl, K., Hanson-Peterson, J. L. and Hymel, S. (2015), ‘SEL and preservice teacher education’, in J. Durlak, C. E. Domotrovich, R. Weissberg and T. P. Gullotta (eds), Handbook of Social and Emotional Learning, New York: Guilford Press, pp. 406–22.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Sheppard, M. and Levy, S. A. (2019), ‘Emotions and teacher decision-making: An analysis of social studies teachers’ perspectives’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 77:1, pp. 193–203.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Thorndike, E. L. (1910), ‘The contribution of psychology to education’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 1:1, pp. 5–12.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Zinsser, K. M., Christensen, C. G. and Torres, L. (2016), ‘She’s supporting them; who’s supporting her? Preschool center-level social-emotional supports and teacher well-being’, Journal of School Psychology, 59, pp. 55–66.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Erlich-ron, Rakefet and Gindi, Shahar (2021), ‘Beyond allowing ventilation: How to connect the social-emotional and the cognitive in teachers’ handling of controversial political issues (CPI)?’, Citizenship Teaching & Learning, 16:2, pp. 189–200, https://doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
Loading
Beyond allowing ventilation: How to connect the social-emotional and the cognitive in teachers’ handling of controversial political issues (CPI)?
Citizenship Teaching & Learning 16, 189 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
/content/journals/10.1386/ctl_00055_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keyword(s): citizenship; class discussions; controversial political issues (CPI); Israeli–Arab conflict; social-emotional learning (SEL); teacher training

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error