Tuesday, March 19, 2024

A PRACTICAL TURN

 

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