Beyond Neutrality and Consensus: The Case for Partisan Teaching
Saved in:
| Title: | Beyond Neutrality and Consensus: The Case for Partisan Teaching |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Quentin Wheeler-Bell (ORCID |
| Source: | Educational Theory. 2026 76(1):100-116. |
| Availability: | Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 17 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Descriptors: | Civics, Citizenship Education, Political Attitudes, Activism, Politics of Education, Controversial Issues (Course Content), Justice, Democracy, Inquiry, Diversity Equity and Inclusion, Classroom Communication, Persuasive Discourse |
| DOI: | 10.1111/edth.70074 |
| ISSN: | 0013-2004 1741-5446 |
| Abstract: | This article challenges the prevailing binary in civic education that pits teacher neutrality against political activism. I argue that the real tension is not whether partisanship belongs in the classroom--it always does--but how it is engaged. Drawing on the concept of partisan justification, I define "partisanship" as reasoning from within a contestable normative framework that shapes what issues are foregrounded, how they are framed, and which disagreements are possible. I critique two dominant models: the Controversial Issues approach, which relies on the illusion of neutrality by concealing partisan framing, and the Activist approach, which risks the illusion of consensus by treating a single vision of justice as settled. Against both, I advocate for an educational partisanship as a democratic design: a practice that acknowledges the inevitability of partisan commitments and structures classroom inquiry to make them visible, discussable, and open to challenge. Using a classroom example focused on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), I show how teachers can disclose their commitments without imposing them, expanding democratic understanding through genuine contestation. I conclude that democratic education depends not on evading partisanship but on practicing it transparently and with care--designing classrooms where disagreement is expected, plurality is preserved, and no view, including the teacher's, is above scrutiny. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1495082 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This article challenges the prevailing binary in civic education that pits teacher neutrality against political activism. I argue that the real tension is not whether partisanship belongs in the classroom--it always does--but how it is engaged. Drawing on the concept of partisan justification, I define "partisanship" as reasoning from within a contestable normative framework that shapes what issues are foregrounded, how they are framed, and which disagreements are possible. I critique two dominant models: the Controversial Issues approach, which relies on the illusion of neutrality by concealing partisan framing, and the Activist approach, which risks the illusion of consensus by treating a single vision of justice as settled. Against both, I advocate for an educational partisanship as a democratic design: a practice that acknowledges the inevitability of partisan commitments and structures classroom inquiry to make them visible, discussable, and open to challenge. Using a classroom example focused on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), I show how teachers can disclose their commitments without imposing them, expanding democratic understanding through genuine contestation. I conclude that democratic education depends not on evading partisanship but on practicing it transparently and with care--designing classrooms where disagreement is expected, plurality is preserved, and no view, including the teacher's, is above scrutiny. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0013-2004 1741-5446 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/edth.70074 |
