traced to pre-Biblical times and in the philosophy of Western moral education, the child-rearing admonition echoes the austere directives of Plato and Aristotle (Hoff Sommers, 2000). Somewhere between childhood and the possibility for active citizenship, contemporary adolescents sit silent, most of the time, in most social studies courses across the United States. In an essay on the place of values in public school curricula, Amitai Etzioni (2008) argues that schools ought to be "concerned with human and social development, ensuring graduates are able to work out differences with others verbally and nonabusively" (p. 22). Yet, A well-disciplined environment often is considered one in which teachers and principals "lay down the law" and brook no talking back from students, and where students show respect by rising when a teacher enters the room and speak only when spoken to. (p. 24) Political scientist Ruth Grant put the matter this way:It is curious that educators seem more likely to encourage conversation among preschoolers and university students and more likely to suppress it in the years in between-precisely during those years in which people like nothing better than to spend their time talking to one another. (1996, p. 475) We concur with Grant that the desire of teenagers to speak up, and to be heard, constitutes a resource that should be exploited in political education. Silencing of students is often not the fault of instructors, however. A teacher's decision to open up her classroom for discussions about contested issues can roust resentful parents, many of whom view such activity as indoctrination (Galston, 2004;Westheimer, 2004). 1 Many of these same parents make it clear to their offspring that political opinions are unwelcome at home (McLeod & Chaffee, 1972;Saphir & Chaffee, 2002). Disciplinarian parents tend to view the mere discussion of controversial topics as disrespectful in family interactions and a threat to their authority (Barker & Tinnick, 2006).High school students themselves, however, seem to thrive as neophyte discussants when teachers do feel they have enough community support to allow for this type of interaction. In recent evaluations of curricular components, frequency of peer discussion stands out as a reliable predictor of gains in knowledge about public affairs, news media attention, opinion crystallization, interpersonal respect, political efficacy, and participatory
