This blog is currently describing how apt teachers
are to incorporate the tenets of a liberated federalism model in the teaching
of civics at the secondary level. This
blog in past postings reviewed the makeup of another version of federalism,
that being parochial/traditional federalism.
As compared to that
earlier version, liberated federalism, while based on federalist ideas and
ideals, one, sheds parochial federalism’s parochialism, two, adopts, to a guarded
level, natural rights views that accept a more pluralistic populus with its
varied cultural perspectives and, three, approaches civics from a more
contemporary perspective. This is not to
say it would neglect the federalist foundations of the nation, but in the bulk
of its inspired materials, it would emphasize current political
conditions.
The judgment of this
account is that the proposed liberated construct offers an approach that can be
seen as being more congruent with teachers’ stated orientation of social
studies. That is, social studies subject
matter is responsible, along with the efforts of parents and other institutions,
to socialize the nation’s youth concerning citizenship attributes[1]
including those that promote mutual responsibilities. That includes the transmission of a political
culture more in tune with federalist principles.[2]
Other points that might appeal to teachers would
include the fact that research shows teachers are significantly more likely
than the general population to become involved in political activity.[3] They are also noticeably more religious than
the general population which might indicate a leaning toward moral concerns. Adding to that, they tend to hold onto social
capital values that promote non-economic goals and aims to further the health
of society.[4]
This account judges that
the teacher corps would potentially be receptive to materials that emphasize
political interaction and moral behavior that would advance the
commonwealth. And further, such concerns
transcend both the public and the private sectors, both what government is
about and what one’s next-door neighbor is about if what he or she is doing
hurts or helps the common condition, short of being a busybody.
The last point to be made
about teachers in relation to their receptiveness to the liberated federalism
perspective is that, given the proclivity of most teachers, a textbook based
approach with a federalist view, or at least conducive to a federalist view would
be essential. This textbook reliance is
not considered as being helpful, but it is what it is.
Timothy Scott, et al.,
write of this reliance. After listing
some significant shortfalls with American education, they observe:
Policymakers,
believing achievement gaps result from teaching performance, have argued for
additional academic controls that promote rigorous standardized instruction to
reduce existing achievement gaps. However, a state-mandated textbook-driven
curriculum that prioritizes test-taking strategies will only exasperate
previous educational deficiencies. As numerous schools face significant
financial constraints, technological and resource investment is severally
limited, and teacher professional development is marginalized. Without
appropriate tools or skills to adapt curriculum, classes devolve into simple
rote-learning of textbook content lacking any semblance of differentiated
instruction. Students in impoverished communities [for example] disassociate
with taught content as textbooks lack a multicultural presentation; thus [sic] they
perceive school environments as unwelcoming and hostile towards their
lived-experiences [sic]. Performance-based funding through high-stakes
accountability further … [incentivizes] underfunded schools to abandon
student-centric learning designs and prioritize a textbook dependent
‘one-size-fits-few’ strategy to avoid sanctions to meet state benchmarks.[5]
And, in agreement, Stephen Thornton, back in
1991, states that the content of most classes, including social studies, is defined
by the textbook used. This is because
most teachers are not comfortable with their own knowledge of the material.[6] This has a possible positive consequence and
a more likely negative one.
This account holds that
there is no substitute for teacher knowledge of subject matter. But given the state of affairs articulated by
Thornton and, by implication, Scott et al., perhaps teachers are not that
committed to the content of the material they are presently using. If an alternative could be presented in a
professional and responsible fashion, teachers might be open to an alternative
view that meets many of their social concerns that this research indicates.
Again, though, teachers
might be so unsure of their position that any change might be seen as a
threat. This account believes that the
effort to make the change to the liberated federalism model is worth it and
that convincing teachers of its merits is a possibility. Now it is up to administrators to see the
prudence of making the change. And with
that, this blog will move on from the commonplace, “teachers,” and next address
the commonplace, “milieu,” in which the proposed change is offered.
[1] For example, Rebecca Winthrop, “The Need for Civic
Education in 21st-Century Schools,” Brookings (June 4, 2020),
accessed October 16, 2023, URL: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-need-for-civic-education-in-21st-century-schools/.
[2] Federalist principles are those that support the make
up of a federalist polity. A federalist
model is one in which a nation’s polity results from its people directly or
through representatives coming together, on an equal basis, to develop and
agree upon a covenant or compact forming a legalized partnership. Such an agreement is held as sacred – either
on a sectarian or secular basis – that establishes the aims for the polity, the
structure of a government, other provisions, consequences for noncompliance,
soliciting God (in the case of a covenant) to witness the agreement, and the
signatures of those coming to the agreement.
If the agreement is arrived at by representatives, a ratifying process
follows the submission of the agreement.
The US Constitution is a compact.
[3] While current rates of political activity among
teachers was difficult to cite, union membership, a sign of political
engagement, does hover around 70% as compared to 10% among the work force. See for example, “Total Number of Public
School Teachers and Percentage of Public School Teachers in a Union or
Employees’ Association, by Selected School Characteristics: 2015-16,” National Teacher and Principal
Survey (n.d.), accessed October 16, 2023, https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ntps/tables/Table_TeachersUnion.asp.
[4] Robert O. Slater, “American Teachers: What Values Do They Hold?” Education Next,
8, 1, accessed October 16, 2023, https://www.educationnext.org/american-teachers/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20NORC%20survey,Americans%20say%20they%20do%20so.
[5] Timothy Scott, Hua Mak Campus, and Farhat N. Husain,
“Textbook Reliance: Traditional
Curriculum Dependence Is Symptomatic of a Larger Educational Problem,” Journal
of Educational Issues, 7, 1 (April 23, 2021), accessed October 17, 2023,
URL: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1304270.pdf.
[6] Stephen J. Thornton, “Teacher as
Curricular-Instructional Gatekeeper in Social Studies,” in Handbook of
Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning, edited by James P. Shaver
(New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing
Company, 1991), 237-248.
