In this episode of “Read by Example,” I sat down with educators and authors Joe Schmidt and Nichelle Pinkney to discuss their influential book, Civil Discourse: Classroom Conversations for Stronger Communities (Corwin, 2022). They explore the urgent need for structured, empathetic dialogue in K-12 classrooms, especially in today’s politically charged environment. Drawing from their extensive backgrounds in social studies education and leadership, Joe and Nichelle provide practical frameworks and strategies for teachers to foster productive conversations, empower student voices, and build stronger, more understanding classroom communities.

Key topics discussed include:

* The four foundational building blocks of civil discourse: Courage, Understanding, Belonging, and Empathy.

* The crucial difference between “contentious” and “controversial” topics.

* Strategies for moving classroom activities from debate to more inclusive discussions and dialogues.

* The importance of grounding student opinions in evidence-based sources and curated text sets.

* Practical advice for teachers on how to prepare for difficult conversations and build a support system within their school.

* How administrators can create a supportive “sandbox” for teachers and the importance of transparent communication with parents and the community.

After listening to this episode, you will walk away with a greater appreciation for supporting student conversations in every classroom.

Take care,

Matt

P.S. Next week Thursday, 5:30pm CST, I speak with Jen Schwanke, author of Trusted (ASCD, 2025). Full subscribers can join us for this professional conversation!

Official Transcript

Matt Renwick: Welcome to Read by Example, where teachers are leaders, and leaders know literacy. I am joined by two colleagues and educators who I have looked forward to speaking with ever since I read their book, Civil Discourse: Classroom Conversations for Stronger Communities. Welcome, Joe Schmidt and Nichelle Pinkney.

Joe Schmidt: Thanks for having us, Matt.

Matt Renwick: You were both formerly high school classroom teachers and are now in leadership roles. Nichelle and Joe, would you share a little bit about your backgrounds?

Nichelle Pinkney: Hi, I’m Nichelle Pinkney. I’m entering my 21st year of education. It’s hard to say out loud. I started teaching elementary for a year or two, then decided I wasn’t ready for that season and went to high school. I went from first graders to 12th graders and started teaching government and economics, then moved into AP Government and Econ. I’ve pretty much taught everything at the high school level.

A few years ago, I wanted to help other teachers learn what I had, so I became an instructional coach at the middle school level. Now, I’m a curriculum director in my district, overseeing social studies and world languages, curriculum, professional learning, and teacher development. I’m involved in my state organizations, and I love social studies and students learning about the world we live in.

Matt Renwick: And you were just elected president of that organization?

Nichelle Pinkney: Yes, I’m president-elect of the Texas Social Studies Leadership Association, starting in February. I’m super excited because my dream has always been to fight for social studies, and I’ll get to do that through work with legislation.

Matt Renwick: Well, congratulations. Joe?

Joe Schmidt: I started as a high school teacher in rural Wisconsin. My first year was 9th grade, my second was 10th, and my third was 11th. I had one student seven times across our block schedule in those three courses. I left the classroom after nine years to become Madison, Wisconsin’s first Social Studies Curriculum Coordinator. I was also the state specialist for Maine, and since then, I’ve worked for a couple of national non-profits.

I’m currently the president-elect of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) and will become president on July 1st, 2026, three days before America turns 250. I will be the lead host for the Chicago conference in 2026. This December, NCSS will also have a conference in Washington, D.C. (link to conference here). NCSS is the largest professional organization for social studies educators, with more than 8,000 members.

I went from being a classroom teacher where people said, “You have good ideas,” and I felt like I was just making it up, to a district coordinator, to the state level, always feeling that same way. That’s why I say teachers are humble heroes; it’s very rare for them to toot their own horn. I do more than 100 trainings with over 2,000 teachers a year, and almost without fail, someone will share something brilliant they “just made up.” Anytime I can help teachers celebrate and recognize their own expertise is a good day. That’s what has driven me: finding different venues to not only support teachers but celebrate them.

Matt Renwick: We have two knowledgeable individuals in the social studies realm here, and I’m honored. As a former principal, I learned that there’s so much knowledge in every classroom. It’s not about improvement but about surfacing that expertise so everyone can benefit. It’s great you’re in positions to connect colleagues.

I had your book for a couple of years after we did a statewide book study on it. I’ll be honest, I didn’t read it until I went to the Sphere Summit through the Cato Institute. I brought the book, and it connected perfectly with the sessions. I was back in my hotel room reading it while everyone else was out. It just really clicked for me. It feels like your book is so needed right now, especially as I see teachers self-censoring and avoiding certain books because they don’t want to deal with the politics or conflict.

I’ll start with how you frame your book around four building blocks of civil discourse: Courage, Understanding, Belonging, and Empathy. Can you say a little more about how you came to those four guiding principles?

Nichelle Pinkney: I’m an acronym junkie. Joe is very intelligent, and he’ll explain things, and I’ll say, “Okay, it’s got to be simplified.” We were on a call with our author mentor, Julie Stern, and I was just writing down words, trying to make it simpler. We knew all these components had to be there, but it had to click.

