An advocate of parochial federalism continues his/her presentation[1] …
Expectations of Schools (cont.)
The last two postings
reviewed the major philosophic schools of thought in the field of
education. There are four: perennialism,
essentialism, progressivism, and reconstructionism. The reader is invited, using the archive
feature, to read those postings if that has not been done. Part of that text pointed out that
parochial/traditional federalism, if used to guide civics education, would most
likely be associated with perennialism and its focus on the grand traditions of
Western civilization – its great ideas and great books.
In further describing and explaining this connection, this
posting will again focus on the work of Mortimer Adler and his updating of
perennialism. He calls for a signal
track, i.e., the same curriculum for all students. That single curriculum should emphasize a
preparation to life in which one can go on learning. In his Paideia curriculum, a prominent
objective has to do with “the individual’s role as an enfranchised citizen of
this republic.”[2]
He writes,
The reason why universal suffrage in a true democracy calls for universal
public schooling is that the former without the latter produces an ignorant
electorate and amounts to a travesty of democratic institutions and
processes. To avoid this danger, public
schooling must be universal in more than its quantitative aspect. It must be universal also in its qualitative
aspect. Hence, … [an] objective of basic
schooling – [is to have] an adequate preparation for discharging the duties and
responsibilities of citizenship.[3]
Note the federalist bias
toward duties and responsibilities. But
would a general education undermine the attempts of schools to prepare
youngsters for the work-a-day world? The
argument of this perennial source is that it does not. Adler explains,
As compared with narrow, specialized
training for particular jobs, general schooling is of the greatest practical
value. It is good not only because it is
calculated to achieve two of the three main objectives at which basic schooling
should aim – preparing for citizenship and personal development and continued
growth. It is also good practically
because it will provide preparation for earning a living.
Of
all the creatures on earth, human beings are the least specialized in
anatomical equipment and in instinctive modes of behavior. They are, in consequence, more flexible than
other creatures in their ability to adjust to the widest variety of environments
and to rapidly changing external circumstances.
They are adjustable to every clime and condition on earth and
perpetually adjustable to the shock of change.
That
is why general, nonspecialized schooling has the quality that most befits human
nature. That is why, in terms of
practicality and utility, it is better than any other kind of schooling.[4]
Therefore, the use of parochial/traditional
federalism construct with its dependence on a methodology that relies on
discussion of constitutional, republican ideas and ideals would not only instruct
as to the duties and responsibilities the citizenry has or a general communal
commitment it should have, but also would add, in a practical fashion, a
preparation for all students in whatever course they choose.
Therefore, current American curriculum should
incorporate Adler’s prescriptions to be amenable to the interests of all
socio-economic classes and their expectations.
And that completes this argument’s position on the expectations of
schools. The next element of this
overall argument presents is a school’s socio-economic base.
This blog will address it in the next posting
and, if space allows, will also address student culture. With those two elements, the overall argument
promoting the parochial/traditional federalism will be completed and lead to
this blogger’s overall critique of this construct. That critique will be the last element of
this blog’s review of this side of the dialect debate between parochial
federalism and natural rights perspectives.
The blog will then address the antithesis – what would become basically the
thesis – that being the natural rights view.
[1] This presentation begins with the posting, “A Parochial Subject Matter” (March 11,
2022). The reader is reminded that the
claims made in this posting do not necessarily reflect the beliefs or knowledge
of this blogger. Instead, the posting is
a representation of what an advocate of parochial federalism might
present. This is done to present a
dialectic position of that construct.
[2]
Mortimer J. Adler, The Paideia Proposal: An Educational Manifesto (New York,
NY: Collier Books, 1982). Page not available.
[3] Ibid., 17.
[4] Ibid., 19-20.
No comments:
Post a Comment