[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.]
The last posting left
the reader with an assignment. It
reported the chapter titles and number of pages each of those chapters
contained for a 2013 edition[1]
of the Magruder American government textbook. The reader was assigned to review the information
and see if he/she could derive any conclusions as to what this blog has been claiming
– that the writing of such textbooks are guided by the natural rights construct
of government and politics.
Unfortunately,
this writer can’t hear what the reader discovered, but below is what the writer
gleaned from the listing. But before
sharing it, the reader should be reminded what the natural rights view promotes. Central to that view is a belief in natural
rights or natural liberty – hence the name.
So, if Magruder’s is so guided, perhaps its chapter titles and
page allocation would reflect it.
If one looks at the titles from
Chapter 19 to 21, accounting for 100 pages of 769 pages of text material
(roughly one seventh), those pages are dedicated to the concept of rights. Chapters 19 and 20 seem to be solely concerned
with individual rights and Chapter 21 incorporates a concern for justice that
at least has a communal angle to it.
After all, justice does demand a societal landscape. But overall, given the number of pages all
three chapters dedicate to rights, one can safely assume the author, William McClenaghan,
has a strong concern over this topic.
To compare this one element to the
2019 edition,[2]
a listing of its chapters, page allocations, and topics is needed. In that version two important changes take hold. First, the author is another person, Daniel M. Shea
– a professor of government at Colby College.
Shea has divided the text differently as the following list indicates:
Name of Text: Magruder (2019 edition)
Topic/Title Number of Pages
1. Foundations of
Government 34
2. Beginnings of
American Government 61
3. The Constitution 51
4. The Legislative
Branch 73
5. The Executive Branch
– the Presidency and Vice Presidency 34
6. The Executive
Branch at Work 62
7. The Judicial Branch 26
8. Protecting Civil
Liberties 64
9. Citizenship and
Civil Rights 38
10. Government by the
People 78
11. Elections 58
12. Government and the
Economy 50
13. California State
and Local Government 62
14. Comparative
Government 24
Total = 715 pages; 102
pages dedicated to rights (Topics 8 & 9)
The first difference
one can detect between the 2013 and 2019 editions is that the text is divided
differently. Instead of 25 chapters,
there are 14 topics. Each topic, within
the text, is divided into “lessons.” In
the opinion of this writer, this newer outlay takes into account that American
government is usually a semester – as opposed to a yearly – course of study.
There
are 180 school days in the school year, 90 in a semester. Many weeks of the school year are not made up
of five days. For example, Thanksgiving
week is only three days (the writer’s local school district recently cut that
down to two days). Many secondary
schools operate under the assumption that every course taught can follow the
same format in that tests are assigned a specific day of the week so as not to
overload a student with too many tests on the same day.
So,
a teacher’s test day in biology might be on a Monday, social studies on a
Friday, language arts on a Wednesday, and so on. Usually the approach used divides the course
into units that last a week and attempt to cover a chapter or topic per
unit. That means a chapter needs to be
covered – given the practical constraints of the calendar – in a week’s time.
Now
if the reader puts him/herself in the shoes of the average high school student
– a person who cares next to nothing about the topics covered in Magruder and understands that government
is one of six or seven courses he/she is taking – the contents of such a
textbook can seem overwhelming. The
course, American government, in Florida is usually offered in the senior year
and some of the other courses that senior might be taking include pre-calculus,
physics, and English literature.
Also
figure-in applying to colleges and the general exhaustion of this type of
schooling for last twelve or more years the he/she has already experienced. All that is a challenge, but it doesn’t end
there. Now think of that government
teacher with about 25-30 students in any given period with all this going on in
their students’ lives. Those teachers’
charge is to teach American government in such a way as to promote a general
view of governance and politics that reflects some conceptualization of the
subject matter.
The
conceptualization might be in line with natural rights thinking – probably is –
but some might opt for some other perspective.
Some might be guided by critical theory, a Marxian view, or federation
theory. Now if that teacher promotes a federalist
message – one that highlights a communal and collaborative sense of the subject
– can he/she count on the text to be of assistance or does it provide yet
another obstacle?
This
writer’s first impression of the above lists of chapters/topics (2013 and 2019)
is that the content puts almost all of its emphasis on the structure and processes
of the central government in Washington.
That is, it has the mechanical view previously described in this
blog. That view highlights how that
government responds to the input generated from its societal environment (both
domestically and internationally).
Only
two chapters in 2013 and one topic in 2019, at or toward the end of each text,
are dedicated to local government and most of that attention is on the state
level. That is a problem for the teacher
adhering to federation theory. Federation
theory, in its advocacy for an engaged citizenry within communal settings and
collaborative arrangements, holds the quality, social capital, as an important
social attribute.
Social
capital, using the thoughts of Robert Putnam, is characterized by having an
active, public-spirited citizenry, egalitarian political relations, and a
social environment of trust and cooperation.[3]
With that sense, one is apt to engage in
politics, but, to be realistic, that is highly dependent on a political
landscape that one can expect a realistic chance of being effective.
For most citizens, effective participation is
limited to involvement with local government – usually city or county
government, not national government.
Why? Most people do not have the
resources to affect national policy, but they do have the resources to
influence local politics and policy formation.
So, if the goal is to promote participation which in turn enhances
social capital, shouldn’t the emphasis in civics education be directed toward local
governance? That’s what makes sense to this
writer.
On
the other hand, he judges the above distribution of attention – as indicated by
the page distribution of the texts – is geared not to participation, but to observation. If successful, the above content seems to be
geared toward informing the average citizen so that he or she will be able to
watch national news and understand it.
With that viewership, a citizen can be an informed voter and able to
translate personal preferences into voting decisions.
Does
this emphasis characterize the whole text?
No, at least in the 2013 edition it does have students consider a more
interactive role – a feature this blog will address in the next posting. To emphasize, these exceptions are just that;
they make up few entries in the textbook and are easily lost and ignored, given
the overall challenge of “teaching” a 700 plus page textbook in fewer than 36
weeks (fewer than 18 weeks in a semester).
This
writer wishes that the emphasis of Magruder was clearer. While the 2013 edition does contain an
element that encourages engagement, it is an exceptional element and it is not
picked up in the 2019 edition. But it is
worth reviewing this effort to give the reader a sense of how the materials
emanating from the establishment views this concern.
The
reader is reminded that a previous posting asked if the establishment of civics
education has been opting toward a more federated posture. That drift is detected in the standards that
have been issued of late – such as the C3 Framework[4]
– but does it appear in that all-important component of the curriculum, the
textbook? The next posting takes a further
look.
[1] William McClenaghan, Magruder’s American Government (Florida Teacher’s Edition) (Boston,
MA: Prentice Hall/Pearson, 2013).
[3] Robert D.
Putnam, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community
(New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 2000).
[4] National
Council for the Social Studies, Preparing Students for College, Career, and
Civic Life (C3) (Washington, D. C.:
NCSS, 2013), accessed April 16, 2018, https://www.socialstudies.org/c3 .
