Preventing Polarisation - A Conversation with Michelle Blanchet and Brian Deters

Welcome to the Future Learning Design Podcast.

I think we need to do a better job of communicating, especially with parents, upfront. This is a classroom. We will facilitate conversations. Please trust us. Please trust that your child is smart enough to think for themselves. But we cannot teach critical thinking and communication if they are not exposed to different ideas.

Hi, and welcome back to another episode of the Future Learning Design Podcast with me, Tim Logan. I'm speaking this week with Michelle Blanchet and Brian Deeters, the authors of Preventing Polarization, a new book setting out how all educators can equip our young people with skills to become active and engaged citizens. Michelle is an educator and social entrepreneur striving to improve how we treat, train, and value our teachers. She's also the co-author of The Startup Teacher, which was published in 2020. After 10 years of experience working with young people, she founded the Educator's Lab, which supports teacher-driven solutions to educational challenges. Michelle is part of the Global Shaper community of the World Economic Forum and has worked with organizations like PBS Education, the Center for Transformative Teaching and Learning, Ashoka, and the Center for Curriculum Redesign. Brian Dietes has been in education for 27 years, teaching social studies and coaching varsity soccer in the US and abroad. He's a co-host of the For a Better Tomorrow podcast, and he flew back and forth from Switzerland to run in the 2018 election as a US congressional primary candidate for the 18th District of Illinois. Brian holds a master's degree in educational administration from Illinois State University, where he also served as an adjunct professor working in the field with student teachers in 2018 and '19. He currently teaches sociology and civics at Morton High School in Morton, Illinois. Hey Brian, how are you?

Nice to meet you.

Hey, good. Yeah, nice to meet you too. Meet Michelle.

Michelle, nice to meet you. Welcome back.

I think you guys would work well together.

It's, uh, it's so nice to be back.

Brilliant. Well, thank you so much for joining me. Really looking forward to this conversation after reading Preventing Polarization, but it's just been released, so the launch has gone super well. So Michelle and Brian, great to have you here. First off.

Yeah, we're excited to be here.

Yeah, thanks a lot. We really appreciate it.

Great. So I thought we'd start just, it could be easy to go off into the clouds of polarization as a concept. We're not gonna go there. We're gonna keep it quite practical and, and educator-focused. But I thought even before we went there, we'd think about what's your personal connection? How did you come to this story? You know, working with civics, with young people to try and engage in dialogue, et cetera. So we start maybe with you, Brian. What was your personal connection with this? How did you come to it?

Yeah, thank you. So Michelle and I were kind of meeting each other and working with each other as sociology teachers in Switzerland at College de Nîmes, where we met. And everything was really in our country of the United States— we're both Americans— kind of falling apart at the seams, it seemed. Certainly that was kind of the portrayal as we were perched over on the other side of the Atlantic, kind of watching things unfold, particularly when we got closer to the 2016 presidential election, which I think everybody recognized was a very divisive time for our country. And so for me personally, I'm an expat teaching at an international school with a completely different maybe lens than other Americans from where I'm from, which is predominantly a really conservative area in more central Illinois. And I think that Michelle and I both recognized that all of the different signs were in place for our country to not just be polarized, but be polarized in a, in a tremendously scary way, quite honestly. Like, where are we heading with our institutions? Are they going to hold? And so it compelled me to, as I oftentimes joke, or maybe it's not a joke, run for office soon thereafter in the 2018 congressional elections. And I did it from Switzerland, which was an interesting experience for sure. And I'm glad I did it, but it was difficult. But I think for me, it was kind of my way of thinking, how can I help kind of get back into the conversation of helping us develop skills to be more civic-minded, to kind of work against polarization, build consensus, as we talk about in the book quite a bit. And so that then ultimately led to Michelle reaching out to me and starting this project. And I think maybe that's a good time for me to turn it to her to kind of talk about where we went from there.

