The Educational Review, USA: "Parental Rights in Education Act": How Narratives Shape Policy

In today's globalized world, education policy is not just about rule-making; it's about the art of storytelling. When parental rights become the banner of policy, can classrooms still remain free and inclusive? Florida's "Parental Rights in Education Act" (HB 1557), dubbed the "Don't Say Gay" bill, has sparked controversy nationwide. Is this bill truly about protecting children, or is it about restricting freedom of expression?

Official website screenshot

The Battle for Narrative Dominance in Education Policy

Should education policy be entirely parent-led? When "parental rights" becomes the core narrative of policy, whose voice is amplified, and whose voice is drowned out? Research by Sofia Wilken from Northern Arizona University reveals that the passage of HB 1557 was no accident but a successful use of narrative strategy.

The study found that the conservative group "Moms for Liberty" used dramatic narratives and emotional appeals to frame "parental rights" as a moral high ground. By portraying schools as institutions "indoctrinating children with progressive values" and parents as "protectors against immorality," they won the support of conservative lawmakers and passed the bill before public opinion could fully form.

How Policy Goals Are Manipulated Through Narratives

How did "Moms for Liberty" make "parental rights" the core of policy? The research analyzed 43 YouTube videos and 5 Facebook Live streams, revealing their main strategies:

Dramatic Narratives: Schools were depicted as institutions "forcing gender ideology" on children, while parents were portrayed as heroes "fighting against immoral education."

Emotional Mobilization: By sharing stories of "children being forced into gender transition by schools," they ignited fear and anger among parents.

Obscuring Policy Goals: Despite the bill explicitly banning discussions of sexual orientation and gender identity, they denied any connection to these topics, attempting to mislead the public.

These narrative strategies not only accelerated the bill's passage but also provided justification for subsequent book bans and curriculum censorship.

The Consequences of Policy Implementation: The Battle Between Classroom Freedom and Student Rights

Following the implementation of HB 1557, Florida became the national leader in book bans, with over 1,000 books removed from school libraries. The study points out that most of these banned books dealt with social equality. When diverse voices are silenced, can classrooms still be a window for students to understand the world?

The policy has also plunged teachers into fear, as they now worry that any teaching content might trigger lawsuits. One teacher mentioned, "If a student's research touches on historical events, I could be sued." This self-censorship not only restricts academic freedom but also deprives education of its necessary depth and breadth.

The Social Significance of Education Policy: How Narratives Shape the Future

Education policy is not just about rule-making; it's a battle of narratives. The success of HB 1557 shows that narratives can be weapons, used to manipulate public emotions and suppress diverse voices. When narratives become tools for a single ideology, can education still maintain its inclusivity?

Imagine classrooms becoming battlegrounds of politics—can students' freedom to learn still be guaranteed? The essence of education is to inspire critical thinking, not to indoctrinate a single narrative. We need to re-examine the logic behind policy narratives and ensure that education provides equal opportunities for all students.

#EducationPolicy #ParentalRights  #BookBans #NarrativeStrategy

The study was published in Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Science, Hill Publishing Group

https://www.hillpublisher.com/ArticleDetails/4621    

How to cite this paper: 

Sofia Wilken. (2025). Policy Processes in the Parental Rights in Education Act. The Educational Review, USA, 9(3), 310-320. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2025.03.007