A recent classroom exercise at Chloe Day School & Wellness Center, a preschool in Harlem, New York, has sparked a nationwide discourse on the role of political activism within early childhood education. A video posted online shows young students engaged in an exercise that appears to dissent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) practices.
The footage, which was disseminated by the social media account Libs of TikTok, captures the children chanting phrases like "Stop the hating!" and "Love is enough! Stop hurting people!" In one instance, a child, prompted by a teacher, expresses anger at seeing people "hurt or taken away from their families." Classroom signage conveying messages such as "We are stronger together" was also visible, contributing to the politically charged atmosphere of the activity.
Dr. Sanayi Beckles-Canton, the school's director, led the exercise. She explained that adverse weather conditions had prevented the students from participating in external protests and that the indoor activity was a means to demonstrate solidarity with citywide demonstrations without leaving the children unsupervised.
While President Donald Trump and ICE were not directly mentioned in the chants, the context suggests that the activity was connected to broader protests against immigration enforcement policies. The Chloe Day School is known for its progressive stance, basing its educational approach on the Reggio Emilia philosophy, emphasizing child-centric development, inclusion, and social-emotional learning. The school's curriculum stresses the importance of exploration and engagement in fostering communal bonds among students.
However, this incident has triggered intense backlash, with critics arguing that such exercises exceed ethical boundaries by introducing complex political concepts to preschoolers. Social media commentary has raised concerns about whether children of this age can comprehend or meaningfully engage with such topics, and whether they are being manipulated into echoing adult sentiments.
Critics maintain that early education should concentrate on imparting fundamental skills like literacy and numeracy, rather than political ideologies. The debate extends to the appropriateness of educators discussing social and political issues with young learners. Opponents of the school's method argue that these structured political exercises compromise educational neutrality and may exploit impressionable young minds.
As of this report, Chloe Day School has not publicly commented on the controversy. Likewise, Beckles-Canton, who also holds a position on the Citywide Council on Special Education, has not issued a formal statement.
Educational experts indicate that this episode is emblematic of a growing concern regarding the infusion of political messaging in early childhood education settings. While certain curricula that promote social awareness are framed as fostering empathy, critics question the extent to which adults should influence young students and the risk of inadvertent indoctrination.
The ongoing controversy at Chloe Day School is reflective of a national conversation about the ways in which early educational programs can responsibly address societal issues. As schools grapple with balancing social awareness and pedagogical ethics, educators and policymakers are under increasing scrutiny to ensure that civic education is age-appropriate and does not predispose children to specific political ideologies before they are capable of forming their own independent views.