Yeah, I think both Brian and I actually returned back from Switzerland to the US to our different areas and were just kind of shocked by how polarized everything had become just in everyday life, neighbors, family, basic conversations. Uh, we both taught civics in the US, so we both had that experience of what it's actually like to be a civics teacher and what those dialogues should be, you know. And the teacher in you, sometimes when you're hearing how people are talking, it's like, I don't think you're really understanding the issue, or, you know, helping people to be better communicators and to facilitate conversations, um, that are effective. And I mean, all over the map. I don't care if it was a dinner, I don't care if it was, you know, something on social media. I'm just seeing people constantly fight with each other. And, you know, we're at a point, I think, in the world where we just have way too many problems to be in such discord with one another. I think we're at a pivotal moment where we really need to be able to work together towards the problems we have. And so I think that's why Brian and I connected because we're like, we have to try something. Like we're at that lowest level of like, how do we just reopen the lines of communication again?

Yeah, it is interesting, isn't it? I mean, it's— I completely agree. This is a really urgent area, but it feels in some of the conversations I've been hearing and been involved in, that the US is a particular— it's almost like a paradigm case of some of that kind of dysfunctional social lack of cohesion and, and lack of dialogue, as you're saying. Do you agree?

Yeah, you know, I think it seems to me that a lot of what happens in the States gets magnified around the world, just the prominence, the, the impact of our prowess on the world. And, and so I think that's part of it. But I do think, and we talk about this a lot in the book, that our binary system, which of course is different than the parliamentary system, the UK and Australia and a lot of European countries, lends itself to more of that team aspect of it. And we talk a lot about tribe in the sociological sense of in-groups and out-groups. Like, this is my team, I'm on the red team, this is my team, I'm on the blue team. And so I do think that does make it more pressing of an issue in our country. And Michelle and I've talked a lot about that.

Yeah, interesting. I mean, being British myself, I wouldn't say there was a lot of convivial kind of supportive parliamentarians working together right now by the looks of it. But I absolutely take your point. So one of the things I thought was interesting that you seem to be saying in the book that we've historically avoided, and both of you are coming from a sociological and a civics educator background. So this is kind of a two-part question, I guess, but Why have we avoided it historically and why should we stop avoiding it?

Yeah, I can say as a child I was deliberately told it's rude to talk religion and politics at the dinner table, verbatim. So I think that's the thing is as a culture, you know, we're supposed to respect one another and we want to keep it light and nice. And so not taking on some of these deep issues seems to be kind of the way to go. And this has kind of played out as well, I think, in the classroom where we don't want to upset anybody, we don't want to offend anybody, so let's just not talk about it. And we're seeing, I think, the consequences of that because, you know, we have a whole generation now of grown-ups that don't seem to have civil conversations with one another, especially on topics that they don't agree on. And I mean, this is a skill. You have to be able to converse with other people about ideas or entertain thoughts you don't agree with. I think sometimes if we were to sit down and think about the goal of what we're trying to achieve— so, you know, for instance, everyone cares about their kids. This is usually something we all agree on. So if we were to sit down and say, okay, what kind of future do we want them to have? Because our actions now matter. This would be a very different conversation. All of a sudden people are talking about like, okay, what about, you know, healthcare or jobs or food security, the planet, you know? And all of a sudden when, when you have clear goals, people can have different conversations on how you might reach those goals. And I think because we've avoided things for so long, what, what Brian went back to— and I realized the polarization is happening in a lot of different countries, but our two-party system has really created this kind of team mentality where we just don't have a lot of options. So instead of discussing issues, what I mostly feel people do is like, you're a liberal, you're a conservative, and that's it. And you're supposed to think the same way, you know. It's almost taboo, like, to, to actually go against how your party usually thinks about a certain thing. And so we, we don't critically talk about it.

