To date, this blog has promoted the adoption of
a civics curriculum based on the construct, federation theory. That theory calls for citizens to take on a
sense or understanding that they are federated to each other – a partnership. That entails respect for each other’s rights
but also the expectation that each has duties and obligations in assuring that the
good health of the partnership is advanced.
This blog has argued that this sense was
dominant from the beginning of the nation to the years after World War II. Since then, another construct has become
dominant, that being the natural rights view that promotes a more individualist
view. And central to that mindset seems
to be monetary advancement. As Barbara McQuade
points out: “… American lust for wealth
has led us to a national culture … that is more about extracting profits than
about bettering humankind or the planet.”[1]
To
return to that earlier federalist mindset, albeit under a different version
(from a parochial/traditional form to a liberated federalism form) some serious
transformation would have to take place – some might consider it impossible. Even this blogger wrote a book concerning the
obstacles facing such a move.[2] This post addresses a more reserved midway
step that could be helpful in accomplishing such an extensive change.
And that would be the introduction of a more consumer-based
view of civics instruction. In other words, using a practical view might be an
initial step to a more profound theoretical turn, one that eventually would be
more communal in its orientation. Paradoxical
to a point, but usually, consumerist thinking tends to be more local in nature
and interactive in behavior.
Existing
curricular content on the study of government does not adequately address the
practical nature of the relationship between individual citizens and
government. Most government courses are
primarily concerned with having students recall the structure of government: federal, state, local (with little attention
to the last two on this list). Usually,
the problems discussed and studied are:
a)
Structural problems, such as, should
presidential primaries be conducted on the same day? Or
b)
Problems involving the democratization of
American society or laws. An example
would be: should the state support
religious instruction in public schools?
Missing are concerns involving the practical
day-to-day governmental services.
Because government is the sole source of
legitimate coercive force, any interaction with it can range from the mundane
to situations with very tragic consequences.
For all students, but particularly those who will take on a trade job in
the future – and likely no college experience – a lack of well–rounded social
science instruction with its sobering content on the realities of power can be
seriously detrimental.
In
general, civics education has been judged deficient. The NEA found only 25 percent of students
taking part in a NAEP Assessment,[3]
were “proficient,” and most of them are from wealthy families, more likely to receive
that higher level instruction in college.
To further verify this need, some years ago the following question was
asked of a group of twelfth grade American government teachers:
Does
the regular American course you teach adequately instruct your non-college
bound about his/her normal, expected involvements with government offices
agencies (federal, state, local)? Answer
yes or no and comment please.
The overwhelming response was “No.”
To quote one teacher, “The County Curriculum
and books are available and geared to the ‘average’ student, with emphasis on
the structure of government.” This sort
of questioning of teachers and students should be regularly included to see how
“practical” civics instruction is perceived by both teachers and students.
This blogger, in his teaching days, was given
guidance from the district office about goals for civics courses. At the introductory level, these goals included
understanding the structure and function of government, understanding the
processes by which power is exercised, and understanding the relationship
between majority rule and individual rights.
Reference to solving individual governmental problems seems to be
missing.
This blog has a bit more to share given this
topic and will dedicate a number of upcoming postings to doing so.
[1] Barbara McQuade, Attack from Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America
(New York, NY: Seven Stories Press,
2024), 170.
[2] Robert Gutierrez, From Immaturity to Polarized
Politics: Obstacles in Achieving a
Federated Nation (Tallahassee, FL:
Gravitas Civics Books, 2022).
Available through Amazon and other booksellers.
[3] Amanda Litvinov, “Forgotten Purpose: Civics Education in Public Schools,” NEA
Today, March 16, 2017, accessed March 16, 2024, https://www.nea.org/nea-today/all-news-articles/forgotten-purpose-civics-education-public-schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment