In the upcoming postings, this blog will describe
and explain the mental construct, liberated federalism. It will do so from the perspective of an
advocate – which happens to be true in the case of this blogger. The last posting gave a hint as to how this
reporting will be organized by sharing the main categorical divisions the text
will employ to present this judgment of the construct; that is, the
commonplaces of curriculum offered by Joseph Schwab and reported by William Schubert.[1] They are subject matter, learner, teacher, and
milieu.
Each
of these divisional categories will be introduced and generally explained and
then further divided into subcategories.
In the case of subject matter, the subcategories are assumptions
regarding decision-making, the discipline of political science, elements of a
liberated federalist model, viability of the liberated federalism construct,
and applied methodology.
The
category, student, will be divided into the following subcategories: personal student interests, social student
interests, economic student interests, and pedagogic student interests. The category, teacher, will be divided into
the subcategories, teacher receptiveness and factors of receptiveness. And the category, milieu, will be divided
into subcategories, expectations of schools, schools’ socio-economic base, and
youth culture.
Each
of these subcategories is identified from the process of applying, through
analysis, Aristotle’s categories of causation as also suggested by Schwab.[2] Throughout these organizational divisions,
Aristotle’s categories of causation will be used to engender specific questions
of inquiry. They include the state of
affairs, interactions, situational insights, and the capacity to act morally.
Each
of these can be described as follows:
·
The state of affairs
refers to the actual conditions found at school sites as opposed to abstracted
or hypothesized relationships between or among factors or variables. Of particular concern will be dilemmas caused
by adherence to one construct as opposed to any other. Here, a “picture” of sorts will be presented
– at least that is the aim.
·
Interactions refers to
social encounters affected by respective constructs – in this case liberated
federalism.
·
Situational insights
are interpretations of encounters gleaned from analysis(es) of practice.
·
Capacity to act
morally will be assessments of practices as judged according to good
citizenship and social capital as defined by liberated federalism.
These categories will be used freely to suggest
questions for the analysis of the purposes this review highlights.
And
by way of further introducing this construct – in using everyday language – the
following summary is offered. Whereas
natural rights – the prevailing construct in America today – with the emphasis being
on individually defined liberty (“I do what I want to do”) – and critical
theory, the most vibrant challenge to natural rights – with the emphasis being
on righting the wrongs befalling the perceived oppressed classes of people –
liberated federalism focuses on the general welfare of society through the
engagement of its citizens.
In
doing so, various aspects of governance and politics will be highlighted. They include local political action, dignity
of the individual, duties and responsibilities of individual citizens, and communal
potential assets that need to be discovered, enhanced, and encouraged. Hopefully, readers will find this line of
thought to be legitimate and potentially a positive force. Surely, the belief here is that it should be
seriously considered as a guide to how the nation approaches civics education.
No comments:
Post a Comment