An advocate of natural rights continues his/her presentation[1] …
This posting addresses how the economic interests of students, as a commonplace
of curriculum development (a la Joseph Schwab’s
theorizing), relate to the natural rights view of civics education. The learner is but one of the commonplaces;
the others are the subject matter, teachers, and milieu.
Economic Student Interests
Economic interests are
served indirectly by a course of study that realistically portrays the
political system under which the nation’s economy functions. As documented earlier in this blog, student
knowledge of that system is woefully inadequate.
Current
levels of knowledge engagement by America’s youth remain too low. Less than half of young Americans vote, even
in presidential elections, and just 10 percent of Americans between 18 and 24
met a standard of “informed engagement” in [the] 2012 presidential election
cycle.[2]
Unfortunately, the state of economic knowledge held by secondary
students is equally deficient.
William Walstadt reports on
that deficiency as it is focused on the economy:
… [S]tudy
after study show that there is widespread economic illiteracy among youth and
the American public. In one such study,
I administered the Test of Economic Literacy, an achievement measure covering
basic economic concepts, to 11th and 12th grade students
nationwide and found that students supplied correct answers to less than half
the questions. In another study I
conducted with The Gallup Organization, I found that less than four in 10 high
school seniors or adults could answer basic questions about economic terms and
concepts that are essential for understanding economic events and issues
reported in the news media.[3]
Yet, using a systems view, observers can see that it is during these
years that teenagers begin to experience real job conditions with firsthand,
part time employment.
The point here is that a
government and civics curriculum that emphasizes the competitive and systemic
nature of American politics would reinforce a more realistic view of economic
conditions in the adult world. As such, given
the natural relationship between economic and political interests, this would
serve their economic interests as well.
One can relate student
economic interests to insightful political analysis in that they both define
decision making in basically the same way.
Under economic theory, especially the type associated with capitalist
systems, decision making is basically a process by which individuals weigh
their benefits and costs. People analyze
situations and determine what their marginal costs and marginal revenues
(benefits) are and make decisions to maximize their returns.
Such decision making can
be presumed for people engaged in governmental or political choices as well as
economic ones. Since this type of
process prevails, it is easier to understand why governmental officials,
governmental workers, and citizens make the political choices that are
prevalent today.
As a matter of course,
understanding this process goes a long way in explaining why government, as
opposed to the private sector, provides the services it does. For example, governments could not depend on
individuals buying their national defense or domestic protection through
private sources because it is impossible to prevent those who do not pay from
receiving the benefit. This free rider
condition makes it in no individual’s interest to pay or buy defense or other
forms of common protection.
Therefore, government
steps in with its coercive power to tax and makes sure everyone pays for
defense and/or protection.[4] In short, a natural rights perspective based
on market, systems orientation provides a realistic view of the economic
aspects of government and a reinforcement for realistic economic
instruction. Again, in terms of economic
realities, this construct is judged as highly beneficial in the instruction of
students when preparing them for the adult world.
[1] This
presentation continues with this posting. The reader is informed
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 the natural rights view might present. This
is done to present a dialectic position of that construct. This series of postings begins with “Judging
Natural Rights View, I,” August 2, 2022.
[Note: This blog, in the postings entitled “Judging
the Natural Rights View, I-XVI, started with “An advocate of parochial
federalism continues his/her presentation …”
It should have read “An advocate of natural rights …” Please excuse the mistake. The archived record has been corrected.]
[2] “Groundbreaking Report Released on Educating America’s
Youth for Civic & Political Participation,” Harvard Kennedy School/Institute
of Politics (n.d.), accessed September 28, 2022, https://iop.harvard.edu/about/newsletter-press-release/groundbreaking-report-released-educating-america%E2%80%99s-youth-civic.
[3] William Walstad, “Why It’s Important to Understand
Economics,” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (December 1, 1998), accessed
September 28, 2022, https://www.minneapolisfed.org/article/1998/why-its-important-to-understand-economics. There is little
to no evidence demonstrating that this general description is any less
applicable today.
[4] “Free Rider Problem:
Explanation, Causes, and Solutions, Investopedia (n.d.), accessed
September 28, 2022, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/free_rider_problem.asp#:~:text=Solutions%20to%20the%20Free%20Riding%20Problem&text=Government%20addresses%20the%20problem%20by,cost%2Dsharing%20can%20be%20achieved.
