The hidden curriculum: getting real about the values we teach

Some of you might be wondering why I’m not speaking up more about everything that’s happening in our country right now.

There’s a lot. And it’s overwhelming.

Here’s the thing: No one needs another hot take from me. No one needs me to repost disturbing videos or contribute to the constant cycle of outrage content. That’s not why you follow me, and honestly, there are plenty of other folks who do that work, many of them quite well and with deep intentionality and purpose.

I choose to speak up when I feel I have something relevant to add that can actually be useful, something that hasn’t already been said a gazillion times, something that isn’t reactionary but thoughtful and timeless. Because what we’re facing right now isn’t entirely new and isn’t going to end anytime soon, unfortunately.

I choose not to use my energy to react online to each new indignation, heartbreak, and tragedy. I do process it offline with folks in my circle, but after 23 years of having an online platform–yes, I started my website in 2003–I no longer react to everything happening in schools and society.

I use my platform online to speak up when I have something I hope is helpful to offer. What I can offer is this: frameworks that help you make sense of what’s happening, language that helps you defend your work, research that backs up what you already know in your gut. And today, that’s the hidden curriculum. Because understanding this concept matters more than ever when people are accusing you of indoctrination for simply doing your job.

You see, each time we decide which history gets a full unit and which gets a mini-lesson…

Each time we choose whose stories to showcase in classroom libraries while others gather dust on shelves …

Each time we select which family structures and cultures to represent in class and which we quietly pretend don’t exist …

We’re teaching whose voices matter, what counts as normal, and how power works.

That’s the hidden curriculum. And it’s been operating in classrooms since the first schools were founded.

This episode is about uncovering the hidden curriculum in your own teaching, so you can make conscious choices about the values you’re reinforcing. And, it’s about empowering public schools to be unapologetic in their stance about a core piece of the hidden curriculum that should be underlying our work:

Every child who walks into our classrooms deserves to see themselves reflected there, to have their existence treated as welcome, and to leave knowing their life has inherent value.

This episode is a call to remain steadfast in your commitment to care for (and be actively inclusive of) all families in your school community.

We need to proudly own our commitment to teaching kids empathy, curiosity, and the ability to understand–and collaborate with–people who are different from them.

This episode is a rebuke of a coordinated attempt to paint these values as controversial, “political” or “a radical left-wing agenda.” They are not.

They are educational best practices, backed by long-standing research, that teachers have implemented for decades in schools across the country. It’s time to stop playing defense, and speak plainly about how we do what’s best for kids.

Listen to episode 342 below,
or subscribe in your podcast app

The myth of neutrality in the classroom

You’ve heard it before. Maybe from a parent at back-to-school night. Maybe from a politician on the news. Maybe in your district’s latest policy memo.

“Teachers need to stay neutral. Just teach the facts. Stick to reading, writing, and arithmetic. Stop pushing your agenda on our kids.”

And if you’ve been teaching for more than a minute, you know something about that request doesn’t quite add up. Because neutrality? That’s not actually possible.

And let’s be clear about something else. When people say “stop being political” or “keep your politics out of the classroom,” most of the time they don’t actually mean politics. They’re not worried you’re telling kids how to vote or discussing Republicans vs Democrats.

What they really mean is “stop teaching values and worldviews that I disagree with.” And I think it’s important to name that right up front: it’s not political speech, it’s values-infused speech.

Why education has never been values-neutral

Here’s the truth: there is no such thing as a values-neutral educator, or an education free of moral values. It sounds ridiculous when framed that way, right? Which is another reason folks tend to frame it as political rather than values. It’s a lot easier to keep politics out of the classroom, though many would argue that teaching is inherently political, and I agree with that. But in a kindergarten math lesson, for example, you could create activities that are apolitical, but not activities that are values-neutral or free from any moral framework.

I do think there are people who believe schools don’t and shouldn’t teach values, and this episode will explain why that’s not possible and never has been. But because that idea is fairly easily debunked, I want to spend more time addressing the issue a greater number of folks share, which is the question of which values we’re teaching, to what end, and whether we’re doing it consciously or unconsciously.

What the hidden curriculum really means

Sociologist Emile Durkheim was writing about this in the early 1900s. He understood that schools don’t just transmit information. Schools socialize. They teach students how to be members of society and teach students their place in that society.

