This blog has been
presenting and validating the liberated federalism model of governance and
politics. For readers who wish to review
those corresponding postings and have not read them, they are guided to this
blog’s posting, “From Natural Rights to Liberated Federalism” (June 2, 2023),
at the URL, https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/, where this series begins. With this posting, the blog moves on and
begins addressing some of the contextual elements associated with that construct.
The first is methodology.
The liberated federalism model emphasizes situational study in that it
focuses on arrangements/associations being confronted with politically
challenging situations. Pedagogically
this suggests two types of lessons: case study approach and community service
projects.
Case study is a situational account in which the concerns
of a lesson are conveyed in a narrative or story format. They can be fictional or non-fictional. Upon reading the case study, students are
asked to consider some challenging questions as to how the people depicted in
the narrative behaved or should have behaved and what they should strive toward
or accomplish.
Of course, this does not
preclude the use of other methods of instruction. As a matter of fact, such lessons depend on
preparatory, information-dispensing lessons as students use sufficient inputs
of content to allow constructive interpretive insights.[1] A good example of this mix – case study with
straight informational components – was provided by the Harvard Project
materials.[2]
That approach, entitled the
juris-prudential approach, was further developed by Fred M. Newmann and Donald
W. Oliver[3] –
among others.[4] As for Newmann and Oliver’s contribution,
they focused on skills in value awareness, definitional formulation, and
factual account settlement. The main
objective is to teach, clarify and develop rational justification for positions
on public policy through oral dialogue.[5]
In terms of community
participation type lessons, educators are looking more closely at the potential
advantages of having students deal with the social realities that exist in
their own localities. Here, the aim is
to develop in students “the personal attributes and social dispositions
associated with effective citizenship; and … the practice of civic involvement
by children and youth carry over as a habit of adult life.”[6] This last aim is highly congruent with the
goals of a republican-federalist view of citizenship and governance.[7]
While much more could be considered
about these issues, this blog will now review a general methodological strategy
for the classroom that encompasses both these approaches listed above. That strategy is the constructive teaching
model.
Constructivism is the theory that says learners
construct knowledge rather than just passively take in information. As people
experience the world and reflect upon those experiences, they build their own
representations and incorporate new information into their pre-existing
knowledge (schemas).[8]
Scheurman, back in 1998, made an important
distinction. He wrote, “[Constructivism
relies on] a belief that knowledge is created by people and influenced by their
values and culture. In contrast to this view
is the behaviorist belief that knowledge exists outside of people and
independently of them …”[9] This latter view, based on behavioral
psychology, leads to what one usually finds in classrooms, that is the
dispensation of information that students are to absorb with little or no
personal interest or interaction with the information.
The
teaching method derived from constructivism is based on the psychological
models of Jean Piaget and Lev S. Vygotsky.[10] The next posting will look at this connection
to these acclaimed educational psychologists from the nineteenth and twentieth
centuries.
[1] “Understanding Inquiry Learning,” National Library
(n.d.), accessed September 6, 2023, URL: https://natlib.govt.nz/schools/school-libraries/library-services-for-teaching-and-learning/supporting-inquiry-learning/understanding-inquiry-learning#:~:text=Inquiry%20enables%20students%20to%20learn,ask%20thought%2Dprovoking%20questions AND Geoffrey Scheurman, “From Behaviorists to
Constructivist Teaching,” Social Education, 62, 1 (1998) , 6-9.
[2] See Anthony Tuf Francis, “Diffusing the Social
Studies Wars: The Harvard Social
Studies, 1957-1972,” Gale Academic Onefile (2014), accessed September 7,
2023, URL: https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=googlescholar&id=GALE|A394347446&v=2.1&it=r&sid=AONE&asid=2cf7c15f.
[3] Fred M. Newmann and Donald W. Oliver, Clarifying
Public Controversy: An Approach to
Teaching Social Studies (Boston, MA:
Little, Brown, and Company, 1970)
[4] For an update, see Emily Boudreau, “You Want to Teach
What?”, Harvard Graduate School of Education, February 2, 2022. This article addresses how controversial
using controversial topics in the classroom has become.
[5] Newmann and Oliver, Clarifying Public Controversy.
[6] Dan Conrad, “School-Community Participation for
Social Studies,” in Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and
Learning,” edited by James P. Shaver (New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1991), 540-548,
540.
[7] Gordon S. Wood, The
Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787 (New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Company, 1998).
[8] “Constructivism,” University of Buffalo (n.d.),
accessed September 6, 2023, URL: https://www.buffalo.edu/catt/develop/theory/constructivism.html#:~:text=Constructivist%20Classroom%20Activities-,What%20is%20constructivism%3F,%2Dexisting%20knowledge%20(schemas) AND see Scheurman, “From Behaviorists to
Constructivist Teaching,” Social Education.
[9] Scheurman, “From Behaviorists to Constructivist
Teaching,” Social Education, 6.
[10] Ibid.
