The War on Thinking: Censorship in Curriculums

Last year, Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis enacted bans on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs in public schools and universities, intending to eradicate these diversity programs which DeSantis claims “indoctrinate students with a leftist agenda.” DeSantis also passed the “Stop W.O.K.E.” act last year, restricting how workplaces and schools were allowed to conduct discussions on racism and social justice. Now, DeSantis has instituted a rampage of censorship in school textbooks, removing academic topics such as Critical Race Theory, and even banning the new A.P. African American Studies course for being “inexplicably contrary to Florida law and significantly lack[ing] educational value.” This censorship is destructive to educational systems as it promotes ignorance of topics that are extremely societally and historically important.

One means of achieving any school’s purpose—to educate its students—is to claim that ideally, a school should present all information objectively. However, no source is ever completely free of bias: this is a natural phenomenon, as any piece of information is influenced by its author’s personal experiences. Ideas and events must be recorded by humans, who are inherently biased, to become information. Instead of trying to impose objectivity, an impossible goal, a school’s responsibility should be to acknowledge bias while presenting students with a wide range of perspectives to study. This technique allows schools to stay true to their purpose of education and produce graduates who value developing thoughtful opinions. True neutrality, in a sense, is presenting all kinds of information to students, trusting that students are able to use their learning wisely.

Just as the variety of information available (or lacking) to a student affects their education, the diversity of a student body is impactful in shaping its culture. A collection of students from different backgrounds, cultures, and of different opinions contributes to a richer academic experience, for example at a Harkness table where everyone brings something unique. However, diversity is not just a nice luxury to have. Building a diverse campus is the  responsibility of school officials, who must advocate for the equity of groups that have historically experienced injustice at the hands of the same system. Programs that emphasize inclusion create campus cultures where everyone feels welcome, and enrich their overall experiences. DEI programs, which intend to promote those elements of education and residential life, have faced recent heavy criticism from some right-wing politicians. While the media has highly publicized DeSantis’ particular efforts to end these programs, DEI programs are also under attack in other states. In 2023 alone, 20 states made or considered making laws that would prohibit DEI programs in public universities. The disbandment of DEI programs not only threatens a valuable aspect of education, but is a refusal to grow alongside a society actively trying to amend past injustices. 

Refusing to hear and recognize certain voices in the name of “objectivity” is both hypocritical and detrimental to students: restricting information is not objective at all. Florida’s censorship of textbooks based on unfounded allegations of political indoctrination obliges us to consider whether fighting over educational issues is merely a partisan excuse for taking shots at an opposing “side” and their opinions. Education—and how to effectively implement it—seems to be caught up in a battle between polarized political parties, where students’ learning is the casualty. As an example of political goals being imposed with little objective justification, the lawmakers who banned the new A.P. African American Studies course in Florida did not mention the law the course’s content allegedly violated. Not even a specific part of the curriculum was cited as inappropriate. New laws that censor learning materials also censor what teachers are allowed to teach, creating a hostile environment where teachers and students are constantly afraid of violating these partisan restrictions. Censorship closes opportunities for important conversations that can provide students with important insight and further learning. Limiting the freedom of speech in the classroom is antithetical to providing a complete education.

The purpose of education is to help cultivate thoughtful individuals who benefit society through their work. Facilitating that process is a school’s primary priority. When schools forget this purpose—as in Florida’s case where they are forced to prioritize governor-imposed curricula—they easily fall prey to politicization. Rather than limiting and controlling what students are permitted to think and feel—which is exactly what censorship does—schools should seek to guide how students form their opinions, encouraging them to do so after weighing multiple perspectives. Presenting complete information, especially by including historically ignored narratives, is a school’s responsibility to its students, and lawmakers should be held accountable when they fail to respect that responsibility.