The main debate was on Ukraine. A motion, based on the Stop the War (StW) position, was proposed on the basis that we all want peace and an end to war, and that NATO was the main problem. There was an attempt to amend the motion to include a recognition of the Ukrainians right to self-determination and self-defence, moved by the past president of the union in a very impassioned speech, on the basis that you had to look at the reality of what was happening now in Ukraine. They were fighting for their existence and in such a situation you had to support them against the Russian invaders. However, the amendment was lost by about two to one and many of us felt that the weak position of the main motion would then pass. As the debate on further amendments proceeded, the weakness of the main motions position of avoiding any reference to self-determination and self-defence but just calling for solidarity with Ukraine, whatever that may mean in concrete terms, became clearer to many delegates. The final vote was a surprise. The main motion was rejected by a clear majority of the delegates. This left the NEU with no agreed position on the war in Ukraine. Both the StW position and the self-determination position had been defeated, which I think leaves the NEU districts free to decide their own positions on Ukraine. This loss by the supporters of the motion led to rather strange comments on social media, the supporters of the self-determination position were called war mongers and various comments of the ‘History will absolve us’ type were sent. However, some sort of unity was eventually restored when all the Conference delegates wore blue ‘Say it loud, Say it clear, Refugees are welcome here’ t-shirts in a massive photo-shoot.
Earlier, the Shadow Secretary of State for Education, one Bridget Phillipson, gave a speech. She must have known the NEU position on Ofsted, passed yesterday, but she tried to talk about reforming Ofsted. This was a bit of a red rag to many delegates who heckled her and eventually there was a large walk out of delegates. The Shadow Secretary of State for Education gave no real commitments on funding, on working conditions or on assessment. In fact almost the only clear statements were that Ofsted would continue, although it might be modified a bit, and she would endeavour to spend more on the Early Years. It felt to many delegates that she was determined to stick to her prepared speech, she made no effort to respond to the heckling and just ploughed through her speech. Many delegates after the session thinking how are Starmer’s New Labour different from the Tories on education policy.
Art Book Review Books Capitalism China Climate Emergency Conservative Government Conservative Party COVID-19 Creeping Fascism Economics EcoSocialism Elections Europe Event Video Fascism Film Film Review France Gaza Global Police State History Imperialism Israel Italy Keir Starmer Labour Party Long Read Marxism Marxist Theory Migrants Palestine pandemic Police Political Prisoners Protest Russia Solidarity Statement Trade Unionism Trans*Mission Transgender Ukraine United States of America War
As well as take a position on the war in Ukraine there are two other things that the members of the NEU should agree to do, as the largest union that represents the people who teach our children and young people.
The government recently warned schools to be ‘politically impartial’. Does this mean now that they can’t, for example, support schools raising funds to support Ukraine? Schools Week (278, 4 March) said that ‘schools and parents feel afraid to show their own support because of ministers’ bravado about wanting to be seen looking tough.’ It asked the DfE and it ‘pointed us to two specific points in the guidance. One states that “not all areas of ethical debate are political issues”, and there are “some concepts and views that can be considered as shared principles that underpin our society and not political issues in this context”. Examples cited include a “belief in upholding certain rights, such as freedom of speech and protection from violence and criminal activity, or challenging discrimination and prejudice, including racism”.’ The guidance also reminds schools of their duty to “actively promote” the fundamental British values, which include democracy and the rule of law.
Of course we reject the government’s attempt to censor political issues in schools, but the important thing here is that schools are free to engage in support activities for the Ukrainian people. Schools are key public institutions in every locality, every area. They could be centres of support for refugees from Ukraine – and refugees from everywhere under threat.
This raises the fundamental educational issue: how can teachers best help children and young people to learn about and understand issues such as Ukraine? In ‘Helping victims of this and every conflict in our schools’, another article in the same issue, Anjum Peerbacos, a pastoral lead for year 13 and co-founder, Hijabi Half Hour, says that ‘Schools are making incredible efforts to support Ukrainian and Russian students and must do the same for all children afflicted by conflict’.
‘That’s the case for all our students, but for many on our roll with associations with and heritage from Ukraine and Russia, their situation requires particular support. … They have loved ones in the war zone. Some have family members who have travelled back to the country to volunteer. Many recognise the places we are seeing on our screens. So in the past week …we have identified all those affected by the conflict, had one-to-one conversations with them so they could voice their concerns, allowed them time and space when they’ve needed it and let them know they have dedicated staff they can talk to…. We have also decided to educate and inform our students about events in this part of the world.’
