“But, of course, much more could be done if all educators saw politics as inherent and the giving of voice as essential to the task of education. To not mention racism is as political a stance as is a thoroughgoing discussion of its dynamics; to not examine domestic violence bears consequences for the numerous youths who have witnessed abuse at home and feel alone, alienated in their experience, unable to concentrate, so that the effects of the violence permeate the classroom even – or particularly – if not named. I am not asking teaching to undertake therapy in the classroom nor to present only one political view but, instead, to interrogate the very conditions of students’ lives and the very thoughts that they entertain as the “stuff” of schooling.” (Fine, 34)

I was torn between choosing this passage and the one that immediately preceded it, which detailed different approaches that various educators took that integrated and celebrated, rather than silenced, student voices. I appreciated specific examples of how to be a teacher that does not silence. As a future educator, it can be daunting for me to read an article that focuses on what teachers do wrong, especially when I think: “Oh, I might be inclined to do or say that,” and then feel discouraged that I might be part of this problem, without even realizing it. But when I read specific examples of what people are doing right – a social studies teacher asking students to perform ethnographies of their neighborhood, or a hygiene teacher asking her students to write to their parents and ask for advice on love and romance, not only does this provide me with concrete examples of how to engage my students, it also inspires me to think of lessons of my own that are like that.

However, I chose the passage after the list of examples because I feel that it crystallizes the article’s main point well, and against some of the inclinations I might feel by reading a list of examples of lesson plans that don’t silence. I like how the quote places those examples in a broader context, explaining the why as opposed to just the what. Why should we interrogate? Because to not do so is just as political as doing so.