The last posting of this blog introduced the
question: how receptive would the teacher
corps be toward implementing an approach to civics that relies on the
construct, liberated federalism? This
blog has dedicated itself to such an approach and has described and explained
it extensively. So, this posting will
not give an extensive description of that construct, but simply state that its
emphasis is on the fact that this nation’s polity was/is based, constitutionally,
on a federalist model.[1]
That model envisions its
citizens as partners in a compact-al agreement in which each is equal and enjoys
a liberty that recognizes a set of duties and obligations. A form of this view, as a political
disposition, prevailed in the US up to the years following World War II; this
blog calls that version of federalism, parochial/traditional federalism.
Since those years,
another view has been prominent; that being the natural rights one, and it sheds
federalism’s concerns for community and adopts a healthy level of
individualism. At its base, the natural
rights view holds as central that each person has the right to do what that
person wants to do short of depriving others of the same right. This, as this blog has attempted to argue,
has led to a polity which is shortsighted and prone to neglect serious social
conditions that have proven to be highly detrimental to the nation’s welfare.
This posting addresses
which factors affect the teacher corps’ receptiveness to the recommended
curricular change of adopting the liberated federalism view. There are formidable barriers. In the main is the strength in which natural
rights ideas, ideals, and assumptions are held.
Given that the natural rights view is prominent, what is being called
for is transformative. So, what one
should seek is to identify and address those factors that can be utilized to
overcome the barriers.
Again, this blog, in its
description and explanation of parochial federalism, identified the factors
that could be useful in this effort.
Those factors are equally valid in trying to implement the liberated
federalism perspective, if not more so.
One such factor is the average age of teachers.[2] Do they tend to be of an age where change is
resisted – an older age level – or are they young where change is more apt to
be at least considered if not adopted?
Here, the numbers are
somewhat neutral. According to the
National Center for Education Statistics, the following has been reported for
the US: average age of teachers is 42.4,
median age is 41.4, less than 30 is only 15% of the teacher corps, 30-49 is
56.9%, 50-54 is 11.6%, 55 or more is 16.5%.[3] These numbers can be compared to physicians
(53.2 average age)[4]
and lawyers (46 average age).[5]
Given the extra years of matriculation
that these other fields demand, the teacher corps seems to be in line with what
one would expect, but in terms of accepting transformational change, age can
prove to be an obstacle. Readers who are
in their mid-40s or older can ask of themselves: how apt are they to accept fundamental changes
about how they make a living?
This age level is
probably not so conducive to transformative change. Add to this general view, one can consider
what Richard Ingersoll, et al. found: “The U.S. teaching force is: larger;
older; less experienced; more female; more diverse, by race/ethnicity;
consistent in academic ability; unstable.”[6] Beyond the gender factor and diversity, this general
set of attributes is a source of concern and even their consistency can be
counterproductive given the transformative change sought for in this account.
In
relative terms, this state of affairs does indicate that a significant portion
of the teacher corps can still remember a time that was more communal even if
such recollection refers to references their parents would share. In addition, they have been exposed to levels
of self-centeredness that characterize natural rights thought and should be of
high concern for social studies teachers, especially civics teachers. And they are also apt to have a healthy
regard for individual rights, as the natural rights view portrays them.
The
liberated federalism construct could be advanced as one that is genuinely
concerned with both elements, individual rights and communal interests or
demands, as it addresses their stated concern, “development of character.”[7] For this reason, the liberated federalism
perspective’s moral dimension could be appealing to social studies teachers.
Teachers
should also be concerned with students being able to think critically and constructively
about society, although, as pointed out in the last posting, actual
observations of this sort of classroom activities taking place are lacking. Perhaps a set of materials that is conducive
to teacher concerns but set up to engage students in higher level of thinking
by design, might encourage these teachers to conduct lessons that are more
reflective.[8]
The
next posting will provide readers with more concrete suggested classroom
materials – another factor – that teachers could implement to further the above
aims that seem to be needed.
[1] More descriptively, 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. 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.
[2] Joseph M. Casciani, “Redirecting Resistance,” Aging
Well, 1, 4 (Fall 2008), accessed October 15, 2023, URL: https://www.todaysgeriatricmedicine.com/archive/101308p20.shtml#:~:text=Why%20are%20some%20older%20adults,way%20to%20manage%20unpleasant%20news.
[3] “National Teacher and Principle Survey,” National
Center for Education Statistics (2017-2018), accessed October 14, 2023, URL: https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ntps/tables/ntps1718_fltable02_t1s.asp.
[4] Patsy Newitt, “Physicians’ Average Age by Specialty,”
Becker’s ASC Review (March 11, 2022), accessed October 14, 2023,
URL: https://www.beckersasc.com/asc-news/physicians-average-age-by-specialty.html#:~:text=The%20average%20age%20of%20a,Cardiac%20surgery%3A%2058.
[5] “Lawyer Demographics and Statistics in the US,” Zippia
(n.d.), accessed October 14, 2023, URL: https://www.zippia.com/lawyer-jobs/demographics/.
[6] Richard Ingersoll, Elizabeth Merrill, Daniel Stucky,
Gregory Collins, and Brandon Harrison, “The Demographic Transformation of the
Teaching Force in the United States,” Education Science (2021), accessed
October 16, 2023, URL: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1297323.pdf.
[7] Margaret Stimmann Branson, “The Role of Civic Education,”
Center of Civic Education (September 1998), accessed October 17, 2023), URL: https://civiced.org/papers/articles_role.html#:~:text=The%20third%20essential%20component%20of,and%20improvement%20of%20constitutional%20democracy.
[8] For a sample of such instructional ideas, see this
blogger’s book, Robert Gutierrez, Toward a Federated Nation: Implementing National Civics Standards (Tallahassee,
FL: Gravitas/Civics Books, 2020). Available through Amazon and other
booksellers.
No comments:
Post a Comment