Public school teachers are expected to avoid influencing their students’ political views, as they are representatives of the state. The first education bill introduced in Arizona aims to prevent teachers from engaging in partisan political activities during the upcoming midterm elections. Many teachers shy away from sharing their political opinions on social media to preserve objectivity and avoid potential negative consequences. However, it is important for students to see that teaching is an inherently political activity, and it is essential to establish a wall between student and teacher.
The Philippine Teachers Code of Ethics states that teachers should not engage in the promotion of any political, religious, or other partisan interest, and should not directly or indirectly solicit, require, collect, or receive any money or service. Teachers can join political parties to help promote their professional interests, but it is crucial for schools to receive government funding and be able to teach effectively.
Studies show that teachers disclosing their beliefs has little influence on a student’s own political views. However, some teachers argue that teaching itself is inherently political, and that schools can be political without being partisan.
In conclusion, while teaching is an inherently political activity, it is essential for teachers to be politically impartial and not engage in partisan activities. Schools can be political without being partisan, and teachers should be kept away from politics to ensure effective teaching and learning experiences for students.
📹 How Teachers’ Unions Became Political | Policy Briefs
In the 1950s, teachers’ unions were not politically active. Most members believed that they should not engage in political activities …
What is the most controversial book?
Im holding in my hands one of the most controversial. Books ever published. One of the most shoplifted. Books of all time a book thats banned. In the federal prison.
What is the most controversial topic right now?
Controversial TopicsAbortion laws.Animal rights.Anti-vaccination movement.Artificial Intelligence.Climate change.Electronic cigarettes.Fast fashion.Gun control in the US.
What is controversial teaching?
Topics typically become controversial when students have competing values and interests; when they strongly disagree about statements, assertions, or actions; when the subject touches on some particular sensitivity (e.g. political or religious); or when they arouse an emotional reaction. These topics may relate to events in the past, to a current state of affairs, or to some future desired outcome.
As the teacher, it is helpful to consider a variety of perspectives on teaching controversial subjects when reflecting on how you will approach such issues in the classroom. In higher education today, there are two prominent paradigms:
- Liberation Pedagogy.The teacher should seek to develop a “critical consciousness” among students. She should allow the students to bring their own experiences and perspectives to the problems investigated in class, with the aim of having students come to a new understanding of their place in the world. In this view, the classroom should not be seen as a world separate from wider society, but as enmeshed and invested in the problems of the social and political world. (See, for example, Paulo Freire, The Pedagogy of the Oppressed for the pdf or check out the Wikipedia page)
- Civic Humanism. Teaching should prepare students for the responsibilities of active citizenship. Teaching should be concerned, in part, with developing moral virtues, such as religious and cultural tolerance, a sense of social responsibility, etc. (e.g. Derek Bok, Our Underachieving Colleges)
What countries don’t have the freedom of speech?
Here are summaries of the Most Censored Countries:NORTH KOREA.TURKMENISTAN.EQUATORIAL GUINEA. Leader: President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, in power since a coup in 1979.LIBYA.ERITREA. … Lowlight: At least 15 journalists have been jailed or otherwise deprived of their liberty. … UZBEKISTAN. … SYRIA.
New York, May 2, 2006–North Koreans live in the most censored country in the world, a new analysis by the Committee to Protect Journalists has found.The world’s deepest information void, communist North Korea has no independent journalists, and all radio and television receivers sold in the country are locked to government-specified frequencies. Burma, Turkmenistan, Equatorial Guinea, and Libya round out the top five nations on CPJ’s list of the “10 Most Censored Countries.”
. In issuing its report to mark World Press Freedom Day on May 3, CPJ called state-sponsored censorship one of the most urgent threats facing journalists worldwide. CPJ studied press freedom conditions in dozens of countries around the world to assess the access people have to independent information and the methods leaders use to stifle the news.
CPJ regional staff used their extensive knowledge of local press conditions and applied a rigorous set of criteria to determine the rankings of the most censored list. The criteria included state control of all media, the existence of formal censorship regulations, the use by the state of violence, imprisonment and harassment against journalists, jamming of foreign news broadcasts, and restrictions on private Internet access.
What is Sonia Nieto’s theory?
Theories, Beliefs & Coined Terms Sonia Nieto believes that educators must approach new information by starting with what students already know and using that as a foundation to begin moving beyond their own experiences and embracing new ones (Nieto, 2015).