It was broken down this way because a lot was going on when we were writing this during COVID. We were at home—I think we were just stir-crazy. But seriously, the ideas of courage and understanding were huge. I think understanding and belongingness are huge because you can’t have the necessary conversations in our world today without them. And the courage part—as you said, you were at the conference, you had the book, and you felt a need for it. That was courageous. Then, instead of going out, you dug deeper into the book. You took the courage to build understanding, and now you’re applying the other pieces—belongingness and empathy—so these things can happen in a bigger venue.

Matt Renwick: So it’s like a simple first step. You don’t have to start by talking about immigration on day one. Maybe the first step is just to get your book or another resource to become more knowledgeable.

Joe Schmidt: Part of the impetus for the book was that as COVID hit, I was doing a lot of virtual sessions. People kept asking for sessions on what is now civil discourse. We were heading into the 2020 election, and people would say, “I told my department not to talk about the election; it’s too contentious.” I thought, “They’re not going to get this in math class.” We can’t just abdicate our responsibility.

But we had to acknowledge that this isn’t easy. It’s important, but it’s not easy. We always start there. We know this is hard, but it is worth it. We don’t want people to think there’s a judgment if you’re not doing it. The point is, let’s just do it. It’s hard, and we’re not going to be perfect at it. We made mistakes. But don’t just jump in on day one with the most controversial topics. That’s how you end up on the news.

That takes you through the progression: Is there understanding? Is everyone on the same page? Does everyone feel like they belong? Otherwise, you can’t have the conversation. My favorite, which is often overlooked, is what we put under empathy: students need to know that we can disagree and still be friends. This is not a zero-sum game. If I could get every kid to understand that their classmates, people online, and people in their communities are all human beings trying to do their best, that would be the greatest gift we could give society.

Matt Renwick: I’m thinking about schools that have banned cell phones. What are you going to do in the classroom in the meantime? How are you changing instruction? The kids want to talk about these topics, but they need structure and support. You mentioned “controversial,” and I liked how you differentiated it from “contentious.” What’s the difference?

Joe Schmidt: I was doing a presentation and realized the words felt different. A woman told me to look at the Latin sub-roots. The root of “controversial” is “quarrelsome,” which to me is fighting. But the root of “contentious” means “to strive,” which I believe is a striving for understanding. We can either be quarrelsome or strive for understanding.

Even if the definitions don’t feel different, I’ve never met someone who wants a controversy in their classroom. We strive to have contentious conversations. I’ve had to get on a soapbox recently to say that social studies is not controversial. Teaching history is not controversial. Is it contentious? Do people disagree? Yes, absolutely. That goes back to courage—this isn’t easy. But teaching this is not controversial, and I don’t ever want a teacher to have to apologize for teaching.

Nichelle Pinkney: I agree. The minute you say, “We’re going to talk about something controversial,” everybody’s bodies shift. Adults do it. Their mannerisms shift. What happens with students? History is contentious across the world; that doesn’t make it bad. We try to correct things throughout the process—not by erasing history, but through our actions. Throughout history, we’ve always strived to do better. We made a decision, realized it wasn’t the best, so we amended it. A Supreme Court decision was wrong, so we changed it. We are always striving to do better, not by erasing the past, but by learning from it.

Matt Renwick: That language was helpful for me, as was differentiating between “versus” and “or.” Those little shifts in language reminded me of the book Choice Words by Peter Johnston.

Joe Schmidt: I remember in the early days, if you had told me I was about to write 600 words on the difference between “versus” and “or,” I would have never believed you. But language does matter, and we need to be reminded of that.

Matt Renwick: It seemed to support a move away from a winner-take-all debate to a non-judgmental discussion of alternatives. Did you notice kids claiming more autonomy in their opinions when you shifted your language?

Joe Schmidt: The big thing is the difference between dialogue, discussion, and debate. I know I defaulted to debate as a teacher, but that’s rarely how the world works. A key part of debate is rebutting the other side. But a discussion is an acknowledgment of different views. If we’re deciding where to go for dinner and Nichelle wants Italian, I don’t lose anything as a human being if we go with her choice. Maybe tomorrow, I’ll get my choice of pizza.

That is freeing for students. It’s okay to have a different opinion—with the disclaimer that we’re still not being racist, sexist, or homophobic. If you like red and I like blue, that’s fine. If you want Italian and I want tacos, that’s also fine. Just because I didn’t get my way doesn’t mean I lost anything. I think that helps them be more authentic.

Nichelle Pinkney: I moved away from debates in my class around the 2012 election. It was getting so heated. If I were honest with myself, I wasn’t preparing students for what a debate should look like. What they see as a debate is completely different from what you would see in The Great Debaters or an actual Lincoln-Douglas debate. This generation sees a lot, but they don’t see what a debate should be.

Matt Renwick: Exactly. From what I remember, debates in the 1800s weren’t about calling each other out. It was more like a discussion where people would concede points. It seems things have changed.

