Overland High School geography teacher Jay Bennish was suspended by the Cherry Creek School District after a student, Sean Allen, released a recording from a Feb. 1 class in which Bennish ranted about the evils of the U.S. government.
As a geography teacher, politics, human rights, state violence, capitalist accumulation, the definition of terrorism and other social, political and economic issues are important and relevant topics for discussion. In fact, few of Bennish’s critics have attacked him for his choice of topics. He’s been castigated primarily for making outrageous statements and for not being “balanced.”
I listened to the lecture online at 850koa.com, and although Bennish is obviously emotional and extremely critical of U.S. foreign policy, I don’t understand why he was suspended. In the span of 20 minutes, he makes a wide-ranging assault on repressive U.S. policies. Some of his claims are over the top, but all of them can be defended by historical evidence and current events.
His critics say that he should have been more “balanced,” but what does that mean? The concept of balance suggests that equal weight be given to all sides, but it doesn’t explain where the weight should come from. Is this balance totally an internal gyroscope that would compel Bennish to include one sentence of praise for U.S. policies to balance against every sentence of criticism? Or is balance an external force, in which Bennish is merely small weight on the teeter-totter?
If most of his students express position A, would it be reasonable for Bennish to put all of his weight on position B to balance against the students? It’s clear from listening to the recording that Bennish thinks most Americans espouse position A, and in his class, he’s trying to get his students to think critically, by balancing against the weight of public opinion.
That doesn’t mean that this is simply an intellectual exercise for him. His passion on the recording makes it clear that he really believes the things that he’s saying, but in terms of judging “balance,” I think we have to look at what he’s balancing against.
Bennish’s critics have focused solely on his comments about U.S. foreign policy. However, this recording also gives us an opportunity to observe the manner in which Bennish interacts with his students.
Allen interrupted several times to express a point of view that was the polar opposite of Bennish’s. Each time, the teacher listened, complimented the student for raising a good or important question and then attempted to answer it.
You don’t hear Allen being shut down, dismissed or ridiculed. Bennish doesn’t talk over Allen or ignore his points. It doesn’t sound as though Allen raised his hand and waited to be called upon. It sounds as if the student felt comfortable to just interject the moment the teacher paused (he doesn’t interrupt rudely). Each time Allen spoke up, the teacher instantly stopped talking and listened.
Allen is only 16 years old. If he thought that he was going to be mocked by his teacher, punished for speaking up or criticized by his peers, then he likely would have sounded flustered, rushed, scared or intimidated.
The recording reveals that Allen felt comfortable enough in Bennish’s class to express himself repeatedly. Allen raises many good points, and he doesn’t back down. When you listen to the recording, listen carefully to the exchange between them. Neither the student nor the teacher sounds confrontational, mean-spirited or intimidating.
Bennish sounds like a good teacher. You might disagree with the specific things that he’s said, but he engaged his students, invited their participation, created an environment in which they felt that they could safely disagree, and praised them when they made points that were contrary to his.
Isn’t that a form of balance?
Former Bronco Reggie Rivers (reggierivers2002@yahoo.com) is the host of “Global Agenda” Wednesdays at 9:30 p.m. on KBDI-Channel 12. His column appears every Friday.