Are teachers local government officials?
In most cases, public school teachers are considered government employees because they work under the direction and control of the government. Government funds pay their salaries, and they often have access to benefits such as healthcare and retirement plans. Additionally, public school teachers must adhere to certain regulations and ethical standards outlined by the government.
The funding for public schools varies depending on the location and jurisdiction. In some cases, local property taxes fund public schools, while the state provides the majority of funding in others. Federal funds also play a role in financing public schools, typically through grants and programs targeted toward specific educational initiatives.
Some noteworthy examples of public school systems in the United States include:
Can teachers be local councillors?
If you are a teacher (or are a non-teaching member of 1.24 staff) at a school or other educational institution maintained or assisted by a county council, you may be able to stand at elections to the district council provided you meet the qualifications and are not otherwise disqualified.
What is the teacher’s responsibility when teaching a controversial issue?
The role of the teacher. Traditionally, many teaching styles could be used when dealing with controversial issues. For instance, teachers could take a “neutral chairperson” approach and attempt to act as facilitators of the discussion. They could also attempt to follow a “balanced” approach and provide students with a range of alternative viewpoints. Teachers could also take a “devils advocate” approach and purposefully take the opposite perspective of that of their students. Or the teacher could take a more “partisan” approach and defend their own perspective, the perspective of certain students or the perspective of the authorities (CoE, 2016).
Teacher responsibility. In any situation, it is essential that teachers are aware of the social and political context and have a good understanding of the school and the situations students experience. There might be issues that are particularly sensitive to all or some students (e.g. pupils who experience or have experienced poverty, racism, asylum) and teachers need to consider this when selecting and addressing controversial issues.
It is also very important that teachers are aware of their local legislation and consider, to what extent, they are allowed by law to promote political views. In many countries, the curriculum or educational laws explicitly specify that partisan politics are banned from schools. This is the case, for instance, of England and Wales, where the Education Act 1996 provides a clear prohibition against practitioners promoting partisan political views and an equally clear requirement for practitioners to offer a balanced account. It is also the case in Germany, where the Beutelsbach Consensus, operating as the basic law for teaching citizenship, requires teachers to provide a balanced approach to discuss any given law.
Are teachers allowed to express political views in the UK?
Expressing personal opinions. Teachers and other staff have a responsibility to ensure that they act appropriately particularly in the political views they express.
There is no blanket prohibition on teachers and staff expressing their own views on political issues that are being taught to pupils. However, there is a risk that doing so could sometimes amount to promoting a partisan political view or compromise the balanced presentation of opposing views. Teachers and staff are in a position of authority and will typically be respected and trusted by the pupils they teach, giving their personal opinions greater weight and credibility.
As a general principle, they should avoid expressing their own personal political views to pupils unless they are confident this will not amount to promoting that view to pupils.
Where staff do share their personal political views, they should ensure that this is not presented as fact and note that there are opposing views which pupils may wish to consider.
Is a teacher a local government employee?
Teachers are considered state employees because the majority of funding for public education comes from state governments. This includes elementary schools, middle or junior highs, high schools, and even public colleges and universities.
So, because teachers are considered state employees, technically, they can also be considered government employees. However, they do not get some of the same benefits as many government workers, especially at the federal level.
This also only applies to teachers who teach in the public sector, not teachers who teach for private schools of any level or a university.
📹 Should Teachers Talk Politics in the Classroom?
Audience Question: Should teachers discuss politics in the classroom? -Become a Member: …
I’m a Freshman in High School and my AP World History teacher talks about politics all the time but encourages us to think about both sides of an argument. He does although shine a light or issues and world problems that Republicans Ignore/or have a big role in. One thing we talk a lot about is, is what’s happening in Yemen and how horrible it is as well as the fact that the United States sells weapons to the saudis.
Teachers have to discuss history with students. The Nazi regime and the holocaust are parts of history that are definitely important for students to learn about and it’s not being biased to say that white nationalism is wrong and that it leads to horrific ends such as the extermination of particular races and ethnicities. To deny that it isn’t evil doesn’t make the educator a liberal or biased but makes sure that history does not get repeated and telling kids that it is wrong and morally inexcusable is the right thing to do. It isn’t choosing a party politically, although today the conservative party has been crossing lines that are dangerous and scary. It is the responsibility of educators to call out moral failing.