To go with what Michelle's saying, I couldn't agree with her more. I think that it is very much part of the socialized existence in American households it's considered to be rude to discuss something like that over the top. I mean, we are a pretty folksy culture, particularly where I'm from in the middle of the country, but it stays pretty surfacey a lot of the time. How's the weather? That's acceptable. But what's your views on this issue and why do you feel that way? But Michelle is so right and it's so motivated us. And when I moved overseas and I was working with a lot of people and meeting people from all over, I specifically remember talking with a Danish friend of mine about this exact conversation and he just kind of made me think about it in different ways. Like, what? Why would you not talk about those things? That's so important to talk about those things. And it really got me thinking, and it certainly motivated me to run, as we talked about, but certainly get involved with this book and to get— hopefully in the classroom, get kids to realize that it's critical to talk about politics. We just have to do it the right way. But unfortunately, if we don't, now we have a situation, as Michelle was talking about, where it is very much become a team sport and our institutions kind of allow that through things like gerrymandering, through things like campaign finance money that just bring out people who maybe are looking to prey off of that divisive behavior and thought. And you add to that social media algorithms and we find our own echo chambers of comfort. And so when it is talked about, it's talked about only from an almost bumper sticker kind of mentality in your safe space. And so as we talk about in the book, you basically have two kinds of people that have emerged, right? You've got people who do not want to engage. Age because they're afraid of what it might do for their own, you know, mental health, if anything. And then people who are embracing it to send out their agenda, and it's just a lot of noise, and media capitalize— literally capitalizes on it.

Yeah, I know, absolutely. But it's interesting what you were saying about the role of the different spaces, because you've got neighbors talking to neighbors, you've got the dinner table conversation at home, and, and I'm, I'm interested in the role like what is the role of schools in that conversation? Because there is a limit to what schools can do. And I often feel that educators, it's like the next thing that educators have to deal with, another social issue that they have to add to the full plate of things that they are already taking on. And I think, I just think that's an important, at a high level, just to kind of to think about a bit before we get into perhaps some of the more practical, you know, what they can do. But I think, yeah, in terms of democracy and civic engagement, what do you see the role of schools being? Michelle?

So I can talk about the US more specifically. I'm not sure what's happening everywhere, but I mean, there's enough data that shows like the average American might not really understand how the government functions, even at the most basic level. And so I think there's been— this has kind of been a hot issue of like, okay, how do we bring that back into the classroom? What does that look like? So it depends on different states, but it might be an electives course. As for the university, it just seems to depend on what your major is in. You know, if it's not in something that's related, you're probably not going to get it. And I do think it it clearly has a role in the school. Um, and I think it's good to differentiate two things here. There's civics and civic engagement, and for me, the two are aligned. And I say that because for me, we, we want kids to leave school and feel like they're a part of their community, because ultimately, when we talk about civics, we want to give kids a way to shape policy, to shape how we run our day-to-day in our communities, in our, in our states, in our country, right? I mean, this is one of the best ways that they can address systemic problems. So if they don't understand and internalize the power of that and how they can contribute, I don't think we're really doing them a service. Now, that said, I think the biggest problem is how do we teach civics? And that's where there seems to be a lot of controversy. I keep finding it interesting how often I hear people say like, well, you know, teaching civics doesn't need to be controversial. And I think we have something that's more like the body of civics, like, you know, what are— how does the government function? And then you have the soul of civics. Which is, you know, that passion you need to care and to be involved. And the thing is, though, is as civics teachers, we can tell you it's almost impossible to teach even the body of civics without it getting controversial. Meaning, for instance, when students learn about the Electoral College, they usually get upset when we start talking about running for president. Usually a kid will ask, well, how do you do that? How do you get started? And then we get into, you know, running for office and how much it costs. Well, the last election, I think, was over $14 $15 billion. And then they're like, well, where did that money come from? And then we start talking about lobbies, and then we get into Citizen United, and they're furious at this point. So that's great, actually, that they're angry because they care. They want their government to do better. So it's a matter of helping them to funnel this kind of anger and learn how to do something positive and productive with it. And I think that's the thing, though, is like, schools to me should be that low-stakes environment where kids get exposed to these topics and have a chance to practice communicating and discussing issues. And I don't know if we're taking advantage of that role. And I also don't think it's become a low-stakes environment anymore because we want to avoid the controversy, but it's almost impossible to do.

