Something in the Water: Controversial Issues and Competitive Debate

Since 2020, many U.S. states led by conservative legislatures have enacted laws banning instructional materials that promote “division between, or resentment of, a race, sex… political affiliation, social class, or class of people ” or the idea that an “individual, by virtue of the individual’s race or sex, is inherently privileged…” in an effort that is publicly presented as a means to ban teaching Critical Race Theory (CRT) concepts in schools. Generally these laws establish a process for concerned individuals, like a parent, to complain that a teacher or school has used instructional material banned under the statute. If the state finds the materials to be in violation of the law, schools, districts, and individual educators may be subject to harsh penalties such as millions of dollars in fines and the loss of one’s professional license. Educators and school leaders are left with the hard task of avoiding complaints while ensuring their students receive accurate information about controversial  issues. 

This case concerns debate coaches in Memphis, TN, who occupy a precarious position in regards to the new law. After all, in a debate, the content is the controversy. The debate coaches receive notice that pieces of the nationally distributed research packet intended for their students are being banned from use in Memphis competitions, by order of the district. Although the packet has not yet been found to violate the law, district leaders are concerned about potential complaints regarding how its sources leverage the concept of “environmental racism” to discuss potential  solutions for lead-contaminated drinking water. Further complicating the issue is that Memphis students are implicated in this debate, as lead contamination is a problem faced by city residents, primarily Black and low-income residents. Now, the coaches must determine an ethical way to respond to the school district’s request. The case raises questions of leadership, teacher activism, and the unique role of debate educators in teaching about justice and controversial issues as their practice comes under increased scrutiny. 

This case was inspired by the experience of the author, who was a teacher and debate coach in Memphis when Tennessee banned CRT in 2021. In the real-world example, leadership in the local debate league decided not to debate the resolution concerning lead contamination, despite it being a nationwide policy debate topic that year. This case imagines what conversations amongst debate league leadership might have looked like in a scenario where their instructional resources come under scrutiny. All characters presented here are fictional.

• To see the resources that the district declared were too divisive in 2021, see the packet distributed by the National Debate Coaches Association.
• Learn more about the positive impacts of interscholastic debate for students, including gains in critical thinking. 
• To read the content of the law, see here.
• To see how some teachers around the country and in Memphis, specifically, responded to the wave of anti-CRT legislation in their states, see this article by the Washington Post.
• To see an example of how a conservative organization like the Heritage Foundation frames their opposition to CRT and aims to mobilize against its perceived presence in public schools, check out this “Issue Toolkit” on their website.
• Click here to see more information about lead contamination in Memphis and use the local utility’s interactive lead service line map.