I’m a middle school social studies teacher. Besides our American history unit when we talk about the Constitution and Federalist Papers, we don’t really talk about politics unless it comes up in current events (like CNN student news, which we watch every morning). The kids ask me from time to time who I voted for and I never answer this question, and I explain why. Whenever politics come up I always make sure to present both sides. The kids are curious, they ask questions, I”m not going to ignore them when they ask unavoidable questions.
Politics should be discussed in two subjects. History and Social Studies (sociology). It seeps into other subjects but these are the core. Both should be taught in a factual manner with both theoretical perspectives behind it. This has worked well in the UK, I’m not too sure about the US though. Also, David is right, it should start from a solid age, probably around 14/15.
I talk politics and religion with my students constantly. It’s my job to make them think. I don’t advocate for my opinions, but push the students to refine their views and arguments. Many of my students won’t go to college, so high school history and government classes are where this kind of dialogue HAS to happen. I also never shy away from the reality of Earth’s age, evolution, climate change, or other scientific and historical facts. We have to deal with reality.
As a high school school teacher at a public school that teaches a health related elective class, I keep it within my subject matter as much as possible. Occasionally students may bring up a political issue and if time allows, I let them express their thoughts and leave it open for debate. I feel that having such conversations is healthy, and in these rare instances my job is not to weigh in with my views, but to be a moderator that ensures the conversation is respectful to all and that students feel comfortable with the discussion.
I know that here in Scandinavia, we have social studies, politics, economics, religion on the school curriculum from about 4-5th grade. It readies the kids for larger life discussions and helps them make choices that benefit them, from the first time they vote at 18 yrs old. Understanding the policies that will govern your future, are important, incl. ecology, economy, politics (left & right of the middle) and all the history that makes the country you live in, what it is! Wouldn’t be without it in our school system!
I’m a senior in high school and my AP government teacher talks about politics all the time but the class is about how the government works so this makes sense. He doesn’t promote an ideology or any candidates, just gives us both the liberal and conservative view of policies. This is how politics should be discussed in high school.
Regardless of whether you make teachers have a liberal or conservative bias, children will shape their political views based on the external environment, because we are all products of factors we have no control over, so I dont think theres anything wrong with having biased teachers in the classroom as long as it stems from an informed understanding of the topic.
Yes. I’m a high school social studies teacher, and I talk the fuck out of politics in my class. Students love it and engage. They know SO much more than I did when I was their age 10 years ago. I make no effort to hide my biases and they love it. Plus, it affects them: many are immigrants, racial, and religious minorities. Plus, there is no way to hide it, I’m volunteering on Bernie’s campaign and trying to join the local dem primary for my congressional seat.
Very, very carefully. (I used to teach hs science during Bush Jr). The parents & administrators really don’t like you inflicting your personal political beliefs on their babies’ young & impressionable minds. But teachers can’t be robots. You have to be genuine, or the kids will call you out faster than parents or administrators will. It’s a fine line of expressing yourself as openly as you can, without offending or proselytizing. Each class is filled with such diversity, a teacher must balance as if on a razor’s edge already. Most times, it is easier to just try & stay on safe topics. There is so much material they need to be proficient in, that there isn’t a lot of time to venture down errant tangents
They should be able to talk politics, and by that I mean they should not be afraid to express their actual opinions. If you’re left wing or right wing, teachers should be able to give their opinions and there reasoning for it, be upfront with their biases. It’s not like it’s that hard for students even in middle school these days to find sources outside of their teachers for information, I’m not worried about the teacher indoctrinating America’s children. The one standard that teachers should be held to is to not punish the student for holding a different opinion.
At the school that I attended we were encouraged to study politics and religions. We even had election campaigns alongside the General Elections. The school debating society was run by the students with guidance from staff. Very little was off limits. The school was a Grammar School in the UK in the 1960’s, perhaps a time of enlightened education.
One of my careers, as a high school instructor who taught chemistry, physics biochemistry, and physical science I found the use of current events and trends a very useful platform. It was an instructional technique to illustrate how science integrates into our lives and how to apply this knowledge and scientific reasoning to make everyday decisions about the way we live our lives.
