An advocate of parochial federalism continues his/her presentation[1] …
With its review of the subject matter (in terms of its content), this blog
begins describing parochial federalism’s position regarding the discipline of
American government and civics. And this
segment begins with a question: What is the
state of affairs within the discipline of those subjects that would indicate a
legitimate use of parochial federalism as its foundational construct?
In the
eighteenth century, politics centered on the establishment of republican
government. James Madison and Alexander
Hamilton spoke of a “new science of politics” concerned with the study of how
free people can create a constitutional system of government based on popular
sovereignty.”[2]
Today’s situation – given the polarized landscape that plagues the
nation – demands a reconsideration of the forces and concerns associated with
the establishment and maintenance of a republic. Federalism is a theory of government that
provides perspective for such a reconsideration.
For those who follow a traditional/historical
approach within the discipline of political science (one that utilizes
documents and other written artifacts of past political activity), parochial
federalism is a construct that fits their type of research and theorizing
(e.g., the works of Daniel Elazar[3]
and Donald Lutz[4]). The professional organization, the Center for
the Study of Federalism, conducts and reports on reputable research and
teaching projects in the tradition of this construct.[5]
Parochial federalism,
with its historical/cultural basis, gives a more comprehensive view of
political activity and behavior in an extended republic than is presently being
offered in the typical civics and American government classes (this blog has
provided such reviews and will do more, with relevant research, in the future).
As
opposed to the sterile, neutral fare that characterizes government studies,
parochial federalism enquires into the historical foundations of the nation’s political
ethos and makes claims as to the current values to which instruction should
ascribe. That value system revolves
around good citizenship and social capital that promote a republic commonwealth
(akin to how Gordon Wood characterizes the Revolutionary generation which is historically
known as those who joined the Whigs or commonwealthmen).
It takes a more proactive approach in asking
and analyzing information regarding justice and the establishment and
maintenance of a civil society. If the
concern is to maintain a republic, what conditions must the construct address
in order to be legitimate and a viable foundation by which to study government
in the nation’s schools?
Answering this question takes on several
dimensions. Eugene Meehan[6]
provides criteria by which social scientists can judge constructs. While a curriculum developer and/or
implementor of curriculum have different concerns from a social scientist, some
of Meehan’s concerns can be incorporated in evaluating constructs for the
purposes of classroom use.
The following questions suggest themselves from
Meehan’s work:
• Comprehension: Does the construct
explain as many phenomena related to the area of concern as possible?
• Power: Does the construct control the
explanatory effort by being valid and complete in its component parts and the
relations between and among those parts?
• Precision: Does the construct
specifically and precisely treat its concepts, making them clear in their use?
• Consistency or Reliability: Does the
construct explain its components and their relations the same way time after
time?
• Isomorphism: Does the construct
contain a one-to-one correspondence with that portion of reality it is trying
to explain?
• Compatibility: Does the construct
align with other responsible explanations of the same phenomena?
• Predictability: Does the construct
predict conditions associated with the phenomena in question?
• Control: Does the construct imply
ways of controlling the phenomena in question?
In other words, given the general goal of parochial federalism, how does
its view of government and politics match up with the realities of government
and serve as a vehicle by which to present reality and the values involved?
A curriculum, to be
viable, must have, as one of its sources, a foundation in reputable subject
matter from the relevant discipline.[7] In addition, this blogger – apart but not
necessarily distinct from parochial federalism – adds two more concerns that
are in line with the demands of a successful application of a construct for
classroom use. They are:
· Abstraction Level: Is the construct of such
abstraction that students will be able to comprehend it?
· Motivation: Is the construct and its content
motivating to students?
This presentation will present evidence regarding the way the construct,
parochial federalism, addresses its disciplinary approach in portraying
governance and politics to secondary students.
[1] This presentation begins with the posting, “A Parochial Subject Matter” (March 11, 2022).
[2] Stephen L. Schechter and Jonathan S. Weil, “Studying
and Teaching Political Science,” in Teaching the Social Sciences and History
in Secondary Schools: A Method Book,
edited by James C. Schott and Laurel R. Singleton (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company), 138.
[3] For example, Daniel J. Elazar, American
Federalism: A View from the States,
Third Edition (New York, NY: Harper and
Row, Publishers, 1984).
[4] For example, Donald S. Lutz, “The Mayflower Compact,
1620” (17-23), “The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, 1639” (24-35), “The
Declaration of Independence, 1776” (138-145), “The Virginia Declaration of
Rights and Constitution, 1776” (150-165), “The Articles of Confederation, 1781”
(227-248) in Roots of the Republic: American Founding Documents Interpreted,
edited by Stephen L. Schechter (Madison, WI:
Madison House, 1990).
[5] An offshoot of the Center for the Study of Federalism
is an academic journal, Publius: The
Journal of Federalism. This journal
is associated with Temple University in Philadelphia.
[6] Eugene J. Meehan, Explanation in Social
Science: A System Paradigm (Homewood,
IL: The Dorsey Press, 1968).
[7] Ralph W. Tyler, Basic Principles of Curriculum and
Instruction (Chicago, IL: The
University of Chicago Press, 1949).
No comments:
Post a Comment