Due to the recent removal of the text Tales of a City by the Sea from the VCE literature course by the Education Minister, there has been much discussion on whether or not censorship of texts due to their content should be permissible. As debates range from distrust in the teacher profession, to cultural and social misappropriation in literature, and to the impacts censorship may have upon student learning, various letters-to-the-editor have been published on ‘The Age’ addressing these concerns. Anne McClelland expresses from her experience as a Literature and English teacher, the possible repercussive effects of censorship in hampering a student’s ability to critically think. Similarly Catton also addresses this in her letter. However, Catton also contends that the government needs to put more faith in the teacher’s professional input in the classroom, rather than expurgate ideas, which may be inappropriately propagandised to students in class discussions led by teachers. Lol
Immediately, McClelland highlights in the title of her letter, her “open” support for the “minds” of young people around “the world”. As she discloses her own background as a teacher at “a small but very effective country secondary school”, McClelland seems to be validating her stance as one, which stems from having both a professional background in teaching and personal experience with dealing with students. In asserting a humble background of teaching in a “country secondary school”, she tenderly emphasises her point about the need for students to go beyond beliefs “outside [their] comfort zone”. As she juxtaposes the government’s censorship with the “realisation” of a “much bigger, more complex and frightening place” outside of school grounds, McClelland emphasises the contradiction in the government’s proposal for censorship with the “underlying raison d’etre” of the subject itself in supporting life beyond schooling. That the proposal is simply disabling the “broadening” of a young mind “to see life as others see and live it” is a particularly strong way to express the pernicious effects of censorship beyond high school, as it imparts in her readers, professionalism, rationality and judiciousness in her expression of concern. Even readers who have no experience as a teacher would be inclined to agree that the support in a student’s ability to critically think is imperative to creating a supportive learning environment in school. Thus, McClelland highlights to her reader, the need to support student learning, and the benefits of “confronting” readings of literature as promoting rather than hindering the "open[ness]" of a student’s mind.
Similarly, Catton also highlights a “deeply divided world”, which McClelland also describes in her letter, a constant rivalry to the “safe, secure world” the government seems to be championing in their response to the cultural insensitivity of texts in the VCE literature course. In an almost declarative statement, by employing an alliterative statement – “Trust teachers to teach with integrity” – Catton implies the government’s underestimation of the teacher’s ability to “get on with our job” and their needless surveillance of students, who under the teacher’s “professional responsibility” have been provided with “safe” exposure to diverse ideas. Catton furthers this idea as she passionately asks for the government “to stop undermining the capabilities of educators” confidently suggesting that this is not the first time that educators have been denied of withholding the same standards as other professions, indicating to readers an injustice displayed by the government's biases against teachers. This positions readers to put further trust in their educators, while also rejecting the authority and objective officialdom the government seems to impose upon teachers and by extension the students’ confidence in their abilities to commit and explore “compassionately about a range of beliefs”. Therefore, Catton demonstrates to her readers of the unjust biases of government decisions, inviting the reader to place more faith in teachers, engendering a subtle skepticism of not only the proposed censorship of texts in schools but also of the government's own abilities to see past their prejudices.