You dont have that in school??????? That explains a lot to me….We in Germany have a subject called “Political Science”. Its obligatory for everybody who wants to finish high school and one of the main subjects with more weekly hours. It covers not only the history (greeks and stuff) the theory (seperation of curch and skate) the institutions (How does the parliament work?) but also current developments in the country and abroad (local elections and the near east conflict) as well as practice: how to engage in a discussion no matter what topic, what are my options to participate in democracy other than voting, what do the parties stand for? I have some US friends and when we discussed Trump via Internet they always said: there is no smoking gun that connects Trump and Russia. He cant be sentenced in court. That means he is innocent. This means we dont have a problem at all. While my standpoint was: jurisdictial responsability and political responsability are totally different: If you are head of a department and somebody in the department messes up, than you as the chairman are responsible while not involved as an indivudual. Trump was the head of his election campaign. Somebody high up in his team made major mistakes. While of course not guilty in a jurisdictial way he still has to step down: it was his obligation to chose the right people and his obligation to oversee them. If he says: I dindt knew of any wrongdoing (illegal payments to Pornstars/ connections between his team and russia): than this is exactly his fault.
My psych/soc teacher who runs our student government programs and teachers some lower level civics and economics classes (which I didn’t take with him, so I don’t know if he talks about his own ideas in those classes) talked a lot about politics from a very left-wing perspective, mostly like social policy (he is a psychology and sociology teacher so that makes sense) and I really loved that class personally. Those classes are made up of 16-18 year olds, so people in the classes kind of have their own opinions usually, so it didn’t bother me much. I think if it were a freshman year class or if he were teaching something to middle or elementary schoolers it would be not the best to talk politics, but when you have a class of usually the smarter 16-18 year olds in the school I think it’s ok. He never really presents himself as much of an authority and it’s a very informal-feeling class and it just felt more like he wasn’t treating us as just little kids who can’t handle differing opinions
The answer is yes civics is an important class to have in school. However the issue is when it comes to talking about the current parties and bias that come from that. A big issue is a lot of teachers talk about what the parties believed when they were a kid, and don’t so much reflect on how they’ve changed over time.
If by politics you mean the role of local, state and federal governments . Yes, yes, yes! History is a waste of time since it’s all a fairytale. Maybe the psychology of politics would help the older student understand what the philosophies are and how they function in the real world. No-one should be taught what to think, just how to think!
At first I was thinking “no”, but after giving it a quick thought I actually want students to start to become more politically aware. I agree with David in that general education should be the main focus before high school. Once these kids become teenagers they have to start learning more about the real world. In particular, science has to be stressed as a necessity so that these students learn that a lot of work goes into different fields of science and as such you can’t simply ignore facts and physical evidence. There could be a course regarding political parties, their beliefs, and where the parties have gone. It would be straight facts with no advocacy on the part of the instructor. The more I think about this the more I feel it should become a reality. This is especially considering how much influence fundamentalist religion has in the United States. I grew up in a Catholic family and went to Catholic schools from first grade to senior year of high school. That involved faith-based curriculum, going through the religious stages (like communion and reconciliation), and seeing right-wing talking points from fundamentalist Catholics. I’ve commented before that I left Catholicism mentally in 2005 or 2006 when it was found out that the church covered up sex scandals and I officially left when I graduated high school at eighteen. The reason why I’m stressing this point is that the fundamentalist population has a lot of influence. We have to keep in mind how willfully ignorant and backwards fundamentalism is.
They shouldn’t push their own political beliefs and positions on kids, but we need to be educating them about politics and explaining government more thoroughly. We need to express the need for kindness and compassion and civility in politics and society, and we need to teach them how to navigate the media and social media, etc, and how to fact check information. We have to make sure they aren’t just falling for Alex Jones bullshit and reading a trump tweet and running with it as gospel. We need to instill a desire to participate in our democracy.
don’t worry about the kids, they’ll figure it out, i know i did. you’re right about elementary kids and science tho. scientific material isn’t political, only religious people have problems with it, sad day for them. i had high school and college teachers who definitely got political, what i realized early on listening to these right-wing teachers, (anyone who tells you teachers are all lefties are full of shit, i definitely experienced the opposite) was i was definitely a lefty, and i openly challenged them, on several occasions, i can think of at least 4 off the top of my head. and it always led to those teachers not giving the marks i deserved. i personally don’t care, but anyone (especially teachers) who gets political with me should be ready to be challenged, don’t let right wingers try and intimidate you with their bullshit, and yes, right winger politics is definitely bullshit.
