Gravitas: A Voice for Civics @gravitascivics - Tumblr Blog

EVALUATING A CONSUMER GOVERNMENT COURSE

In this posting, there is one more concern this blog addresses regarding a proposed approach to civics education. For interested readers, they are encouraged to look up the posting, “A Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024). It is there that one finds the beginning of this effort. It can be found through the citation here,[1] or, along with subsequent postings, by using the archive feature of this blog. In total, those postings provide a rationale for the course of study being proposed.

As for the remaining concern, i.e., what this posting addresses, that would be the evaluation of the course itself – curriculum evaluation. To evaluate this course of study several aspects are reviewed. This evaluation scheme categorizes those factors according to a procedural model of evaluation devised by Lawrence Halprin.[2] The model is entitled the RSVP Cycle and seems more appropriate here than usual curriculum models because what is needed is not the evaluation of a school wide curriculum, but of a course of study.

While dated, this model is still well regarded.[3] The letters R, S, V, P refer to the categories of concerns or criteria Halprin says are present in ideal procedural relationships during the performance of a multidisciplinary event. Because of the decision-making emphasis of this course, such a model promises to be useful and is open-ended to concerns of the environment in which this course of study would be utilized.

The categories are:

R = resources upon which a course can draw.

Does this course operate within and take advantage of physical limitations?

Does this course operate within financial constraints?

Does this course respect societal, institutional, cultural expectations?

S = sources evaluating preparation processes leading to implementation.

Are the roles of participants defined and sensitive to their needs and dispositions?

Are the curriculum goals and objectives accepted by significant others?

Are time allocations reasonable for completion of tasks?

Are communication preparations adequate for acquiring needed information?

V = valuaction (coined term) which analyzes the consequences of actions (decisions) taken.

Are all predicted outcomes accounted for in the progression of the course?

Are values incorporated at decision points clearly stated and understood?

Are the two above concerns given adequate priority in terms of their utility?

P = performance, that is evaluation of actual behaviors during the process.

Are specified behaviors appropriate to meet curricular and instructional objectives?

Are behaviors and processes efficient?

Are processes flexible enough to meet reasonable unplanned changes?

It is suggested here that if this course were to take on any level of implementation among schools, that, for each implementation, this model be considered to develop evaluative instrument specifically suitable to that implementation, both on a summative and formative basis. This process should be done by school site curricular administrators.

A couple of things should be kept in mind. One, this course is offered as a transition stage toward an approach that is communal, a course guided by a liberated federalism construct. And two, if this course, with administrative approval, is only being utilized by a particular teacher – not a school or school district –these ideas are suggested to assist that teacher. That is, they should not be considered a “must do” list of required criteria. And with that, the rationale for a consumer government course of study is complete.

[Note: Due to medical reasons, this blogger is ceasing the blog’s Tuesday-Friday posting schedule. He anticipates he will, from time to time, issue new postings. He also wishes to thank readers for their readership.]

[1] URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_03_17_archive.html.

[2] Lawrence Halprin, The RSVP Cycles: Creative Processes in the Human Environment (New York, NY: George Braziller, Inc., 1970).

[3] Interested? See URL, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbIi966lOLs.

#curriculum #course of study #evaluation #consumer government #civics education #social studies

INSTRUCTIONAL EVALUATION FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT

Again, this blog proceeds with its promotion of a consumer government approach to civics education. To date, this blog has addressed various concerns with such a change including commentary on the needs for the approach, needs of the subject matter, curricular goals and objectives, related teaching strategies, etc.

Interested readers who have not followed the proceeding postings, but wish to read them, are directed to the first one, “A Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024). It can be found through the citation here[1] or, along with subsequent postings, the archive feature of the blog. By reviewing them, readers can consider a multi-faceted rationale for this proposal.

This posting addresses instructional evaluation. Evaluation at the instructional level can utilize a variety of techniques. On a summative basis, evaluation should be criterion reference based. Competencies on the following concerns need to be spelled out:

Cognitive – knowledge (recall) of basic facts and procedures, application of inquiry skills (modeled after scientific method and other reputable research methodologies), logical deduction skills, and appropriate communication skills. And …

Affective – non-graded attitudes that relate to dispositions regarding citizen participation regarding governing issues.

A pre-test, that can use a multiple choice or open-ended format, need to be administered to determine:

Pre-requisite knowledge and skills attained (e.g., sixth grade reading and mathematics level proficiencies),

Knowledge of subject matter that instruction will address, and

Relevant value orientations students hold prior to instruction.

As with most courses of study, there would most likely be a final written examination. That test will provide evidence as to the success of instruction by comparing results with pre-test to identify measured change. By comparing results between pre- and post-testing, specific areas of deficiencies can be detected by conducting an item analysis.

On a formative basis, individual units could provide unit tests and quizzes, formulated from lesson objectives, and on student-project work products. Again, course objectives should guide these reviews. Informally, teachers can rely on classroom participation and on one-on-one discussions with students to acquire feedback information.

