For the last three years, K–12 schools have been embroiled in public debates about whether political and social issues are appropriate for the classroom. State policies restricting teachers’ instruction, which began in 2021, are at the crux of this debate. Initial policies prohibited instruction related to critical race theory and perceived divisive concepts related to race and gender. Recently, state policies have shifted toward prohibiting instruction related to sexual orientation and gender identity. As of early 2024, over a third of states have enacted such a policy (PEN America, 2024).
State restrictions are not the only way teachers experience constraints on classroom discussions: Messages and pressure also come from school and district leaders and students’ families, even in states without policy restrictions (Woo, Diliberti, & Steiner, 2024). Collectively, we refer to these influences constraining teachers’ instruction as limitations.
At the heart of this debate is teachers’ latitude when choosing instructional content. Teachers find themselves having to balance the need to teach the content in their curriculum, their own beliefs about whether and how to approach political and social issues, compliance with state restrictions, directives from leaders, and messages from students’ families. Where does teacher autonomy fit into this equation? And how much autonomy should teachers have over their instructional content?
How Limitations Jeopardize Autonomy
Since 2022, we have worked alongside other researchers, using RAND’s American Educator Panels to survey teachers about their opinions on state restrictions, what they perceive as limitations on their instruction, and how they navigate limitations in their classrooms. These data shed light on how and why teachers may experience limitations as infringing on their autonomy.
In our analysis of responses from more than one thousand teachers across the nation, we found that limitations influence how teachers approach instruction in a multitude of ways: Teachers described how limitations curtailed the control they had over their choice of instructional materials, classroom discussion topics, and books in their classroom libraries (Woo et al., 2023).
In 2022, we found that slightly over half of teachers nationally reported that they opposed state restrictions on instruction (Woo et al., 2022). In 2023, teachers were about ten times more likely to consider limitations harmful to student learning than they were to consider them beneficial. Teachers expressed concerns that limitations reduce students’ access to learning opportunities and diminish students’ sense of belonging and capacity for empathy (Woo, Diliberti, Lee, et al., 2024).
At the same time, teachers do not all experience these limitations as constraints in the same way. While many described how limitations infringed on their instructional autonomy, a small number of teachers instead perceived a push toward including diverse perspectives in instruction as a constraint on their autonomy. This is in line with our finding that, while a majority of teachers oppose state restrictions, 20 percent of teachers nationally support these restrictions, and 3 percent of teachers believe that limitations are positive for student learning (Woo et al., 2022; Woo, Diliberti, Lee, et al., 2024). Often, these were teachers who believed that topics like race or gender were not appropriate for school and should instead be discussed at home with families.
Leveraging research can help school leaders understand where to provide guidance to teachers.
Three Evidence-Based Approaches for Teacher Autonomy
Teacher autonomy promotes well-being and retention and allows teachers to tailor instruction to best meet students’ needs (Carver-Thomas & Darling-Hammond, 2017; Steiner et al., 2022). Yet, complete autonomy without guidance and support can create inconsistency in students’ learning opportunities. As some states pass policies restricting teachers’ classroom discussions and others pass policies supporting them, students’ learning opportunities may become increasingly dependent on where they live. Since teachers do not uniformly share beliefs about how to approach subjects such as race, gender, and sexual orientation in the classroom, providing teachers with complete autonomy without accompanying guidance and support could similarly result in disparate instruction.
Thus, school leaders must strike the appropriate balance of providing direction and guidance to teachers while creating opportunities for teacher autonomy and voice in school decision-making. We offer a few suggestions to school leaders on how to find that balance.
1. Guide teachers toward evidence-based approaches and build their capacity to adapt those approaches to students.
Research emphasizes the importance of cultivating learning environments that promote safety and belonging (Darling-Hammond & Cook-Harvey, 2018) and provide students with opportunities to engage with instructional content that relates to their lived experiences (Aronson & Laughter, 2016; Bonilla, Dee, & Penner, 2021). As instructional leaders tasked with helping teachers understand the strategies that will best support student learning and development, school leaders should look to this research when crafting teacher guidance about how to approach social and political topics in the classroom.