The Education Hub website at the DfE offers ‘Help for teachers and families to talk to pupils about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and how to help them avoid misinformation’ and ‘How to talk to young people about distressing complex, emotive news stories’.
But that raises a wider issue: we can’t speak about Ukraine but be silent on Britain’s wars. As Anjum Peerbacos says in the same issue of Schools Week:
‘I have taught children that have travelled from war-torn lands for over 20 years. This horrendous situation is only different in one key regard: Where were the outrage and the compassion for those killed or displaced and made destitute in Afghanistan and Iraq, in Syria and Yemen? Where was our concern as a profession for those in our schools and communities affected by those conflicts? This week, while Black refugees being turned back or unaccountably delayed and mistreated at the Polish border received very little coverage, one reporter said of Ukrainian refugees: “These refugees are not like the others. They are blonde and blue-eyed.” Our students have seen all of this, and they couldn’t have witnessed a more overt double standard. So now that we know what works to support conflict’s distant victims, let’s resolve to apply it equally to all.’
How have teachers in the UK helped children and young people – and how do they today – to understand Britain’s recent wars in Afghanistan and before that Iraq, and its role for example in supplying weapons to Saudi Arabia in its war with Yemen? There may be many good teaching materials on this out there but I have found it very difficult to find them. One useful one is ‘Making Sense of World Conflicts’, a pack published by Oxfam in 2007.
In contrast there are lots of US resources for schools. To give just three examples that teahcers here couold borrow ideas from:
• Zinn Education Project – ‘Teaching About the Wars’. Zinn Education Project shares a teaching guide from Rethinking Schools that focuses on United States military engagement in Afghanistan and the Middle East. Teaching About the Wars is divided into five chapters: Introduction: Breaking the Silence on War, the Road to War, The Human Face of War, Military Recruitment, and Anti-War Resistance.
• ‘How to Talk to Children About War – An Age-By-Age Guide’. Today.com has created an age-by-age guide for explaining war to children. The guide explains how to talk to children in preschool to age 8, children ages 8 to 10, middle school students, and high school students.
• Educators 4 Social Change resources for Teaching About War.
But we need more than resources. We need real-life accounts by teachers, in recent years and today, about how they have helped children and young people in primary and secondary schools to explore and make sense of these difficult issues. I have looked but I have failed to find any. If they don’t exist we have a problem, but I hope they’re out there and we can share and draw on them today.
I found more examples in the US and below are extracts from one, ‘Suggestions from a 5th-grade teacher on bringing the War in Iraq into the curriculum’ by Bob Peterson with his class of 5th graders (ie Year 6) at La Escuela Fratney, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, an inner-city bilingual school that is predominantly Latino but also has whites and African Americans. Bob is a leading educationist activist and one of the editors of the journal Rethinking Schools.
‘I wanted students to explore what they thought, not only about the war but other pressing social issues. I encouraged them to write their feelings and thoughts in their journal or as part of a bilingual poetry book that each is expected to complete. I shared a few poems that former students had written on the war and other social topics, including Osvaldo’s from the year before, and suggested that my students might write a “message” poem on a topic they felt strongly about.
The various mini-lessons had an impact and over time, the war became an ongoing topic of conversation, albeit at a low level. For example, a student might announce the new cost of the war, based on an internet search they have done the night before. A few wear peace buttons they have gotten from other family members.
Many of my students’ families, including those who have members in the military, have become increasingly critical of the war. This has posed the dilemma of how to make sure that articulate, outspoken critics of the war don’t dominate class discussions. I also want to make sure that students, regardless of their view, base their perspectives on sound facts and reasoning. As a result, I challenge statements, even those I may agree with, if they are merely asserted and not backed up. I want my students to learn to think and form their own opinions.
For a number of my students, the most significant lesson came outside the classroom.
I also noted there was going to be a local peace rally the same weekend and that I knew some of the organizers, who had previously told me they would be interested in students speaking at the rally. I told this to my class and several students expressed interest. With their parents’ permission, over the next two weeks several students stayed in during recess to write speeches and make signs.
Three students — two of whom have relatives in the military — spoke at the protest, with the full support and participation of their parents and families. A few other students and their families attended as well. The three student speakers were warmly received by the more than 100 people at the rally, which was attended mainly by veterans and was held inside Milwaukee’s City Hall Rotunda on a cold Friday evening.
Gabriela was the first of my students to speak, and began by saying, “I believe the Iraq war is the most unnecessary war the United States has ever been in.” She paused, as I had suggested in our rehearsals, and the thunderous applause gave her the courage to make an impassioned plea for peace.’
You can read the whole of Bob’s article at https://rethinkingschools.org/articles/the-war-in-iraq-and-daily-classroom-life/