Dangerous Memories and Teaching 9/11

Author's note:  the below is an excerpt from my forthcoming book, Teaching Terror:  9/11 and Collective Memory in American Classrooms.  It will be available from Routledge early Aug. 




One other important intersection between the literature on historical memory and the literature on peace education is Zembylas’s concept of critical emotional praxis (Zembylas 2008, Beckerman and Zembylas 2012).   In his words, critical emotional praxis “creates openings for different affective relations with others”.  The point here “is to explore the conditions under which trauma impacts educators’ and students’ lives, to destabilize and denaturalize that regime of thought that perpetuates a conflicting ethos with those who are deemed responsible for ‘our’ trauma, and to invent new practices of relating to others”.  For this to be achieved, what he calls “dangerous memories” (2008, p 133-157) must be allowed to come to the fore.  Trauma obviously creates pain and suffering, around which we as humans naturally desire to create meaning. We also desire to restore physical, mental, emotional and even I would argue cultural security.  In seeking to achieve both of these goals, we often harden the boundaries between “us” and “them”, them being of course the groups we have identified as the perpetrators.  For teachers, this means being aware of the spaces of inclusion and exclusion in our classrooms.  Trauma narratives often privilege the narrative of those positioned as the victim, and marginalize and silence those seen as the perpetrators.  

In the case of the historical trauma of 9/11, dangerous memories might include memories of Muslim students, immigrants, or other similarly marginalized students in the wake of 9/11.  The 1953 CIA coup in Tehran is another appropriate example, as are US military bases in Saudi Arabia and the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine.  Memories of FDNY firefighters who did not have working radio equipment should not be censored.  Stories of Afghan civilians struggling to survive the Soviet invasion, the Taliban regime and the US invasion after 9/11 must be given air.  Surfacing and creating space in the classroom for such dangerous memories is essential for students “to understand how trauma operates through affective connections and articulates its differences from other places around the world” (Zembylas, 2008, p. 5).  Such pedagogy “develops capacities for critical emotional praxis” which can inspire and strengthen the skills needed for peace building.  Zembylas refers to this as the “pedagogy of dangerous memories” (Zembylas with Beckerman, 2008, pg. 133-156).  As we will see in Chs. 3-5, many classroom teachers find it difficult enough simply to find time to address 9/11 at all, given the demands of state centralized curriculum.  Thus it is hard to imagine critical emotional praxis or discussions around ‘dangerous memories’ taking place on any regular enough basis to disrupt harmful orthodox national narratives about 9/11.  Rather dramatic changes in school structure and policy would be necessary.  That said, as we will see more in Ch. 4, there are teachers finding subversive and creative ways to at least complicate the narrative of 9/11 somewhat and to humanize the Other. 

 

How Teachers are Teaching about 9/11: 10 Essentials We Now Know

For about the past year, my team and I have been surveying and interviewing US public middle and high-school teachers nationwide about their experiences teaching 9/11. How have they approached teaching today’s students about one of the most painful, important and arguably divisive events in US history? Here’s what they had to say.

1. Most teachers (including history teachers) don’t see teaching about 9/11 as part of their curriculum. According to my survey 84% of teachers who don’t address it give this as their reasoning.

2. When 9/11 is addressed in the classroom, this appears to be only on the anniversary of the attacks. 65% of teachers report addressing 9/11 once a year (on 9/11 itself). Only 10% report addressing 9/11 once a quarter, and 7% once a month.

3. Teachers who have developed units on 9/11 place a priority on critical thinking! According to the interviews my team and I conducted, teachers are involving students in hearing and gathering oral histories, conducting online research, presenting in front of the class, and debating issues that have emerged since 9/11 (like the use of torture, the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the prison Guantanamo Bay). Teachers, especially our government and history teachers, design lessons to help students understand 9/11 in historical context, providing information about the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and the Cold War, for example. They also use teaching about 9/11 as a way into teaching about war powers, the Constitution and the branches of government.

4. Teachers find themselves often working to correct misconceptions and stereotypes about Muslims, as well as rampant internet rumors about who was “really” behind the events of 9/11.

5. Even over a decade later, over 20% of teachers report that addressing 9/11 in the classroom remains too painful. They need and deserve school-based support.

6. We have an abundance of curriculum on teaching 9/11, but most teachers are not using it. Only 45% of teachers report using curriculum such as from PBS, the New York Times or similar curriculum sources.

7. The teachers I interviewed expressed that they believe passing on the knowledge and memory of the events of 9/11 is a patriotic duty.

8. While teachers overwhelmingly do “feel academically safe” teaching about 9/11, most express real caution when it comes to addressing the controversial political issues that have faced us since 9/11. They fear being perceived as biased or even unprofessional.

9. Only 6% of teachers view their students’ knowledge of what occurred and why on 9/11 as “excellent” or “very good”.

10. About a quarter of teachers responding to my survey express that a “lack of time in the curriculum” is a real barrier to teaching 9/11 the way they’d like. About ¾ of the teachers I interviewed more at length specified that a bureaucratic culture of standardized testing and centralized curriculum was a major barrier. In such a culture, how can teachers foster democratic, empowered and engaged citizens? How can we reclaim the classroom for teachers as public intellectuals?