Phillip Jackson then coined the term “hidden curriculum” in his 1968 book called “Life in Classrooms.” Jackson observed classrooms and noticed that teachers were constantly reinforcing behaviors and norms that had nothing to do with academic content. For example: Waiting your turn. Making eye contact when someone speaks to you. Sitting still. Raising your hand.

Jackson created this term of “the hidden curriculum” which encompasses everything we teach that isn’t in the official curriculum. It’s the unspoken lessons about how to behave, how to think, whose voices matter, and how power works. You can’t opt out of the hidden curriculum. It’s happening all the time, whether someone is aware of it or not.

I talked about this back in 2019 in episode 172, called “Some Things a Teacher Shouldn’t Be Neutral About.” Unfortunately, that episode is just as relevant in 2026 as it was then. Maybe more so, because I still don’t think we’ve agreed as a country that the hidden curriculum exists. I do think in some aspects, we’ve moved on to discussing which values and worldview we’re teaching, but there are still powerful voices insisting we return to a status quo from decades ago, and they’re using the framing of “take politics out of school” or “teachers should be neutral.” Why, when this is patently impossible? Because it benefits them to pretend that the way we’ve traditionally done school was value-neutral and apolitical, and therefore the obvious path forward.

How teachers reinforce values without realizing it

As I argued in my 2019 episode, a teacher’s worldview shapes everything about how you interact with students. If you believe girls and boys have fundamentally different roles in society, you will reinforce that in your classroom, whether you mean to or not. If you believe certain cultures are more “normal” or “appropriate” than others, that shows up in whose experiences you center, whose language you validate, whose stories you tell.

When the neurodivergent kid who needs to fidget gets labeled as disruptive while the kid who sits perfectly still but isn’t paying attention gets praised, you’re teaching something about conformity over actual engagement.

When you enforce your phone policy more strictly with certain students than others, when you assume the kid with their head down is being defiant rather than overwhelmed, when you validate some students’ mental health struggles while dismissing others as “just wanting attention,” you’re teaching something about who deserves grace and who deserves discipline.

None of that is in your lesson plan. But you’re teaching it anyway.

And listen, I’m not saying this to make you feel guilty or to suggest you’re a bad teacher if you’ve done any of these things. I think most of us will recognize ourselves here. I certainly do.

The point isn’t to judge individual teachers for unconscious patterns we’ve all inherited from the system we were trained in. The point is to become aware. Because once you’re aware, you get to make different choices. You can be intentional. You can examine your own patterns, question your assumptions, and make conscious decisions about which values you want to reinforce instead of just defaulting to whatever feels “normal” because that’s how you were taught or trained to teach others.

Research on the Hidden Curriculum and Social Control

Let’s get into some of the scholarship here on how the hidden curriculum operates.

In a 2009 article called “The Moral Construction of the Good Pupil Embedded in School Rules,” Robert Thornberg found that when we don’t explicitly discuss and critique rules with students, we’re teaching blind obedience. Students learn to follow authority without question because they’re rewarded for being “good pupils.” Thornberg argues that the function of the hidden curriculum is social control.

Gerald Walton looked at sexuality education in 2005 in an article titled “The Hidden Curriculum in Schools: Implications for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth” and pointed out that:

When every story problem in math class features “mom and dad,” when every historical figure studied is presumed straight, when you never see families that look like yours reflected anywhere in the curriculum, what are students learning?

That there’s a right kind of family to have, and a wrong kind, a kind we don’t talk about. People outside the dominant group don’t matter enough to be mentioned. That the existence of these families is either controversial or invisible.

So, representation isn’t just about making students feel good. It’s about teaching them whose lives are normal, whose stories are worth telling, and whose identities require special permission to even acknowledge.

How the hidden curriculum reproduces inequality

Critical theorists like Henry Giroux (whose book “Theory and Resistance in Education” came out in 2001) and Michael Apple (who wrote “Ideology and Curriculum” in 2004) go even further.

They argue that the hidden curriculum reproduces class inequality. Working-class kids in public schools learn to follow directions, show up on time, and do what they’re told. They’re being prepared for jobs where they take orders. Meanwhile, kids in elite private schools are encouraged to question, debate, and lead. They’re being prepared to give the orders.

This particular difference in the hidden curriculum is especially troubling to me, because it presents an equity gap. Students in high poverty, under-resourced communities often experience compliance and following orders without question as part of their hidden curriculum, while students in wealthy communities have entrepreneurship, innovation, and leadership built into their hidden curriculum.