I wonder, just as an aside, how you feel about the— because what everything you're talking about and the whole, even the concept of civics is quite nationalistic, right? And I wonder what, where do you see the role of the kind of more global citizenship engagement? I mean, you know, that's a contested concept and or a vague concept. What is it really? What does it mean to be a global citizen? But I think there is also conversation around that. And I don't know, how do you see that connecting with the civics concept?

Yeah, definitely. You know, it's interesting because I'm in the civics class right now and I apologize if you can hear in the background. But to answer your question, you know, I think that when you mentioned the term global citizen, that in itself, as innocuous as that might sound to you, has become a politically charged kind of label. Particularly in certain pockets of the United States. And I teach at a— that I'm in the school right now in a conservative district. So that means that, you know, your typical school board members and students are going to be coming from more traditional conservative values. And of course, that's great, that's how it is. But it can lead to more conservative-minded social media taking those terms and turning it into kind of a fear campaign. So even that idea of trying to advocate that we need to be global citizens, the Earth doesn't care what our politics are, it's burning up, you know, kind of thing to, to discuss becomes charged and very difficult. And it's thrust at us as educators into the middle of this fire, I think unfairly so. And so as we discuss in the book and in our podcast series that we do— Michelle, it's just the other day we were talking about that— it's very difficult for us to approach any issue because of the concern of what that might mean for your own safety of your job. So for the typical teacher in the classroom, it is always something that we're having to think about, to relate issues of the importance of building bridges with other cultures to take a global look at our citizenship. It's challenging for sure.

Yeah. Interesting. I mean, it kind of confirms what you were saying, Michelle, about the fact that it's just impossible to avoid controversial issues because even something that perhaps is seemingly innocuous, like global citizenship, actually is very much not as soon as you start delving into it. Interesting. And I mean, what you were already saying as well, Michelle, that was one of my thoughts and questions was around how much is this a knowledge issue when we're talking about civics and teaching civics. And my, my own personal experience, I was trained as a— in the UK was called a citizenship teacher in the early 2000s. And it was a politically motivated shift to train teachers in what they called citizenship equivalent to civics. But in order to avoid the controversy of certain hot button issues, it's about knowledge teaching, right? Transmitting knowledge of what parliamentary democracy means, et cetera, et cetera. And that almost staying safe by teaching the knowledge. But as you said, there's so much emotion involved that you can't actually separate from this whole issue anyway. I just wondered, yeah, what are your reflections there about what if you are, as the book is doing, supporting educators to become better dialogue facilitators and all of those things in, in terms of preventing polarization, how much do they need to be able to kind of hold a space for all of that emotional work and how much is it is a knowledge piece For me, I do think the kind of social-emotional learning behind having conversations and being open to listening to others, being tolerant of questions, having the humility to kind of understand if you're wrong or if you don't know things.

I mean, that's just part of learning and growing, but it does take a certain amount of humility to do that. So I think there's a huge overlap in that, and I think not addressing that isn't really doing ourselves any favors because, I mean, I'm sure all of anyone who's listening to this can relate to, you know, that time they've talked to somebody and the goal of the person was really just to show that they're right about something. It's not to achieve a goal, it's not to have a thoughtful chat, it's just, I want you to think I'm smart and I know this, and I'm— my only goal is to prove to you I'm right. And this is not productive. So I think addressing social-emotional learning or talking about things like soft skills, this is necessary in every facet. So I mean, of course it's necessary in discussing like, hey, what are the issues of our time? What does policy look like now? Is this what we like? Do we need to adapt? You know, how does our How can we help the system evolve? What can that look like? And also understanding too, we're not always going to get it right either. You know, in this, in this quest for having the right answer, it's a bit silly. All we can do is try. And even if something works for a period, something happens in the world and we're still going to have to evolve. So I think there's a lot in this emotional aspect. We're not discussing it as much as we should. And I think it's a disservice. Yeah.

Brian, was there anything you wanted to add?