With those concerns reviewed, there remains only one topic this blogger wishes to address, that is, evaluation of this proposed course of study itself. The next posting will mark the end of this proposal by looking at curriculum evaluation, asking how one can determine how effective can a course on consumer government, as outlined in this blog, be.

[1] URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_03_17_archive.html.

#student evaluation #pre-testing #post-testing #formative evaluation #civics education #social studies

TEACHING STRATEGIES FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT

Picking up on a topic this blog has been addressing since the posting, “Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024),[1] this posting continues its promotion of a consumer government approach to civics education. To remind readers, the adoption of that approach is seen as an initial step toward a civics curriculum based on a liberated federalism construct which features a more local, interactive role for students with their government.

It would do this by encouraging a sense, among the citizenry, of a partnership in which each citizen has an emotional stake in advancing the common good – a tangible commitment. To make the case for this adoption, the ensuing postings chose as a pedagogic model, the jurisprudential model,[2] by which to develop decision-making, value clarifying lessons that could be designed for this consumer government course of study.

This choice was not meant to be mandatory, but as a responsible option to illustrate what could be done in developing suitable lesson plans to achieve the overall goals outlined earlier in this blog. This chosen model calls on students to make value judgments on controversial issues and this blog’s promotion opens its options to non-value conflict situations. Another variance is that what is being promoted, unlike the original model, opens instructional options beyond exclusively employing inquiry-based lessons.

Other lesson strategies can be employed especially if lessons do not address controversial topics. Finally, the option promoted here analyzes a variety of problem situations as they might be related to governmental actions and/or problems at different geographical levels or locations. Those levels, as described earlier, range from the immediate environment of students to the global settings, but at each level they can and do affect the local political environments of those students.

Strategies and materials to be successful, they must be particularly sensitive to the fact that a large portion of the students for which this approach would be used, would be from a non-college-bound population. Experience shows, by making the curriculum relevant, practical, and less abstract, these less academically motivated or disposed students will find resulting lessons as more useful.

To augment this attribute, strategies must maintain low abstraction content. Relations between inquiry activities, for example, and problem areas need to be presented in as natural a manner as possible. Readings should be short and lesson exercises limited in scope, but as the course progresses, a cumulative effect toward sophistication should be built in and encouraged among students.

And with those thoughts, this promotion has two more areas of concern – ideas regarding evaluation of instructional strategies and evaluation of the proposed curricular change. These two topics will be what the next two postings will address. Again, if readers, who have not done so, wish to read up on the totality of this rationale for consumer government, they can, using the archive feature of this blog, begin with the above cited posting, “A Practical Turn.”

[1] URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_03_17_archive.html.

[2] Fred M. Newman and Donald W. Oliver, Clarifying Public Controversy: An Approach to Teaching Social Studies (Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company, 1970). An earlier version can be found in Donald W. Oliver and James P. Shaver, Teaching Public Issues in the High School (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966).

#decision making #value clarification #local politics #local governance #lesson plans #civics education #social studies

INSTRUCTIONAL CONCERNS FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT

Since the posting, “A Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024),[1] this blog has been promoting the adoption of a consumer government approach to civics education. The aim of such a change would be to begin the focus of civics from a structural/national view to a more local/engaged view.

What is in place is a highly individualistic sense to politics and while the change would not counter that sense, it would help shift students’ attention to the concerns of their local communities. In doing so, civics would undermine the natural rights view and encourage students toward a federated view. Readers, if they have not done so, are encouraged to use the archive feature of this blog to review those postings. That would be the postings that develop a rational for this curricular change.

This posting will further comment on the goals and objectives the last posting, “Goals and Objectives for Consumer Government” (April 9, 2024),[2] presented. It begins by suggesting that school site planning of this proposed curricular change should strive to adopt a resulting course of study that highlights local problems or how statewide, national, or global problems affect local realities.

Such adaptation needs to be done carefully weighing the constraints of the classroom and relevancy of the materials adopted. Text materials need to be edited to reflect this newer approach (not a simple task), and they would provide a pre-determined set of governmental/political problems. While it is expected some of these identified problems will be applicable to local conditions throughout the US, others will not. Naturally, appropriate deletions, changes, and additions should be considered by implementing staff.

To further the “local” effect, where possible, an added goal to this curriculum at the instructional level would be to learn from real life situations or what are known as field experiences. That is, students are called upon, where appropriate, to actively participate in political activities relevant to a problem or issue under study. This instruction should be considered or planned as local needs and concerns dictate.

The lesson objectives as presented in the last posting might seem repetitive since one basic decision-making model is being employed. It should be kept in mind that what has been presented is an initial proposal, admittedly needing further development. Variety of learning objectives, though, is highly encouraged when planning the cognitive input segments. Depending on the nature of the individual problems considered, students will need reliable knowledge to make rational decisions based on actual conditions.

The lesson objectives should reflect the different types of knowledge presented. For example, it is strongly suggested that objectives emphasize the development of process skills associated with inquiry. Particularly in problems where there are controversial decisions to be made, then predictive assertions, anticipating the likelihood of consequences, can be investigated through student inquiry that aim at discovering cause and effect relationships.