These research findings point to something important: the hidden curriculum isn’t just some abstract concept. It has real consequences for which students get prepared for leadership and which get prepared to be led. It shapes whose identities are validated and whose are erased. It determines whether students learn to question authority or simply comply with it.

What’s different about this moment in education

And here’s what’s changed since I recorded that 2019 episode, at least in my observation. Back then, most of the pushback against teachers was framed around neutrality. “Just teach the facts.” “Stay objective.” “Don’t push your agenda.” They were at least pretending to want value-free education.

Now? A lot of folks on the far right, extremists, have stopped pretending. They’re saying the quiet part out loud. You hear school board candidates and politicians openly arguing for white Christian nationalist viewpoints in schools. They’re not asking for neutrality anymore. They’re saying “These are OUR schools, for OUR values, and if you live in America, you need to comply.”

This has been documented in school board elections across the country, where church pastors and political figures have explicitly framed local elections as spiritual battles. Academic research has analyzed White Christian nationalist rhetoric in Pennsylvania school board campaigns. And Texas educators have tracked candidates backed by Christian nationalist PACs running for school boards across North Texas.

The mask has come off. What they want is dominance. They want their particular cultural and religious worldview centered as the default, with everything else treated as deviation or threat.

And that actually makes the conversation clearer, in some ways, because we’re no longer pretending that we want an apolitical education. Advocates for explicitly Christian nationalist views, as outlined in the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, have been characterized by multiple sources as seeking to reshape American education around a particular religious and cultural worldview.

In this scenario, they have an agenda, clearly, and I am advocating for clearly standing in an opposing agenda that is based on the values that most Americans across party aisles agree on. At this point in history, I believe what’s needed is the statement of, “Yes, we are teaching values. We’re teaching respect and inclusion. We value diversity and want to honor different belief systems.”

This is something American schools have been doing successfully since the early 1990s, and in some places, even before that. I know, because I was there, working in schools. We taught Black History Month in the 90s. We talked about tolerance of difference and diversity in race, ethnicity, and religion. We knew the importance of giving kids books that featured different family types, people with disabilities, and a range of cultures and ethnicities.

This was widely accepted as best practice in child development and education for decades. The vast majority of Americans supported inclusion and diversity back then, and still do now. This includes many Christians, Republicans, and conservatives who, let’s be clear, are in no way a monolithic group who all support the Heritage Foundation’s vision for public schools.

What Americans actually believe about inclusion in schools

Recent polling shows that 61% of Americans consider diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives important in public education. Another poll found that a majority of voters believe it’s extremely important to ensure schools are safe and welcoming for every child. A UMass poll found that a plurality of Americans opposes ending federal DEI policies in education. And research from Columbia University showed that an overwhelming majority support teacher agency and inclusive curriculum.

So what are we doing here?

We can’t opt out of the hidden curriculum. But we can become more conscious of it. We can choose which values you’re reinforcing.

And when someone accuses you of indoctrination, you can say this:

“You’re right that I’m teaching values. Every educator does. The question isn’t whether schools teach values, it’s which values we teach and whether we’re honest about it. I’m choosing to teach empathy, curiosity, and the ability to work with people who are different from you. These are the values our diverse democracy needs to function. These are the skills are kids need in order to get a job and function in society, if you’d prefer I teach different values, let’s talk about that.”

Notice what this framing does. It shifts the conversation from “Are you indoctrinating? Are you trying to teach my kid what to think?” to “What values should schools be teaching?” And that’s the real question we should be debating.

We have to move beyond the idea that political ideology only shows up in the voting booth, and beyond the idea that our ideology should only feature one set of values.

We don’t teach students from one type of family, one belief system, one religion, one ethnicity, or one narrow gender binary. Therefore, we need to teach the actual humans showing up in our classrooms, our communities, and our country. We all live here together. We all belong, and we all matter.

That is the perspective that I think every American public school system should actively stand for, and do so unapologetically.

And I do place this responsibility on school systems, rather than individual teachers, who should not be left to stand alone on this very basic principle and take the heat.

It’s time, actually past the time, to question whether teachers should bring their worldview or ideology into the classroom. We can’t leave it at the door. The question is whether we’re conscious of it. Whether we’re examining it. Whether we’re willing to challenge our own assumptions when they cause harm. And, whether we truly want to respect and include all humans in our country, or whether we want to prioritize some over others.

4 Ways to use the hidden curriculum intentionally

Here’s what I want you to take away from this episode.

First, the vocabulary. Use the term “hidden curriculum”, which gives you language to explain that schools have always taught more than academic content. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant or lying. There is research which I’ve linked in the article for this episode backing up this claim.