Well, yeah, I was just kind of thinking about my own classroom that I'm just got done teaching a civics, two courses in civics today, and trying to do it in a way that certainly gets the kids to think about being civic-minded and the responsibility of having their ideology. But undoubtedly trying to do it in a way that's like, it's not saying one way is certainly right and one way is wrong. Now sometimes people can be misinformed on either direction, but I kind of give the simple analogy of, you know, hey, it's, uh, what do you want the thermostat set at here? 68, which is Fahrenheit, obviously. Or 75, either of you were wrong. Like, that's a simplistic way of thinking about kind of how politics plays its role in civics. The civics aspect of it is to get the hot air to come out so that we can function. But it seems like in some examples, people would rather instead of having it 68, you know, if they didn't want that, they'd rather just blow the thermostat up. So I guess kind of thinking in a way that gets it to be rather simplistic and not threatening has kind of worked, I think, particularly teaching in classes where I know students are coming in with— in not all cases and probably not most cases, but coming in with information from the institutions that they are involved with outside of the classroom that aren't helping them be productive, civic-minded future constituents.

I think it's also really interesting. I've been thinking about this a lot recently, the kind of the relationship between the different sides of the, you know, whether it's binary, you know, in a polarized society or a fragmented society, and there's lots of different conflicting positions, but there's a sense that if we win the argument and we persuade everybody else we're right, then everything will be great and we'll be living in this utopia, right? Which I'm sure we all agree, which, uh, fantasy anyway. But the fact there's this really interesting realization, I think, that we get to, and hopefully we can support young people to get to, that both sides of the debate need each other to kind of further the health of a democracy and move society forward, right? And the idea of winning is actually, it's kind of a nonsense. It's kind of winning is losing in some fashion, right?

Yeah, I think as well too, I mean, issues are complicated. And another thing I've seen a lot that's happened is sometimes you have to separate the idea and the implementation. And so sometimes we might say something like, okay, we all want better public health. Well, what does that look like? And you're not necessarily going to get it right. Like what works in one country might not work in another. If something works for a little bit, you might need to— it might need to evolve. And I think this idea of getting it right is really counterproductive to this mentality mentality of problems are going to happen, we're going to need to try to solve it. The idea might be good, but how we implement it might not work. And just to give an example, I remember if you're in the US not so long ago, huge debate, very polarizing issue, Obamacare. And so I, I remember it was interesting because if you asked most people about the idea of ensuring people had access to healthcare, they liked it, right? But one thing that I noticed is when they went to launch, I think they launched everything like on the same day, and so the platform just kind of shut down. It was like on overload. See, like, see, it doesn't work. This is a bad idea. No, the idea was perfectly fine, but the launch strategy doesn't seem like it was very effective. And it was interesting though, because sometimes people can't differentiate between the two. So some of the, the, in this quest to be right, and it, let's just scrap an idea. However we tried to solve it didn't work. The idea was bad. Well, well, no, that, that's not it. And, and I just mentioned this because I think when we have this mentality of wanting to be right, we, we lose focus of our goals and the reality that all we can do is try and evolve. Like, there's never going to be, as you were saying, like a getting right. And I think when we accept that, it makes us more prone to thinking more thoughtfully about things that are happening, what our goals are, and getting closer to solutions instead of just, you know, dismissing ideas.

And the other side, I mean, I'm sure there will be some people that wouldn't agree with the idea of Obamacare at all, right?— but even that helps to, whether it's that particular issue or any other issue, the opposition helps to kind of formulate and shape the way that it evolves. And I think that's just a really important dynamic more broadly that I think is, yeah, it's really interesting. But then one of the things I really appreciated about what you said quite early on in the book is that you weren't going to talk about, particularly about why polarizations happened, right? Because I think we can kind of get into all this extended quite abstract conversation about societal development, all the stuff, you know, actually the reality is there, you know, people face challenges in their lives, they face conflicts in their lives, and educators are kind of somewhere stuck in the middle trying to muddle through and figure, you know, support people to move through this in a more healthy or more kind of engaged or reflective way. So in that spirit, perhaps we could talk just specifically about what are some of the, I mean, you know, there was some good stuff about moving beyond apathy into empathy and very practical practical things in the book, but I don't know if there's any that come to mind now. Just, you know, what are some specific practical things that the educators might do?

