A PROGRESSING PROCESS

This blog has spent a great deal of space on what direction civics education should take.  It has introduced an approach in selecting civics content by describing and explaining a mental construct designed to guide educators in that pursuit.  That construct – federation theory – has its origins in the colonial period of this nation. 

The blog has offered, as part of that construct, a moral code and a model of how the construct is “activated.”  This latter element attempts to give a dynamic sense of how the theory accounts for the way a federated collective meets a political challenge. 

As of the last several postings, the blog has shifted emphasis and is now attempting to convey which instructional approach is most congruent with the content of this approach.  While this writer has made it clear that the use of federation theory does not insist on an instructional sequence of activities, it does logically point to behaviors one can associate with the ideals and ideas the model and moral code highlight.

The title of this approach – historic-based dialogue – will be explained in the next posting, but first a contextual concern needs to be addressed.  This approach is a developmental approach; that is, the process outlined develops within an academic course.  It changes in its specifics as students become, hopefully, more sophisticated, vis-à-vis the content.  What is described here will assume a certain amount of familiarity by students with what this instructional approach is attempting to accomplish.

          In this vein, to specify what exactly the methodology prescribes, one needs to see where in a unit of study a chosen topic is scheduled.  In terms of the topic identified in the last posting, foreign trade, it would fall in that portion of the course that deals with how an interest group interacts with the government or how the nation conducts itself as it interacts with other nations. 

In an earlier posting, this writer identified a course of study that would be suitable for a course that opted federation theory as its guiding construct in determining content.  To remind the reader, here is how that course is outlined with a listing of consecutive units and how each relates to a social capital issue – issues that would be highlighted by a federation theory foundation:

•         The individual – short term interests vs. long term interests

•         The family – the effects of divorce or single parent parenting

•         The neighborhood – responsibilities toward problem children

•         A small business – treatment of employees

•         A labor association (such as a union) – efficiency and quality issues vs. worker interests

•         A large corporation – product safety

•         A local government (either city or county) – zoning or racial/ethnic divisions

•         Law enforcement agency – judicial rights applicable to an accused

•         White House – leadership that advances social capital

•         Congress – the extent that money (in the form of donations) is influential

•         The courts – the role of interpreting constitutional principles as expressions of social capital

•         Society during wartime – special demands on citizenship

•         International associations – global efficiencies vs. maintenance of a living wage

This listing was offered as a suggestion, but what should be pointed to is that the progression attempts to begin with more attention to issues that a secondary student might find relevant.  For example, if a teacher chooses divorce or single parenthood issue, this is chosen for students that have a high incidence of one and/or the other situation.

Back to the challenge addressed presently, if a teacher were to choose foreign trade as a topic, then that topic would probably be inserted at that point of the course that would correspond to the slot taken by “a labor association.”  It could also be inserted in the slot dedicated to international association.  It should be remembered that the topic was chosen because of the effect such trade has on equal opportunity and income distribution – two concerns that have high relevancy qualities for many students and communities.

This is pointed out to indicate that the unit in question would probably be administered either roughly one third of the way into the course or at the end of the course.  For the purposes of this demonstration and to be able to describe the full extent of the development of this strategy, the choice here will be the end of the course.  This adds a burden, in that, the more a topic is removed from the students’ environment, the more difficult it is to make it relevant in terms of their perceptions.

But, such timing would relate to a course development in which students would be familiar with the goals of the course, would have had the opportunity to practice the skills the process outlines, and are prepared to engage in a debate.  By that time students know that they are to formulate positions regarding political, economic, and/or social conditions that pose a political challenge to an association, which is a collective exhibiting federalist mode of operation.  Hopefully, and it will be assumed, that they are able to participate in a somewhat formal debate.

In terms of the total course, this development is to advance by students, at the beginning of the course, engaging in discussions.  This is followed by students participating in arguments or the development of arguments.  In the final phase, students compete in, to some degree, formal debates. 

This development is one that has students, during the arguing stage, choose between offered opinions, usually between two polar-opposite opinions that address a chosen topic.  The goal in this initial phase would be to have students identify and defend supportive data – factual information.

In the second phase, students argue a position that should be more specific than one in which they espouse by expressing a broader opinion.  This is of course, to a great degree, determined by the questions asked by the teacher.  The general aim should be to ask questions that get students to be more concrete and policy directed:  should the government do X or Y or, as the students become more sophisticated, Z or be able to choose from even more options.  In terms of foreign trade, an example would be:  should the US manipulate the value of its currency to help its balance of trade with other countries?

In the final phase, the one that would align with the final unit, students take on the responsibility to conceptualize the issue area into subtopics and policy considerations.  This is more complex and a teacher should exercise judgement as to what his/her students are prepared to do as the course evolves over the term(s).  In all of this, the process is organized by what constitutes a logical argument.

The next posting will address what makes up a sound argument and introduce the notion that this process is based on what is believed to be the elements of effective debating strategies.  For this purpose, that posting will rely on the work of Stephen E. Toulmin.