Teachers are there to teach how the government institutions are working and to teach the true meaning of a constitution and the law. Why it’s important to vote for example. Schools must be a neutral land and shouldn’t be allowed to promote political parties but must be allowed to talk freely about any issues a society has. Kids have to learn that they can have free speech but must listen to other opinions as well, peacefully.
Whether or not they should, they do. And I recall a few times in middle school, say around 6th grade back in the late ’90s, that a rather conservative teacher of mine was trying to convince the class that his political ideals would be ours eventually because they were just more sensible and mature. According to him. I don’t know how that hit the other students, but me being me it made me far more suspicious of everything he said because even though I didn’t have a good grasp on politics at that time, I knew that what I’d learned of conservative beliefs conflicted greatly with my personal morality. So, in essence, he was signaling to me that his judgement was not to be trusted, and therefore how I could trust anything he taught me? Keep in mind that I tend to be a quiet dissenter, I won’t often confront the person I disagree with directly — not in a case of power imbalance like young student to old teacher — but I’ll certainly spread my doubts to others and so I do think I had more of my fellow students questioning their trust of him and a few speaking out with challenges. I’m stubborn when pushed, and when I feel I’m being misled or manipulated I have a tendency to find ways to strike back. So… this is to say that I think it’s not a great idea for a teacher to speak politics to their students. Not that people like me are going to be common, probably the opposite. There’s a question of morality, of course, that a figure of intellectual authority should speak of personal opinions in the same space as they cover facts can corrupt what the students consider “true” and could cement in young minds that a particular political stance is more “factual” than another.
Isn’t there a “subject” called “Politics” once a week in the US? I’m German and curious because we have that in school – after the kids turn 14. We learn about all our parties and also compare the governments of different countries. For example: In how far is the American or French government different from the German one? And where are the strengths and weaknesses of each system? What crisis do we face and how does each party plan to master them? What problems does the EU have? Etc. The kids are also encouraged to talk politics and discuss (based on facts and not emotions). All the while the teacher doesn’t influence the students but informs them, so they can make up their own minds. We also simulate voting, so they know exactly what to do when they go voting for the first time. And when they vote and talk to other people later on in life, the children can do it with lots of knowledge. And isn’t that what school should do? Educate? So not talking about Politics in school sounds pretty outlandish to me.
Teachers should encourage students to find out about the relevant topics people are talking about. They should encourage their students to form their own opinions and discuss these topics. Sure, the teacher themself shouldn’t advocate for any particular political position, but they should ask the students questions that make them think critically about their own and other people’s views. Students should learn to make rational arguments for why they think in a certain way, and this can only be done if the teacher is allowed to talk about politics and challenge the students’ views. Again, the teacher shouldn’t advocate for any political position, but if someone in the class says something (that has to do with politics) that’s simply factually incorrect or poorly reasoned, the teacher should be allowed to challenge them (though this would preferably be done by asking the other students what they think about this reasoning and not just by using their authority as a teacher to tell them they are wrong). Now, obviously this should only be done on classes where politics are a relevant topic, for example social studies and history, and sometimes science classes (if talking about evolution, climate change, LGBT+ people, contraception, the effects of drugs or the development of an embryo is considered to be “political”). On other classes, I would see no reason to bring up politics.
Would someone really quit going to a dentist if they didn’t agree with their politics? One goes to a dentist because they are good at being a dentist; their political views are not relevant. Also, politics NEED to be addressed in classrooms (with bias minimized). Students need a safe place to discuss social issues; isn’t that the purpose of school? To learn how to listen to other people, process information, and create arguments and rebuttals? That’s the learning process in a nutshell.
I dont’ want my dentist who knows I’m his/her captured audience, espousing politics in my face while their arm is down my throat… Seriously… I don’t pay, nor does my insurance company pay for them to discuss politics, especially when I can’t talk back. Secondly, politics is part of history, and if it’s discussed in terms of the period of time, and what each party or figure supported, that is fine.