Yeah, so you hit it on the head there in the sense that our book, we talk about how the milk has been spilled, if you will. Like, we're not here to discuss all those components as to why we're polarized. We are polarized. We give a few mentioning things at the beginning, but our book serves as a manual. I think we look at it that And these are our ideas. It doesn't mean that they're all of the ideas or that there aren't other ideas that teachers can bring in off of ours. But particularly, you know, for me, when we were just talking about the consumption of information, how, because of the way social media works, because of how all cultures have kind of gotten to this point by using their phones and our brains changing, that we just don't absorb much beyond a headline of sorts. Like it's It's oftentimes referred to as kind of bumper sticker stuff, right?

For sure.

And so one of the things that we have that we talk about in one of the middle chapters is learning how to mindfully consume information. Like that's such a skill that's lost upon so many people. So we provide ideas on, on how we can do that as educators, you know, laying out specific strategies on just making sure you're, you're, are you on a place? That's providing information that's credible, that's accurate. And how do we know that? That's just one that comes to mind. Michelle.

Yeah, so I think for each of the chapters, we've tried to focus more on a skill that we think will help kids to, to be more civically engaged, more so because they're better equipped to communicate and to express themselves and to build consensus. For instance, one we talk about is just practicing humility. And I think one of the first steps as adults is to make sure that we're being mindful of how we engage with others. And some of that is just taking a pause ourselves when we chat and understand what is the purpose of our dialogue. Like, what are we trying to achieve when we start certain conversations? And I think being more mindful of ourselves is important. Also, with the practicing humility, I think it's also about listening to people. I think we all have people who come to us with conspiracy theories at this point. Just listen to them. Sometimes just validating them and making sure they feel heard helps them calm down because this is ego-driven, you know. And so we have really practical things like that. I think another thing for teachers with this mindful information consumption We don't get to control where students are getting their information. So if they are on TikTok, if their worldview is formed by memes from Instagram, we need to dissect that. Have them bring those memes in so we can actually talk about maybe why this meme is a bit simplistic. And Brian and I had a chat the other week on how, like, you know, is the meme the modern-day political cartoon? In a way it is, but in another way, we have people who can, just produce one in 5 minutes. And I don't know if they've really thought about the issue. So I'm not sure how valid it is to say they're all, you know, political cartoons, but we need to be able to work with kids so that they understand what they're seeing and to be able to better identify if it's accurate. And that's just another example.

And I mean, in a way it's kind of just starting where they are because as you say, you can't control where they are. And most, you know, as parents we try and control where they are, but even then we can't, right? And I was having a conversation yesterday with my 9-year-old and my 11-year-old about Putin on TikTok. They would not be persuaded that this wasn't actually Vladimir Putin posting on TikTok. And it's like, you know, navigating through that is a minefield, right?

Yes, but a necessary one. I mean, that's where we're at.

Yeah, absolutely.

And that's a perfect example of what we're talking about. And of course, you being in the position you are, were able to kind of deal with that immediately with your kids. You know, how often is that not the case? How often is it not even being addressed. Yeah. So the laboratory of our classrooms have become ever more essential to deal with these issues. But the, the great juxtaposition or challenge to that is that we are, as we mentioned, being really pressured not to tackle these things because of how our system has emerged. And, you know, it's the safest thing just to not address it at all, right? But Michelle and I have both dealt with those experiences in the classroom where we're just like, but if not us, who, right?

