Discussion and Conclusions

Research Question Answers

• I believe that some self-censorship does inevitably occur.  However, the issue is not quite as wide-spread and rampant as I would have believed. 
• Some topics seem to be more susceptible to self-censoring than others.   
• Most educators seem to decide on materials based on relevance, mandated standards, and student needs/wants.  From my research results, it appears that self-censorship is not a serious issue when it comes to choosing books and curriculum materials. 
• Some educators have a different opinion on controversial topics when it comes to fiction versus nonfiction books and curriculum materials. 

Discussion

I distributed a research instrument that measured 25 controversial topics on a Likert scale.  Also included in the research instrument were three questions that further explored the issue of self-censorship among teachers and media specialists.

After analyzing the Likert scale data, I have divided the results into three categories.

Category One—Topics with less than a 20% overall opposition rate:

• Child Abuse
• Death
• Disaster
• Divorce
• Drug Abuse
• Eating Disorders
• Pregnancy
• Prejudice and Stereotypes
• Racism
• Suicide
• Violence

The results for these eleven topics provide evidence that these topics are not generally self-censored by teachers and media specialists.  One possible interpretation of these findings is that these topics are found to be relevant or non-threatening in the education of high school students. 

Category Two—Topics with more than a 50% overall opposition rate:

• Mutilation
• Nudity
• Obscene Language
• Sexual Perversion
• Incest (This topic had a 49.26% opposition rate, but I decided to include it in this category because it was so close to 50%.)

The results from these five topics strongly suggest that they are highly self-censored by teachers and media specialists.  One possible interpretation of these findings, is that educators find these topics irrelevant, unnecessary, or too controversial for inclusion in the high school curriculum.

Category Three—Topics between a 20-50% overall opposition rate:

• Abortion (32.83%)
• Adultery (35.83%)
• Degradation of Women (28.79%)
• Homosexuality (40.3%)
• Murder (23.88%)
• Parental Hate (38.81%)- (Parental hate is defined as total hatred and disregard of parents by their children.)
• Prostitution (35.82%)
• Rape (28.36%)
• Sex (28.36%)

In my opinion, the results for these nine topics were quite surprising.  These topics were not graded as conservatively as I had expected.  The results suggest that while some topics may be moderately censored from the curriculum, these nine topics are generally accepted by the majority of educators surveyed.

I was able to interpret even more information from the survey questions included on my research instrument.  The first question asked educators how they made decisions regarding choices of books and other curriculum materials.  Out of the 61 responses to this question, there were three common answers.  Decisions were based on:

• Relevance to curriculum content (what the teacher actually teaches in class) and/or the real world (19 out of 61 responses)
• Georgia Performance Standards (what the state requires teachers to teach)/Local Dictates/Class Content (17 out of 61 responses)
• Student Interests (7 out of 61 responses)

These answers suggest that educators decide on materials based on relevance, mandated standards, and student needs/wants.  From these results, it appears that self-censorship is not a serious issue when it comes to choosing books and curriculum materials.  However, there were a few answers that concerned me:

• “Message or morals”
• “Moral values”
• “Based on my personal values and morals”
• “Good morals and behavior practices”    

I believe that these responses show that self-censorship is almost certainly occurring.  Do these educators suppose that their opinions on morals and personal values match those of their school community?  Do they force their own belief systems and thoughts on those of their students and school community?  These answers make me a bit nervous.  It is one thing to use common sense when making book and curriculum decisions, but have these educators crossed the line and let their personal opinions interfere with professional decisions?

The second survey question asked educators if there were certain subjects they avoided when placing orders and developing curriculum.  Out of the 46 responses to this question, 20 participants answered that they did not avoid certain topics.  Topics that were mentioned were:

• Nudity
• Abortion
• Sexual topics
• Obscene language
• Homosexuality

These results backed up opinions determined from the Likert scale portion of the research instrument.   These topics seem to trigger some self-censoring behaviors in some educators.  However, the overall results suggest that self-censorship is not a serious issue among educators.  Once again, there were a few answers that appear to provide evidence that self-censorship does occur on a small scale.  These comments included:

• “I avoid subjects that I am not comfortable with, because I do not want to address those questions.”
• “The most offensive or controversial”
• “I only avoid that which is inappropriate.”
• “Yes.  We live in a very conservative community so I try to select content that will push my students without scaring them or turning them against the text.”

These particular answers suggest that educators have drawn their own conclusions about what is appropriate.  We need to examine this further.  Who is in the position to make sure that topics are appropriate?  Is it possible to separate personal beliefs and values when making professional decisions?  The last answer in particular shows that self-censorship does indeed occur.  Does this educator assume that all community members feel the same way? 

The third survey question asked educators if their attitudes differed about controversial subjects between fiction and nonfiction materials.  Out of 58 answers, 18 survey participants said that their attitudes do differ on controversial subjects between fiction and nonfiction materials.  Another 26 participants said that fiction and nonfiction genres made no difference on their particular book and/or curriculum choices.  I feel that this question, while providing some interesting and relevant specifics, did not adequately lead me to any specific answers to my research question.  I think that further investigation would be needed to draw a valid conclusion from this particular question.  There were a few comments relating to this topic written into the margins of returned research instruments.  These included: 

• “Saying whether I approve or oppose the inclusion of a topic is meaningless unless I know how the subject is treated…Questions as you presented them cannot be truthfully answered without some context.”
• “I had problems using the rating scale on the topics listed on the survey.  It was difficult to choose a rating since there was no distinction between fiction and nonfiction materials…It was very hard to generalize.  We try to look at our purchases individually and consider a number of factors.”  

I feel that both of these survey participants made valid comments.  If I used this survey again, I would make more distinction between fiction, nonfiction, and textbooks.  From the feedback I received after the survey administration, many educators informed me (both verbally and on the survey instrument) that this would make a difference in their decisions and attitudes particularly on the Likert scale portion of the research instrument.  An example of this issue can be seen when rating the topic of nudity on the Likert scale portion of my research instrument.  I did not differentiate on the scale whether “nudity” included written descriptions of nudity, graphically written descriptions of nudity, photos of nudity, or classical art displays of nudity.  I feel that many educators would have had different opinions based on the type of nudity found in books/curriculum materials.  The differences of opinion on topics in fiction and nonfiction materials would be a great topic for further research.