Second, the understanding that you can’t be neutral. We need to stop trying to be neutral and instead, be intentional. As part of that intentionality, decide which values you are teaching, preferably with the support of your team, admin, and district leaders, and be honest about it.

Third, when someone says “just teach the three Rs,” call that out for what it is. They’re asking you to teach the values that uphold the status quo while pretending those values are neutral. Don’t let them get away with that framing.

Fourth, make the invisible visible. Talk to your students about classroom norms. Explain the reasoning behind rules. Involve them in creating the expectations. When students understand the “why,” they’re learning to think, not just to obey. This approach directly counters the “blind obedience” model that Thornberg warned about. It’s one of the most powerful ways to use the hidden curriculum intentionally, for good.

And finally, examine whose culture you’re privileging. If your classroom expectations align perfectly with middle-class white norms, that’s not neutral. That’s a choice. Ask yourself what messages that sends to students from different backgrounds.

Look, I know this is exhausting. You’re already defending your profession from people who have never spent a day in a classroom. You’re already working twice as hard for half the respect you deserve.

But this framework matters. Because when someone comes at you with accusations, you need to be able to say:

“Teaching has never been neutral. Schools have always taught values. The hidden curriculum has been operating since the first classroom existed. The only question is whether we’re conscious of what we’re teaching and honest about it. I choose to be both.”

And then you can point them to actual research. This isn’t radical left-wing propaganda. This is established educational theory that’s been around for decades.

The hidden curriculum isn’t a new problem that teachers created. It’s a concept that helps us understand what’s always been happening. And now that we understand it, we get to make more conscious choices about which values we reinforce.

Your takeaway truth for the week ahead is this: Every child who walks into your classroom deserves to see themselves reflected there, to have their existence treated as welcome, and to leave knowing their life has inherent value. Stand for the idea that every family, culture, and identity deserves to be seen and respected. Uphold the idea that kids need to learn about differences and work across them. That is not a political stance, because or public school teachers who are tasked with embracing and educating any child who is enrolled in their classroom. Uphold your commitment to representation and care for all families as if it’s not controversial, because it shouldn’t be.

References and further reading

All4Ed & Lake Research Partners. (2024). Voters’ views on education in 2024. https://all4ed.org/publication/voters-views-on-education-in-2024/

Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum. Routledge.

Black Education Research Center & Brilliant Corners Research. (2023). It’s time to teach the truth: A report on American attitudes toward K-12 education. https://www.tc.columbia.edu/articles/2023/november/majority-of-us-voters-support-inclusive-education-and-teacher-agency/

Burke, K. J., Juzwik, M. M., & Prins, E. (2025). United for what and for whom? An analysis of White Christian nationalism in a 2023 school board election campaign. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 47(1). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10714413.2024.2391601

Durkheim, E. (1961). Moral education. Free Press.

Giroux, H. A. (2001). Theory and resistance in education. Bergin & Garvey.

Hixenbaugh, M. (2023, May 2). A fight over religion and politics is roiling a Texas school board election. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/grapevine-texas-school-board-election-christian-nationalism-rcna82246

Jackson, P. (1968). Life in classrooms. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Kettering Foundation. (2024). Project 2025: The blueprint for Christian nationalist regime change. https://kettering.org/project-2025-the-blueprint-for-christian-nationalist-regime-change/

PDK International. (2025). 2025 PDK poll results. https://pdkpoll.org/2025-poll-results/

Project 2025. (2024). In Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Project-2025

Rice, D., Rhodes, J., Nteta, T., & Eichen, A. (2025). The American public continues to support DEI policies. UMass Poll. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2025/06/04/new-research-shows-the-american-public-continues-to-support-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-policies/

Texas AFT. (2025, May 9). Election recap: What school board, local results mean for Texas public schools. https://www.texasaft.org/policy/privatization/charters/election-recap-what-school-board-local-results-mean-for-texas-public-schools

Thornberg, R. (2009). The moral construction of the good pupil embedded in school rules. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 4(3), 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1177/1746197909340874

U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2022). K-12 education: Department of Education should provide information on equity and safety in school dress codes (Report No. GAO-23-105348). https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105348

Walton, G. (2005). The hidden curriculum in schools: Implications for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth. Alternate Routes: A Journal of Critical Social Research, 21(1), 18-39. http://www.alternateroutes.ca/index.php/ar/article/view/20362