CONSUMER GOVERNMENT SUBJECT MATTER

If one suggests that the approach to civics education should go through transformative change, one would justifiably be concerned of how smoothly that transition would occur.  This blog has argued that such a change is called for and that more specifically the change should be from what is, an approach theoretically guided by a natural rights point of view (a highly individualistic view) to one guided by a federalist view (a communal view). 

The former argues people can do what they want if they do not interfere with others having the same right.  The latter promotes a sense of partnership among citizens with rights, but also with duties and obligations one attaches to partnership.  The former is dominant today in American culture.  The latter, in a more traditional form, was dominant up until the years after Worle War II.

Of late, this blog suggests that one step that could facilitate such a change is to take on a more modest approach.  That is teaching civics in such a way that sustains many of the natural rights assumptions but shifts the attention of students from the national stage of governance and politics – where it is now – to a more local focus.  That is where a felt community exists.

To achieve such a modest change, this blog suggests a consumer government course of study.  Two postings ago, this blog suggested a set of aims for such a course.[1]  The last posting, “Consumer Government Course Structure” (March 29, 2024), sets out two main structural elements for a consumer government course:  the one instructing students as to the basic structure of government, and the other a set of consumer government problems or issues.  The bulk of the course would be taken up by the latter element.  In terms of this element, that posting stated:

 

At each environmental level [such as the community], the question can be asked:  when dealing at this level, what personal relationships or relations with social institutions (family, education, economy, social class, or government) generate the necessity or the motivation to deal with government?  This process produces, in typical lives, a list of problem areas (e.g., taxes, marital responsibilities, parental issues, income concerns, etc.).

 

To continue in this vein, each issue or problem area (which progresses from local settings to regional, national, and international ones), serves as the main lesson topics of the subject matter.  The suggested list offered below is not an exhaustive one but which, given time and resources, provides in its study adequate student exposure to the varied levels and services of government.

The environmental levels and examples of corresponding problems areas are:

 

1.     Self-home environment – a. marriage; b. child rearing; c. consumer concerns; d. household maintenance; e. health/disease issues.

2.     Neighborhood environment – a. homeowner associations; b. neighbor antagonism and/or complaints; c. school concerns; d. police protection.

3.     Town/city environment – a. employment; b. running a business; c. recreation facilities or needs.

4.     County environment – a. transportation; b. research needs (e.g., water quality); c. suing or being sued.

5.     State environment – a. higher education; b. joining an interest group.

6.     National environment – a. dealing with national corporations; b. consumer protection issues; c. federal safeguards (e.g., regarding airline travel).

7.     International environment – a. traveling abroad issues; b. smuggling; c. political dangers to foreign nations, d. drug trafficking.

 

Perhaps readers can add to this suggested listing.  Since this listing is not all-inclusive, it should be reviewed and updated periodically.  Individual teachers might find it useful to change some items to better meet their local needs.  Of course, any such changes need to meet school standards and secure administrative approval.

          As suggested earlier in this blog, such instruction would be assisted by opting for an instructional strategy where students engage in problem-solving processes and such lessons can be organized by a decision-making model.  The literature is full of such models, this posting will utilize one of the older ones offered by Fred M. Newman and Donald W. Oliver.[2]

          This model deals with case studies in which individuals or groups are presented with moral dilemma situations.  Students are basically called on to express their opinions on what should be done in these situations.  In the process, students must deal with the following questions:

 

1.     Which policies should be adopted or devised – value questions?

2.     Which facts are pertinent – factor questions?

3.     Which concepts best organize one’s concerns – definitional distinctions?

4.     Which theories or models best describe or explain the factors involved – abstracted insights?

 

These questions are derived from relevant disciplinary content or perspectives (such as ethical-legal, political, sociological-anthropological, psychological, historical, economics) and students go about answering them to make rational, informed decisions as to what should be done in each problem situation.

          So, how does this approach look like when implemented at school?  The next posting will describe how this general strategy might unfold in the classroom.  Hopefully, readers who might find value in these strategy points will find the upcoming, potential flow of classroom activities as potential lesson plan ideas to implement the Newman and Oliver strategy.

---

[1] Two postings past, “Aims for Consumer Government Course” (March 26, 2024), suggested a list of aims for such a course.  They are:

1.     To prepare students for normal, social adult life.

2.     To prepare students to identify, protect, and advance their legitimate self-interests.

3.     To prepare students to recognize their social and legal responsibilities.

4.     By the end of their formal education, to develop:

a.      Cognitive skill knowledge that allows them to interact with government agencies in such a way as to generally protect and/or advance their self-interests,

b.     Cognitive skills that allow them to interact in a rational fashion,

c.      Cognitive knowledge of the responsibilities society legitimately expects them to meet, and

d.     Willingness to engage in public discussion that relates to the issues inherent with controversial decision areas where government-citizen interactions are concerned, and moral values are considered.

 

[2] Fred M. Newman and Donald W. Oliver, Clarifying Public Controversy:  An Approach to Teaching Social Studies (Boston, MA:  Little, Brown and Company, 1970).