Joe Schmidt: Kids have a perception of what a debate is. If you say you’re having one, they think they know what it looks like. They want the zinger, the viral moment, the mic drop. That’s why we try to move them toward discussion. There is a place for debates, but not for highly contentious, emotional topics where students expect you to pick a winner. I’m not going to debate someone’s identity. I don’t want to put a student in a position where they feel like a part of them “lost.”

If you’re going to ask a question for discussion in class, you need to ask one where you want a split opinion—50-50 or even 30-40-30. Don’t ask a question that puts a kid in the position of defending something you’re uncomfortable with. If the question puts fundamental values at risk, ask a different question.

Matt Renwick: So, how do you help kids separate their identities from their beliefs? The goal isn’t to change minds but to broaden perspectives.

Nichelle Pinkney: In the book, we talk about preparing students. I always start by saying that everyone has a bias, whether we want to agree with it or not. Our biases are preconceived based on where we grew up, the food we eat, the music we listen to, and so on. I used to tell my students to “check those biases at the door,” which means we’re not going to judge people or put them in a box.

From there, everything was rooted in research and sources. When students responded, it was always grounded in resources. Before sites existed that show where news sources fall on the political spectrum, I had to make sure I provided materials showing different sides. I grew up in a small town in Texas and had a very limited view until I went to college in North Carolina, where my roommate was from Connecticut. She had seen a world I had never seen. So, in my classroom, I made sure students could see other sides, because in some environments, you won’t get that. We used a thinking routine: “At first, I think this because I don’t know any better. But now that I see all these different sides, I may still think the same thing, but at least I’m informed.”

Matt Renwick: That sounds like you created awareness for the kids in a natural way about how our environment and culture shape our beliefs.

Joe Schmidt: I would work very hard to curate a text set with multiple perspectives using primary sources or different news articles. The shorthand with students was, “If you can’t point at it, it’s probably not evidence.” I curated the set for you; don’t ignore the ten pages of reading and then tell me what your uncle said on Facebook. You build that habit, and kids will start to reinforce it with each other. In a Socratic seminar, you start by saying, “I’m on page 3, line 17,” and give everyone a second to get there.

Using structures like sentence stems can keep conversations from boiling over. If you want students to speak in a certain way, give them the stems and hold them accountable. Kids are the best body-language readers. If they see you’re not consistent with the rules for everyone, the structure falls apart. If you’re consistent, it may feel rigid, but it provides the structure kids need to be successful.

Matt Renwick: You wrote in the book that a classroom’s strength lies in its ability to handle disagreements without breaking bonds. That speaks to a shared sense of humanity. You also challenge the reader: when you are fearful of teaching a topic, who are you thinking about? For me, it was a former school board where a few people were out to get teachers. How can leaders help teachers reclaim their agency to handle criticism when they bring in contentious topics?

Joe Schmidt: That question is from Dan Krutka. Often, when we say “my kids aren’t ready for that,” it’s really “I don’t want to deal with the outside factors.” I remind teachers they have to stay in the sandbox—the legal rulings are consistent that you can’t indoctrinate students. But then I tell administrators, you build the sandbox. If you want teachers doing this work, you need to support them.

I was working with a district where people wanted a middle school teacher fired for teaching current events. I told the administration they needed to release a statement supporting the teacher. That’s the job. But I know some administrators don’t want to deal with the pressure. So if your principal won’t support you, find someone who will—an assistant principal, a department chair, a guidance counselor. Don’t give up your agency. Think about this ahead of time. Don’t wait until all hell breaks loose to figure out your support system. Practice it like a fire drill, so when a situation arises, you are responding, not reacting.

Matt Renwick: The book is very thorough. You call that prep “Day Zero Planning.”

Nichelle Pinkney: As an administrator, I support my 250 teachers 100%, and they know that from day one. That’s our role; it’s what we signed up for. I can be that voice. I can say, “It’s in the standards,” or “It’s what happened.” Here in Texas, our standards are specific, and I can point directly to them.

Another big thing is that out of fear, we’ve closed our classroom doors. We need to change the narrative. The narrative is that teachers are doing something wrong. I say be transparent. I over-communicated with parents to the point where they’d say, “Oh my god, another email from Ms. Pinkney.” I would tell them, “In this unit, we’re going to talk about the principles of government. Here’s what they are. Please ask your child about them when they get home.” Very few parents visited, but they all knew what was happening. We have a loud group saying one thing, and we get quiet. I say we need to be loud. We need to put it out there and say, “This is what we’re doing. I would love for you to come see it.” Get your administrator involved. Invite everyone. Create an open-door policy so everyone knows what’s happening in your room.

Matt Renwick: So, communicate, use the standards, and find leaders who will back you up. That’s all great advice. I think we’re out of time, but I will just say that this is a social studies book, yes, but it’s also a literacy book. It’s a book for any K-12 classroom. It connects so well to the speaking and listening standards that everyone should be teaching.

Again, the book is Civil Discourse: Classroom Conversations for Stronger Communities. I’m here with Joe Schmidt and Nichelle Pinkney. Thank you so much for joining me. Good luck with your school years.

Joe Schmidt: Thank you, Matt.

Nichelle Pinkney: Thank you, Matt.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit readbyexample.substack.com/subscribe