I live in Illinois, so I’m required to take a government class in highschool, I just finished my senior year, and my AP government teacher managed to teach both the fundamentals of civics but also teach current political issues in an actually balanced way, with only hints of my teachers bias, aka him only once saying his actual ideology and his opinions, so I’d argue at a highschool and college level sure, but college is also a slippery slope because colleges aren’t publicly funded, so it should be down to the dean of the university not the federal government to make that decision, middle school and elementary school is when you really first start learning government, with the basics of how government is structured and such so elementary and middle school would be different to highschool and college
Talk “politic” in the school? yes. Party politics, no. Particularly, high school students should be able to differentiate between communism, socialism, democratic socialism, etc. A teacher should NOT advocate for a particular party or ideology, but the students should be able to identify the underlying ideology behind (al least) the mayor political parties. Students should be able to differentiate between politics a policy. Of course, I’m not saying that ALL the teacher SHOULD do this, but it should be somewhere in the curriculum.
Teachers talking politics with a right wing bias would offend me very much so therefore I have to conclude the same thing would apply if a teacher is prone to left wing bias. The issue for me is that too many groups and people want to consider facts as having some kind of political bias. Explaining the mechanics of government, the constitution, political parties, etc, are facts. Explaining these things out of context, ie, to buttress or dismiss a left or right wing argument is bias and as such has no place in a classroom funded by tax dollars.
All that withstanding, there’s no real valid distinction or separation. The simple kindergarten teaching that we help out people who are in need, listen and respond empathically, and seek to include everyone we can is still political, granted I assume I don’t have to explain which political sway that harkens to.
when it comes to collage im of the opinion that teachers should disclose tgeir political views when it comes up and inform their students when their political biases may come into account. I think that encourages far more critical thinking than avoiding any discussion of their own political posistions.
I think in High School and College, in a Civics or History class is fine. Obviously in a government class in jr. high or whatever, but I think with a stated political bias or personal political beliefs or interpretations it should be fine. I just think you need to couple those ideas with actual facts and events and be open to the kid’s different viewpoints and questions. (because questions are going to come up)
Teachers should teach civics in the classroom. But if they are going to discuss politics. Then there should be another adult present. Of the opposite political party. Because as we have seen there are too many adults, who cannot be trusted. We want children to have a proper education which teaches them critical thought.but we cannot trust adults to leave their political agendas aside.so to ensure that the political discussion covers all aspects of our democracy, and political affiliations. It requires two adults, one from each political affiliation. That way a child is allowed to form and unbiased opinion based upon their own character and beliefs.
As you age you should be encouraged to enter the political discourse. We should introduce kids to the realities of what they’ll face with their family members, with their coworkers, on the TV and Newspapers. Imagine the shift that we could affect by teaching children the art of rhetoric from the beginning. How to argue and spot fallacies. How to be the political animal as we’ve been described by the ancients. But as for the teacher’s personal politics. That should be separated from the curriculum, not saying the teacher should never state his or her opinion, but it should be clear that it’s the teacher’s opinion.
Most of the bias is in the curriculum, no the teacher. I am a junior at a pretty good high school in Virginia and my history teacher is a very unbiased, respect the difference of opinion type teacher. The virginia SOL curriculum is from over a decade ago. The curriculum literally says the civil war was about states rights (not mentioning slavery) and my teacher called that sh*t out as ridiculous. But yeah, dont shoot the messenger.
Public schools, no, but it’s a natural thing to come up in history and civics classes that it’s a got to be a conscious thing to be turned off. Specific levies and issues supporting public education…maybe. It’d be like my kid’s christian science teacher talking about praying at home…no place in public school.
Facts often rub someone the wrong way, especially conservatives. For example, I knew a guy who was all about keeping down the number of Puerto Ricans coming to the United States. I said, “They’re American citizens.” Was I being political? Is it political to point out that the United States Constitution does not contain the word “God?”
I still worry a bit about politics among college and university professors etc. The risk of getting worse results for a lifetime of debt, because your political views did not line up. It’s hopefully a much smaller risk than I imagine some times. But it is difficult to keep politics out of an all-adult setting.
On the same train of thought, teachers should not be teaching ideology or religion in a classroom as well for the same reasons. However if we allow politics in grades K-12, under the condition of just introducing the “system” as it were in how our history evolved, then Christian bible thumpers will and still do in some states, institute “Bible history” as a course in school. It is an elective, certainly, but a student must have so many electives before passing onto high school from middle school, and oftentimes, Bible History is the only available elective as only so many students can take Art or Music or wouldnt’ want to take art or music.
Teachers are there to teach. They are not there to indoctrinate. If your beliefs are threatened by the knowledge of the world outside your home you are free to confine your children within your four walls in a process called “home schooling”. Of course this has its own consequences but at least they will know who to blame for their ignorance.