This blog has been dedicated to presenting a construct that
can serve as a guide in choosing content for our civics curriculum. I have argued that presently, that subject
matter, along with all of the social studies, has been guided by a construct I
have entitled natural rights. I have
further argued that the natural rights construct, while having beneficial
aspects, has enabled and encouraged certain detrimental developments among our
youth and the resulting adult population as those youth attain higher age. I have listed those developments: lower political knowledge, lower level of
skills in attaining political knowledge, less disposition toward engaging in
political and other civic activities, higher levels of incivility, and high
levels of criminality. If there is a
portion of our educational curriculum meant to address political and
governmental knowledge, skills, and dispositions that would lead to better
citizenship, then that would be civics, in particular, and social studies, in
general. The results of those
educational efforts inform us that we are not doing a very good job. I have presented this argument over many
postings, especially early on in the history of the blog. Recently, I revisited this general
description and provided more recent research findings to indicate that things
have not gotten better. But I feel I
have been remiss in that I have left out a very important intervening variable
that is relevant not only in describing the problem, but also in contextualizing
any attempt to rectify the situation.
The factor I did not address is one that Robert D. Putnam
looks at in a recently published book, Our
Kids: The American Dream in Crisis.[1] He points out that one of the consequences of
the recent shift of income our economy has experienced – a distribution away
from those who were at the lower ends of income toward those who were at the upper
levels – is that civic engagement among lower income adults and youth has
fallen off dramatically. The book
reviews how the levels of voting and other active modes of participation are
almost non-existent among lower income, less educated people. In addition, within this population we are
experiencing a higher incidence of criminality, drug abuse, poor school
performance, poor parenting, and general irresponsible behavior. One main reason has been that with the shift
of income toward upper income groups and away from lower income groups has been
a resulting pattern of segregation.
Lower income groups have less and less contact with upper income groups. This has led to high degrees of social
isolation as lower income groups have been literally left behind in high crime
and otherwise degrading living environments.
A further consequence is that lower income groups of citizens are
participating less in our political processes.
The essence of democracy is equal
influence on public decisions. A
representative democracy requires at least widespread, if not universal, voting
and grassroots civic engagement. The
more that other means of political influence, such as money, are powerful and
unevenly distributed across citizens, the more important electoral and
grassroots involvement becomes for ensuring some approximation to democracy.[2]
Instead, we have had the opposite, resulting in those groups
who need more viable attention receiving less.
Putnam points out that political engagement has fallen off among all
groups – as I have pointed out in previous postings – but the drop off has been
a great deal more precipitous among impoverished, ill-educated citizens. In short, while better civics education is
sorely needed for all our youth, the need among lower income youth is much more
critical.
Putnam reminds us that highly reputable social commenters,
such as Hannah Arendt and William Kornhauser, have written very convincingly
that if we disregard the plight of lower income groups, we do so at our own peril. As the numbers of those not being favored by
the economic changes we are experiencing increase, this can become a highly
dangerous situation. Levels of crime,
violence, disruption, prison costs, and other results mean a less favorable
society.
What better civics content can there be than what Putnam
emphasizes, a content that promotes collaborative and communal approaches to
social problems and social arrangements?
That is what federalist theory highlights. That approach goes beyond merely outlining a
structure of government, but contains the content of an organic entity, our government. And beyond its treatment of government and
politics, if implemented as a way to run schools, the interactive mentoring
that Putnam calls for becomes integral to the subject matter and to the view of
school as a living and caring institution.
