The 2024 presidential election is quickly approaching and the topic often pops up in classrooms across the country at some point or another. For many teachers, a presidential election presents the unique opportunity to highlight the voting process and, for some, though it is wrong, their own political perspectives. Teachers often deny that their personal beliefs are ever revealed to students, and many refer to their selection of “unbiased” resources as evidence. Unfortunately, more often than not, the “unbiased” resources they tell students to use have a clear and present bias, but for teachers who share the purported viewpoint, they don’t see the problem using them.
A few of the leading “unbiased” educational resources that circulate among teachers’ circles have been pushing teachers and students to the left for decades. Unfortunately, many of these resources are now hidden behind paywalls, some of which are exclusive to schools only.
The following is a breakdown of how several notable resources have approached teaching about the 2024 presidential election.
The New York Times: The Learning Network
For teachers who may not be familiar with – or who have yet to come to terms with – the New York Times’ left slant, this resource is likely perceived to be a valuable one for teaching students about the 2024 presidential election.
The homepage of their ‘12 Ways to Teach the 2024 Election With The New York Times’ mentions Trump’s “felony trial” in the second sentence of the introduction, which they source to themselves in an article titled, ‘Trump Guilty on All Counts in Hush-Money Case’ for more information.
The second reference is to the first assassination attempt on former President Trump at the Butler, Pennsylvania rally on July 13. The article they link to is their own in which they write that Trump made “a defiant gesture” when he “pumped his fist” to the crowd. The use of the word “defiant” may not be the best word choice when speaking with students as it is generally a negative term, especially when lumped in with the former president being called a criminal. Trump pumping his fist was seen by many as a response of strength and courage in a more inspirational gesture to the crowd. Teachers could use the latter when describing the historic photo that was captured in the moment if the topic comes up.
The Times article continues, “F.B.I. officials told members of Congress that the shooter used his cellphone and other devices to search for images of Mr. Trump and President Biden, along with an array of public figures.” With this statement, students will come to believe that President Trump was not the shooter’s only target, but President Biden and “an array of public figures” were as well, downgrading the serious and real threats to Trump’s life.
In their linked article about the debate between Trump and Biden, The Times writes, “Over the course of 90 minutes, a raspy-voiced Mr. Biden struggled to deliver his lines and counter a sharp though deeply dishonest former President Donald J. Trump.”
The Times continues, “While [President] Trump at times rambled and offered statements that were convoluted, hard to follow and flatly untrue, he did so with energy and volume that covered up his misstatements, managing to stay on offense even on issues of vulnerability for him like the Jan. 6, 2021, attack and abortion.”
Speaking to how “truthful” the Democrat was, the Times recalled President Biden saying that he was “battling a cold” the night of the debate.
In an article the New York Times wrote introducing Vice President Kamala Harris as the possible and later declared Democratic nominee, it is interesting to point out that they wrote, “[Vice President] Harris declined to be interviewed for this article.”
Of course, students must also be aware that ‘With Biden Out, Vice President Kamala Harris Has a Chance to Make History Again.’ The Times’ article describes Harris as “the first woman, and woman of color, to be vice president” who “has faced sexist and racist attacks.”
The Times continues glorifying Harris writing that she “has long been seen as the embodiment of a country growing more racially and ethnically diverse, has often nodded to her mother and the generations of women of all races who paved the way for someone like her.”
Would it be an article about Kamala Harris if abortion isn’t mentioned? No. The Times, of course, included several references to the Vice President’s commitment to advocating for abortions. (Teachers using the resource will need to define abortion for their curious students.)
According to The Times, Harris is the one to take on “this villain” who is “a convicted felon,” as per their conclusion highlighting Harris’ own remarks.
More biased resources from The New York Times can be found here: 12 Ways to Teach the 2024 Election With The New York Times
Education Week
This resource should pat themselves on the back for how “unbiased” they are when it comes to the 2024 election.
The author of the blog covering the election, Larry Ferlazzo, links to his X account (which he inaccurately still calls Twitter…likely in an act of defiance, but someone who claims to be discussing facts should maybe stick to them). On his account, he shared an article he wrote titled, “WHAT ARE TEACHERS & SCHOOLS GOING TO DO THE DAY AFTER ELECTION DAY IF TRUMP WINS?”
The article begins, “It will be terrible for our country, and terrible for our world if Donald Trump wins the Presidential election.”
The teacher advisor also shared an article on his X account with the tag “Why Texas Secretly Loves Illegal Immigration.”
Another X post of Larry’s was a retweet of someone calling Trump a person who stands for “racism and bigotry,” suggesting that Trump’s supporters do the same.
We’re just going to leave this one here from Learning For Justice (formerly known as the intolerant Teaching Tolerance).
Background: Students are asked to determine who a literary character would vote for in an election. While this lesson plan was written in 2016, it is still suggested on their list of election resources and can be used for any election as candidates change.
