Great thread from UNC history prof Joe Stieb on “prove me wrong” debate contrasted with what actually occurs (and should occur) in a classroom and a university. Speakers such as Kirk are fine; they are not part of the core university mission.
Stieb articles better something I have long thought about. My classroom has never been a forum for debating all ideas or engaging uncomfortable truths or however people describe it. We discuss what the law is and why; we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of what the law is and its alternatives; we argue cases or hypos; and I guess there is some room to argue one’s preferred views. And I run the classroom in a way to draw out the relevant information, not to offer students a soapbox. As one colleague tells his students, for purposes of this classroom, I do not care what you think–I care about what the court says and why. A better understanding of the classroom purpose and dynamic–as Stieb describes–would clarify so much.
Posted by Howard Wasserman on September 13, 2025 at 03:43 PM