UK Education and Censorship: The 'Of Mice and Men' Controversy

Censorship vs. Education: The Debate Over Historical Racism

The removal of Of Mice and Men from the Welsh GCSE curriculum has ignited a debate about how schools should handle literature that includes offensive language and racial slurs. Of Mice And Men was previously dropped by UK exam board OCR from its GCSE English Literature set texts in 2014 after then-education secretary Michael Gove called for more British authors to be included. Welsh Conservatives argue that removing the novel amounts to censorship that hinders students’ ability to engage with historical racism and understand the context in which these terms were used.

The argument from the right is one rooted in a broader concern about what they perceive as "cancel culture" and the sanitisation of education. In recent years, conservative politicians and commentators have increasingly framed efforts to remove racially insensitive or outdated materials as an attack on free speech and intellectual rigour. They argue that history, even its most uncomfortable parts, must be confronted honestly and not erased.

However, this perspective often overlooks the reality that curricula are constantly evolving. The removal of a single book is not the same as historical revisionism, rather, it reflects an ongoing conversation about what best serves the educational and emotional needs of students. After all, school reading lists have always been curated to reflect contemporary values and pedagogical priorities.

Supporters of the book’s removal, on the other hand, emphasise the impact such language has on Black students, who are often put in the uncomfortable position of hearing racial slurs spoken in classrooms by peers and even teachers. Numerous studies on the psychological impact of racial trauma have shown that repeated exposure to racial slurs, even in an academic context, can contribute to stress, anxiety, and feelings of alienation. The idea that education should challenge students is important—but should this challenge come at the cost of some students' well-being?

This raises critical questions about whether certain texts can be replaced with alternatives that educate students on racism without subjecting marginalised groups to distressing experiences. Schools must balance historical accuracy with sensitivity, ensuring that students learn about racism in ways that do not perpetuate harm.

The Impact on Students: Confronting or Perpetuating Harm?

The argument for keeping Of Mice and Men on the curriculum is that literature provides a window into history, allowing students to engage critically with issues of racism and discrimination. Advocates for retaining the book argue that shielding students from historical realities does them a disservice and limits opportunities for meaningful discussion.

However, many Black students and their families have voiced concerns about how the book is taught. My personal experience at a predominantly white school highlights this issue: there was one Black student in my year, and all my teachers and school heads were white. When we studied Of Mice and Men, my white teacher not only read the racial slur aloud but also encouraged students to do the same. Boys in my class even competed to volunteer for reading passages that included the word. The normalisation of racial slurs in a classroom environment can create a hostile space for Black students, reinforcing feelings of alienation rather than fostering meaningful discussions on racism.

This issue is not unique to Of Mice and Men. A 2019 study conducted by the UK’s Runnymede Trust found that Black students often feel unsupported in school environments when discussing racism, with many reporting that teachers fail to handle racially sensitive discussions appropriately. If a student of colour is made to feel uncomfortable, ridiculed, or silenced when engaging with historical racism, does the educational benefit of reading certain books outweigh the harm caused?

Curriculum Development: Balancing Historical Accuracy with Sensitivity

A key issue in this debate is whether literature can teach historical racism effectively without using racial slurs. There are many books that explore the impacts of racism without using offensive language, providing equally, if not more, powerful narratives. Books such as Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry, The Hate U Give, and Between the World and Me offer critical perspectives on racism while ensuring that classrooms remain inclusive and safe spaces for all students.

Education authorities face a challenge: how do they create curricula that do not erase history while also ensuring that students from marginalised backgrounds do not experience unnecessary distress? Possible solutions include:

• Providing content warnings and structured discussions around racial language to ensure that students understand its historical weight.
• Incorporating alternative texts that address racism without centring dehumanising language.
• Training teachers on how to facilitate discussions about race in a way that is sensitive to students’ lived experiences.

The process of curriculum development is inherently political. In 2014, then-education secretary Michael Gove attempted to reshape the English literature curriculum in England, prioritising more “British” works at the expense of American classics like Of Mice and Men and To Kill a Mockingbird. The controversy in Wales must also be understood within this wider context of educational reform, where decisions about which books remain on the syllabus are influenced by broader political ideologies.

What Does This Mean for Education?

The Of Mice and Men controversy in Wales is not just about one book; it is about how schools navigate the tension between historical education and student well-being. Literature is a powerful tool for confronting injustice, but when taught without consideration for its impact, it can do more harm than good.

The removal of the novel from the curriculum should not be seen as a simple act of erasure, but rather as an opportunity to rethink how schools approach the teaching of racism. If the goal is to educate students on racial injustice, then the materials chosen, and the way they are taught, must be carefully considered to ensure that they actually serve that purpose.

Moreover, this debate underscores a larger discussion about who decides what is “appropriate” for students to learn. Should literary canons remain fixed, or should they evolve to reflect changing social understandings? And when does maintaining historical authenticity cross the line into harming marginalised students?

Ultimately, education is about more than just preserving literary traditions, it is about shaping informed, thoughtful, and empathetic citizens. Schools should not merely aim to teach about racism; they must also ensure that they are not inadvertently perpetuating it in the process. The challenge ahead is to strike a balance between confronting history and making sure that no student is left feeling like a spectacle in the process.