School leaders might also build teachers’ capacity to enact research-based practices for discussing contentious topics in the classroom through mechanisms like modeling, coaching, or professional development so that teachers develop the skillset to appropriately engage in such discussions when they do arise. These practices include establishing classroom norms that create a safe environment conducive to constructive conversations, individual reflection on one’s own positionality and beliefs before engaging in such discussions with students, and proactively communicating instructional plans to parents, students, and school leaders (Pace, Soto-Shed, & Yeager Washington, 2022).
Leaders already use research to guide instruction and build teacher capacity in other domains. For example, research on the science of reading has led to numerous state policies stipulating that teacher preparation, professional development, and instructional materials include explicit phonics instruction. For a subject like reading, school leaders are in the position of nudging teachers toward evidence-based approaches. Instruction about political and social issues should be no different.
Leveraging research can help school leaders understand where to guide teachers by moving teacher practice toward evidence-based approaches and where to allow for teacher autonomy by building teachers’ capacity to flexibly adapt those approaches to the students in their classrooms.
2. Solicit teachers’ perspectives and attend to their concerns when crafting school policies.
Integrating teachers’ perspectives into the development of school policies—especially when they are aligned with research—is one way that school leaders can elevate teacher voice and support autonomy. Our findings highlight teachers’ perspectives at the national level, but school leaders must understand the range of teacher opinions and beliefs in their own schools and solicit them when crafting school policies. For example, school leaders might facilitate discussions with teachers to co-create a set of norms rooted in the school’s mission and values about how to engage in classroom discussions on political and social issues.
At the same time, school leaders should also attend to teachers’ concerns about discussing political and social issues in class. For instance, where teachers are hesitant to discuss issues like race or gender with younger students, school leaders might point teachers to evidence-based, age-appropriate ways to engage in such discussions when they arise and guide teachers on how to implement such strategies in their classrooms. School leaders could model concrete practices like engaging in clarifying conversations when students raise questions about different social identities, actively addressing signs of “pre-prejudice” when students make comments that reflect societal biases, or developing students’ critical thinking skills by identifying common stereotypes (Derman-Sparks, Olsen Edwards, & Goins, 2020).
Respecting teachers’ professional expertise and knowledge of the children in their classrooms is critical for supporting teachers’ well-being.
3. Support teachers’ use of evidence-based approaches, even in the face of conflict.
One of teachers’ top reasons for limiting classroom discussions about political and social issues was because they were worried their school or district leaders would not support them in the face of parental concerns (Woo, Diliberti, & Steiner, 2024). Research consistently suggests that parents are a key reason teachers decide to limit their instruction on political and social topics even in places where there is not a requirement that they do so (Woo, Diliberti, & Steiner, 2024).
School leaders can play a role in allaying teachers’ concerns about parental pushback by clearly messaging how they will support teachers. School leaders may need to support teachers’ use of evidence-based approaches and communicate to families the evidence behind teachers’ instruction. Leaders might support teachers by creating and communicating clear protocols on school leaders’ and teachers’ roles when responding to families’ concerns and conveying to teachers the types of instructional materials and practices that are grounded in research. Part of this protocol for responding to conflict might also involve communicating to families how school policies and teachers’ instructional approaches are rooted in research evidence demonstrating that student belonging and safety promote academic learning. In addition to conveying support for teachers, this can help shield teachers from claims that they are imposing personal beliefs on students.
Crafting protocols for responding to conflict with families may be especially important where school leaders and teachers are subject to restrictions. In such places, school leaders should become familiar with the restrictions in their state or school system to clearly understand what is and is not prohibited. School leaders can leverage their own knowledge of such policies to guide the support they provide to teachers. For instance, some state restrictions note that they do not prohibit discussions of contentious issues (Sanders, 2023)—even if the media, teachers, or families might interpret them as doing so. School leaders can equip teachers with this knowledge so they understand the boundaries of state restrictions.
Finding the Balance
Respecting teachers’ professional expertise and knowledge of the children in their classrooms is critical for supporting teachers’ well-being at school and ensuring teachers can meet the needs of their students. Yet, complete autonomy presents the risk that instruction might not always be grounded in evidence-based approaches. In a time when teaching can feel especially fraught, school leaders can help teachers use their autonomy well by equipping them with the guidance and resources to enact best practices for supporting student learning, even within the constraints of classroom limitations.
