by Lexi Matthews ‘18

A student yells “Hillary for Prison!” in NSL. Another calls Trump an idiot for denying climate change during biology. In the middle of an immigration lesson in Spanish, a third announces he’ll move to Canada if either is elected.

Although politics stand with sex and religion as ‘taboo’ social topics, chatter around the 2016 presidential election has been seemingly inescapable these past 18 months; candidates’ faces grace the front page weekly, their campaign ads interrupt our favorite shows, and their names have grown nearly as common as prepositions in conversation. With Pew Research finding an unprecedented 89 percent of Americans viewing one or both candidates as ‘highly unfavorable,’ this isn’t hard to understand, but raises an important question: how do schools address this polarizing topic constructively?

“I’ve asked teachers to respond like they would with anything [when politics arise]; with empathy, with sensitivity, with making everyone feel welcome,” said Principal Bill Gregory in a general meeting with Sherwood teachers just before school started. He addressed handling the election and encouraged all to keep expressions of political opinions balanced and open to equal discussion.

Spanish teacher Moira Kenyon echoed Gregory’s desire to avoid conflict and keep class focused on legal immigration rather than its more controversial counterpart. She tries to detail the humanity of the issue, offering insight into the personal stories of lives affected by immigration, then pushes students to develop their own opinions. “My personal feelings aren’t the important part of the lesson,” said Kenyon. “The priority should be to educate and create an environment where students feel comfortable enough to share and learn.”

As her Spanish 5 class touches heavily on illegal immigration, Tanya Aguilar advocates for teachers “sharing what they believe about the world and society in general” without addressing specific political affiliations. She praises her students’ abilities to avoid conflict when the hotly contested issue arises in class, using their diverse backgrounds and beliefs to learn from one another and grow closer instead of pulling apart.

With classes like NSL, it is hard to imagine a lesson not mentioning the election. “We absolutely love the teachable moments. We discuss the election daily. Students realize how living through history is so much more powerful than getting it second hand,” said AP NSL teacher Aileen Woolley. Earlier this year, the AP NSL team switched the traditional order of units to correspond better with current election events. An upcoming project has students test online to determine their personal ideologies and compare them to that of the candidates.

As lessons cover topics like abortion and welfare, disagreements are not uncommon. AP NSL teacher Scott Allen usually lets these play out on their own, the discussion almost always ending positively. As long as insults stay out of it, Allen views this as enriching, real-world exposure to the diverse political perspectives that exist outside Sherwood’s walls.

Most teachers agree that the answer to avoiding polarizing debate lies in establishing rules and expectations beforehand. This includes creating boundaries between personal attacks and constructive evaluation, and allowing all to feel that their thoughts are valued. Generally, students shouldn’t be forced to share, and have the right to leave the discussion if desired. “The classroom is not cable news!” said Allen.

While some opinions differ on the best way to mix politics and education, the majority agrees that this mixing is necessary. Some argue that this articulation of complex ideas is the essence of learning, combining important life skills like research, persuasion, and critical thinking. “Young adults should be educated on decisions happening in their country. It’s something teachers need to work hard to do right, but it’s worth it. It’s their future,” said Kenyon.