THE MAGRUDER AND GLENCOE CASE, PART IV

[Note:  If the reader has taken up reading this blog with this posting, he/she is helped by knowing that this posting is the next one in a series of postings.  The series begins with the posting, “The Natural Rights’ View of Morality” (February 25, 2020, https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-natural-rights-view-of-morality.html).  Overall, the series addresses how the study of political science has affected the civics curriculum of the nation’s secondary schools.]

What follows, beginning with this posting and continuing in at least the next, is a closer look at the Magruder’s American Government[1] textbook and the Glencoe’s United States Government[2] textbook.  The aim is to see if each of these books portrays a natural rights view of governance and politics.  That is, do they portray governance and politics as that aspect of life in which one is primarily concerned with one’s unencumbered rights to determine life’s goals and aims and the right to pursue them short of prohibiting others of the same rights. 

Under such a view, one is free to compete with others on equal legal standing in just about all arenas including seeking disbursements of public services.  It is a view in which the individual is more like a consumer – sovereign entity – and sees the political system more in terms of a market arrangement; he/she pays taxes in exchange for those services.  As such, he/she is not a partner with others to pursue the common good within the context of a shared governmental arrangement.

For this posting, this writer used the indexes of these books to analyze whether the books have anything to say about selected communal ideas.  These ideas, if highlighted, would indicate the writers of the books were not guided by natural rights view, but instead a federalist view, encouraging a “we’re in this together” view.  The concepts are community(ies), community development, neighborhood(s), charities, and non-profit organizations.  One can justly see that these are the types of topics one would associate with the federalist quality, social capital.[3] 

So, what was found?  In Magruder’s (2013) there is no listing for community(ies), community development,[4] neighborhood(s), or charities.  There is no listing for non-profit organization(s), but there is one for non-governmental organizations (NGOs).   That text describes only that the United Nations works with NGOs in administrating several of its programs around the world.  While commendable, this type of information is not what bolsters social capital among high school students.

And in the 2019 edition, it does make a reference to nonprofit organizations in terms of their contributions to political campaigns.  These latter groups are national organizations and the information concerning the contributions is in the context of how the contributions are expression of 1^st Amendment’s protected free speech right.  Overall, in terms of community, Magruder’s has little to nothing to say.

What about Glencoe’s text?  There is an indexed reference to the Neighborhood Legal Assistance Program.  That reference guides the reader to an insert that provides a short case study of an advocacy worker, Mary Ellen Beaver, working to establish the rights of migrant agricultural workers.  While this does reflect federalist values and is an example of someone exhibiting social capital, the description is not part of the text and probably would be easily ignored.  Other than that reference, the other concepts do not appear in the index.

But perhaps this selection of ideas is a bit too skimpy.  So, a list of other concepts is added.  They include “grass-roots” politics, political engagement, civic duty(ies) and responsibility(ies).  Limiting the search to Magruder’s 2019 edition and Glencoe’s 2010 edition, this is what was found:

Magruder’s –

·       A chapter subtitle, “Responsibilities, Duties, and Obligations of Citizenship” that gives an overview – in general terms – of what a member of a civil society should contribute.  The space allocated to this concern is about one and a quarter pages with the obligatory picture of John F. Kennedy (“Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country” fame) and references to Theodore Roosevelt and George Washington.  This appears on pages 34-35.

·       A definition for political efficacy as being when a person or group lacks any feeling of effectiveness when it comes to governance or politics is provided.

Glencoe’s –

·       Under a subchapter heading, “Citizen Participation,” there is a five-line “call” for citizen participation since it is a prerequisite of a democracy.  This treatment is very cursory.

·       In Chapter 14 there is a subchapter title, “Citizen Responsibilities,” that begins on page 395 (toward the end) and ends on page 397 (just before the end of chapter questions).  The subsection emphasizes the duty to vote and addresses the question, why do people not vote.  This treatment is also very cursory.  

·       And under the topic of Interest Group Organization, the rise of political action committees is highlighted, but the concern is mostly on how they affect national elections.

That’s it!

          The last two postings of this blog reviewed the tables of content for these various editions of these textbooks.  That review established that the overall approach of the texts is to mostly describe and to some degree explain the structure and processes of the American political system.  That review made the point that the texts mainly communicate a mechanical view of governance and politics. 

This posting provides evidence that, in addition to that overall view, the texts lack much concern for the more normative issues associated with governance or a concern for how and why citizens should opt for establishing and maintaining federated relationships among themselves.  The next posting will look at one text insert series in the Magruder, 2013 edition.  With qualifications and limitations, the inserts reflect a promising turn, but that initiative does not survive in a later edition, that of 2019.

---

[1] William McClenaghan, Magruder’s American Government (Florida Teacher’s Edition) (Boston, MA:  Prentice Hall/Pearson, 2013) AND Daniel M. Shea, Magruder’s American Government (Boston, MA:  Prentice Hall/Pearson, 2019).

[2] Richard C. Remy, Glencoe United States Government:  Democracy in Action (New York, NY:  McGraw-Hill/Glencoe, 2010).

[3] Using the thoughts of Robert Putnam, social capital is characterized by having an active, public-spirited citizenry, egalitarian political relations, and a social environment of trust and cooperation.  See Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2000).

[4] In the 1993 edition, there is reference to community standards in association with the concern over obscenity and 1^st and 14^th Amendment rights.  In the 2019 edition there is reference to neighborhood segregation – mostly racial segregation.