Teachers' Understanding of the Pledge of Allegiance

Teachers' Understanding of the Pledge of Allegiance

Introduction

Current social context demands that we see people either as flag-waving patriots or traitorous war protesters. American social institutions have supported this dichotomy by fostering a haven from the complexity of the world situation since 9/11: come in, they seem to say, and say a prayer for our country, sing the national anthem, recite the Pledge. These institutions know that familiar words act as aural blankets. We wrap ourselves with vocabulary and cadences that soothe our souls, repeating words without thought.

Although the custom had fallen off prior to 9/11, a great many American public schools begin the school day by reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. The recitation of a promise to support the flag and the country it represents constitutes an oath that is said by almost every student and teacher daily. We are concerned that the recitation of the pledge has gone unexamined by both teacher and student. While it may be acceptable for religious institutions to demand oath without analysis, public schools should be and are held to a different standard. Fostering the critical analysis of the documents that have supported our country is part of the rights and responsibilities of the American school system and those whom it employs.

In this paper, we will begin the process of exploring what actually happens to the recitation and analysis of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. Our primary question for this initial work is: What do teachers think about the Pledge as it is used in their classroom?

Background

Research on the Pledge of Allegiance. In the last thirty years, there has been surprisingly little study of this particular ritual in democratic participation. The majority of this work tends to focus on the legal issues concerning refusal to say the Pledge (Knowles, 1992; Urofsky, 1995). This work effectively summarizes the current legal understanding of the relationship between state law and local school governance, that while states have a compelling interest to encourage democratic education in schools, their ability to mandate such participation is effectively limited by the Constitutional obligation to protect freedom of religion (Minersville School District v. Gobitis, 1940; Urofsky, 1995).

In addition, there was a small cluster of studies that occurred around the U.S. centennial examining how the Pledge was being used in the context of democratic education (c.