Yeah, exactly. But that's, that's the question, isn't it, in relation to what's going on right now with College Board? And we wanted to ask a question about that because, you know, you've got a chapter in there, chapter 5, on avoiding censorship. And, you know, there is a question about somebody ultimately has to make a decision about what issues we are bringing to, to the classroom. Yes, we're starting with where young people are, but curriculum organizations or schools are deciding what we're putting in front of young people. That's a huge question and you're seeing it play out in in that, that kind of, again, very polarized conversation, I imagine, particularly in the US around what the College Board have just decided with the African American Studies program. And, but there's, you know, there's many examples of that kind of thing that schools, districts, curriculum organizations are taking all over the world all the time. Which issues do we bring to our young people to expose them to? Because there's, there's always this kind of specter of indoctrination that seems to be, you know, if we're exposing them to these issues, then somehow they're being indoctrinated into them. But a lot of it's about the way in which they are engaged with those, right? So, Michelle?

Yeah, for me, if you're not allowed to question something, it tends to me— if someone's worried about indoctrination, if you're not allowed to question, sure, then let's chat. But if an issue is to ensure that children are communicating and critical thinking and exploring ideas, there's no indoctrination happening. And so it's been really interesting how often I've heard like, we don't want our kids to learn these things. I think we need to do a better job of schools of communicating, especially with parents, up front. This is a classroom. In order us to be effective, we will facilitate conversations. Please trust us. Please trust that your child is smart enough to think for themselves. But we cannot teach critical thinking and communication if they are not exposed to different ideas. And I think, Brian, you know who said this, but there was this general who had this wonderful chat, and was talking about how he's read everything, right? Like, just because he's an American general, he's read Mao, he's read the Communist Manifesto. Why not? Why wouldn't you be able to read those things? I mean, for me, it says a lot to not trust your own child to be able to read these things and think for themselves. I mean, that is the point, is to ask questions and to explore. And so I think in this censoring, I feel like schools often know what's going on. I feel like a lot of schools or even college where where they're having to bend to this political will that's really negative. And I think we need to communicate better, like, we're the educators. You have to trust us to do our jobs. And if you want your child to be a critical thinker, this is what it looks like. Please trust the process.

And that's particularly very daunting right now, and it's specifically in the United States because of our politics and the media that's associated with it. It was General Milley, by the way, who member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who worked under Trump and, and many other presidents. But look, I'll be honest with you, by and large— and this isn't certainly all parents by any means— but the atmosphere out there that gets pressure on school boards because of what they're being exposed to, starting with our politicians, is that we in the classroom are part of this— and we've mentioned the word indoctrination— this indoctrinating strategy. And particularly you see it in more conservative media where, oh, teachers are, are liberal-minded and they're helping create this dissolving of morality in our country. And when you couple that with the simplicity of where we are at now with winners and losers, I'm right, you're wrong, boy, it's a challenge. You know, just President Trump has just come out with a video this week chronicling what his plans are if he gets elected again for education. And I would encourage you to take a listen to it because it speaks to all those things and he's obviously doing it for his own political gain. So.

Yeah. But interestingly, I think there is even perhaps in this conversation, there's a kind of a tacit agreement between ourselves that critical thinking is an important and core part of what a good education is. But even that is a controversial, that maybe not everybody would agree from even that base. So I think we're in a really interesting place place where if we can't even find shared bases for agreement of even that, that's what constitutes a good education. Because actually in some contexts, in some cultural contexts, national contexts, they wouldn't necessarily agree that that's exactly what we want for our young people. We don't want them to question, you know, there is a kind of transmission of values and a sacredness of the continuity of our shared values, shared culture, et cetera, that, that is more important. So I know you're gonna have to run off to your next civics class, so I don't want to hold you up, Brian.

But yeah, I'm gonna have to cut out here really quickly, but what a tremendous conversation, and I really appreciate you bringing this on.

Thank you so much. And I mean, thank you for writing the book because I think it's such a great resource. There's so much in there that's really practical stuff for educators to just dive into straight away. So I don't know, having met you for the first time, it's a real pleasure. I've known Michelle for a and I'm really happy to be able to support you in promoting the book because it's just, it's a really useful manual, as you said. So thank you for your time.

Thank you so much. And we'll keep moving forward, right? That's all we can do.

We hope you've enjoyed this episode. Please feel free to continue the dialogues with our guests, with us on our blog or on social media, or within your own networks.