“Students engaged in nuanced discussions around complex issues like gender and power when participating in this activity. For instance, many students who read Lord of the Flies pointed out how Simon’s intellectual nature and instinct to care were “feminized” in the book, while Ralph’s and Jack’s more aggressive approaches to leadership earned them status. These students then spoke more broadly about war and how voters often embrace candidates—mostly men—who are seen as possessing foreign policy and military acumen. Students concluded that Simon would cast his vote for Bernie Sanders while Jack would vote for Donald Trump.”
For reference, Sparknotes describes Jack as follows: “The strong-willed, egomaniacal Jack is the novel’s primary representative of the instinct of savagery, violence, and the desire for power.”
Cliffsnotes writes, “Jack represents evil and violence, the dark side of human nature.”
BBC writes, “Jack is clearly used to getting his own way and is a bully – he uses verbal and physical violence when necessary […] swiftly becomes a violent dictator […] is an unlikeable character, motivated by evil and whose bad traits only get worse as the story progresses.”
Facing History and Ourselves has a special collection dedicated to the teaching about the election. They took it upon themselves to define the general differences between the two major political parties.
Facing History made a poor attempt to explain “Political Polarization in the United States.”
“In general, the left is associated with socially liberal policies and economic policies that create a greater social safety net, while the right is associated with socially conservative policies and less regulation of the economy,” they write.
(What child or young adult doesn’t want a safety net?)
They further describe “example economic policies” of liberals (left) as being “expansion of government-provided health care; increase in minimum wage,” and “example social policies” as being “expansion of LGBTQ rights; more pathways to citizenship for immigrants.”
“Example economic policies” of conservatives (right) are “lower taxes on wealth; limited government regulation of the economy,” according to Facing History. “Example social policies” are “immigration restrictions; limited access to abortion.”
In other words, liberals want to help people and conservatives want to harm people. Their gross interpretation of defining characteristics is severely out-of-touch and heavily biased to an indescribable degree.
In another resource, Facing History suggests teachers take students down the “America is racist” route.
This deeply reflective resource (that can be found in Facing History and Ourselves’ election collection) suggests that students examine the “inaugural poet” Amanda Gorman’s poem in which she writes:
“And yes we are far from polished
far from pristine
but that doesn’t mean we are
striving to form a union that is perfect
We are striving to forge a union with purpose.”
The lesson recommends students dissect each line, encouraging them to provide evidence for why America is “far from polished” and “far from pristine” and why Americans should not strive to “form a union that is perfect” (a play on the U.S. Constitution which states in the Preamble, “in Order to form a more perfect Union”), but should strive to “forge a union with purpose.”
Students of American history should already know the country’s purpose, given the fact that America has been a defender of freedom since its birth and fought wars to preserve it.
Still, this resource is an interesting one given the trending topics being discussed in education that are reflected in the rhetoric of left-wing politicians and found in numerous resources peddling the narrative that America is systemically racist, sexist, and built on a pattern of oppression.
[Note: While teachers may use this excerpt in a lesson to encourage students to analyze it, which could include critiquing it, the intent here, and its use by many teachers, is likely to support the poem’s obvious message.]
iCivics Education
iCivics is no stranger to the far left. The CEO herself, Louise Dubé, has a history of demonizing the United States and its “racism.”
In their page on the bios of the presidential candidates. iCivics suggests that students analyze the qualifications to become the President of the United States. In addition to the formal qualifications listed in the Constitution, iCivics recommends students determine the “unwritten [qualifications] that influence how the American voter considers their options.”
A “qualification” is “a condition or standard that must be complied with,” according to Merriam Webster.
Suggesting that students consider the “qualifications” of economic backgrounds, family structure, religious background, gender and social networks in addition to others counters the Founders’ intent that anyone who meets the qualifications as listed in the Constitution can become the President of the United States. While additional factors do contribute to Americans’ decision on the candidate for which they will vote, to call them qualifications is a poor word choice, and an important one at that, as it could trick students into thinking that such factors are, or ever could be, “qualifications.”
— — —
There are a myriad of resources on teaching elections as they approach. Other resources include Scholastic, whose handling of the 2020 election we previously covered, and the Zinn Education Project, which takes the election as an opportunity to disparage America’s founding.
Despite the transparency that some of these resources still have, many notable ones that we did not mention here have moved their teacher resources behind paywalls; this is one of the perils of the curriculum transparency effort. A teacher resource that is only available to teachers through a school district subscription is impossible to research for those on the outside. There are likely lessons being taught on the 2024 election that do not uphold accuracy, and until conservatives and moderates become classroom teachers to find out exactly what is going on themselves, the rest of us will never have a full account of what leftist teachers are telling students across America. More importantly, until conservatives and moderates become classroom teachers, students across America will only be taught the left’s version of historic and current events.
