BIASED TEACHING?

If we consider that a teacher might influence how others act, think and feel about
the world, one should have on mind how determining teacher’s action can be. Reflecting
about it would demand not only a critical thinking about bias, but about the role of
influence on human beings. If every person can be as influenced as being influent over
others, it should be equated which one should take part – as much as how and when. There
should be asked, as well, if balance is a thing that might be achieved with no extremes
violence.
Even with teachers’ voices uttering equality, balance and fairness, the tones and
gestures (that, mostly, are not always consciently controlled) may reveal meanings which
are, on nature, contradictory. One classic example is the situation where the teacher
preaches respect, especially with a highly guidance text and, just after that, (s)he just
speaks about the “disorganized” nature of black people, or the attainment of jewish
population towards money, or even the “high tone” used by Latin people.
Are the examples, above mentioned, a proof of bias or just evidence of truth? The
people who believe in the assertions just mentioned would say, surely, that truth cannot
be considered bias. A jewish boy, on the other hand, just aside four or five Latin girls
might, at the same time, confirm or represent a doubtful data for such matters. Even that
it is true that one Latin person just speaks on high pitch, and that some jewish people save
money with discipline… would it represent a real truth which could be applied to
everyone? Perhaps the question, on such a matter, would be if, supposedly, singular
features might be applied, or not, to pluralization.
In what moment, a determined perception (towards one or some people) might be
generalized as a whole truth? And even that it might be so, would not exceptions always
be possible? Even that John represents a long lineage of jewish people who have saved
money (and, even, possibly enriched), is that a feature which truly represents a people?
And even that it does, reason should guarantee the possibility of exceptions; so,
the question, perhaps, is not if a teacher view might or not be always biased; but, rather,
if uncomfortable assertions should or not be uttered. The point, so, would be how to treat
so different people that, commonly, are targeted as – not only – common sense and its
implications (bias and prejudice). Ethics and democracy, so, should be the key for such a
problem. If, on one hand, an ethical teacher would be capable of not mistreating students
due to the whole influence the teacher has, him/herself, gone through; on the other hand,
the teacher should guarantee the inclusion of all the people who are being guided by
him/her. Ethics guarantees not mistreating people and democracy ensures everyone’s
inclusion.
In theory, so, it might be clear what should be done; but practice always reveals
many blind spots which no theory could, possibly, foresee. What to do, so? If we have
on mind that a teacher is not the master of teaching but, much more a professional
learning, (s)he might be able of learning with his/her own mistakes and, by unveiling
his/her own mistakes, becoming capable of unfolding new points of views for students
who, in the end, will be less biased, for sure.