These instructional objectives will target the teaching of transferable skills, make disciplinary information functional, and add to the overall open-endedness of real decision-making processes. And in lessons where controversial decisions are to be made, they further highlight the value component of the lesson. In that, the lesson plans should first develop affective domain objective – those objectives regarding students’ value positions.

And finally, cognitive material – those elements regarding factual content – will rely heavily on political science discipline but will not be exclusive to that source. Other social sciences and respected research sources should be employed for relevant, reliable information. This might be also useful in discrediting disinformation one can readily find on social media. All this suggests certain teaching strategies, which is the topic of the next posting.

[1] URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_03_17_archive.html.

[2] URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_04_07_archive.html.

#consumer government #local politics #inquiry #problem solving #decision making #civics education #social studies

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT

Usually in a presentation by curriculum developers of some new curricular strategy, they offer a short rationale for the new plans and then present a list of goals and objectives. Of late, this blog has been promoting a curricular change in American civics classrooms – a promotion that started with the posting, “A Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024).

That change targets the underlying mental construct that currently guides civics education. That construct is the natural rights view that focuses on the national electorate and the national government. Most of the lessons review the major structures, processes, and functions of the national government. The proposed change would be to a consumer government approach.

This shift would retain to some degree the individualistic view that the natural rights construct supports. But it would have students’ focus be aimed at local political realities and, therefore, draw their attention to their communities where most consumer issues are centered, at least as they are experienced by most citizens.

In other words, this change is seen as a midway step toward a more communal approach that would be provided by the adoption of the liberated federalist construct. All these terms have been defined in previous postings, but for the purposes here it suffices to know that the natural rights view is individualistic, the federalist view is significantly communal, and consumer government is concerned with citizens, either individually or in groups, seeking services from government.

Since this blog’s presentation is not formally stating a curricular change at some school district or state education department, the goal has been to just introduce this suggested change to a general audience. As such, what has been described to this point has been more of an introduction to certain curricular ideas. Therefore, this informal approach seems more useful for this blog’s purposes. But it is time to set out a list of goals and objectives.

Here they are, curricular goals and objectives for a consumer government curriculum.

Curriculum goals:

Understand the major structural, procedural, and functional features of the federal, state, and local governments.

Responsibly and rationally propose solutions to a series of individual and/or group political problems or issues. Each of these problems or issues features a government role and the interests of individuals and/or groups. They emanate from the following environments: self/home, neighborhood, city/town, county, state, nation, international.

Appreciate the functional role of academic disciplines – in terms of their findings and research protocols – play in solving related governmental challenges.

Define self-interest in problem/issue situations involving governmental agencies.

And for each goal, the following objectives:

Goal 1 –

Comprehend the major structures, processes, and functions of the federal, state, and local governments.

List the major components of the federal, state, and local governments.

List the functions of selected components of the federal, state, and local governments.

Give examples of how the major components of the federal, state, and local governments interact.

Describe the major problem issues currently being addressed by the chief components of the federal, state, and local governments.

Goal 2 –

Be able to solve responsibly and rationally a series of individual or group problems involving governments emanating from a variety of environments.

Define problem/issues situations according to the following concerns: a. Does the situation affect the interests of oneself or of significant others (e.g., a family member)? b. Does the solution of the problem/issue involve the application of an established process entailing no or few options or does it demand investigation, valuing, and choosing from alternatives?

Define chief political and ethical concepts involved with problem/issue situations.

Describe factual information involved with problem/issue situations.

Investigate, using mostly disciplinary content and methods, the problem/issue situation to attain relevant information.

Formulate a course of action aimed at reasonably and ethically solving the problem/issue under study.

Goal 3 –

Appreciate the functional role that academic discipline methods or other responsible research methods and content play in solving problems/issues involving governments.

Accept readily the role of disciplines and of other responsible research protocols’ content and methods.

Verbalize the need for disciplinary and other responsible research protocols in terms of their content and methodologies in decision-making efforts as they deal with people’s interaction(s) with government.

Voluntarily utilize disciplinary and other responsible research protocols’ content and methods in performing unit of study activities.

Goal 4 –

Define self-interest in problem/issue situations involving governmental agencies.

Logically deduce from stated life goals appropriate defensible values as they relate to problem/issue situations under study.

Analyze problem/issue situations and identify the involved self-interests they entail.

Formulate strategies that are conducive to stated values and self-interest claims and logically address the problem/issue situation under study.

Evaluate previous relevant value positions according to new problem/issue situations and information discovered by conducted research.

Of course, all of these ideas – including the above goals and objectives – reflect a planning process that is still very much in need of further thought and development, and the next posting will comment on that need.

#civics goals #civics objectives #natural rights construct #liberated federalism #consumer government #civics education #social studies

A UNIT OF STUDY FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT

For readers who do not read this blog regularly, it is currently promoting a change in civics education. It argues that today that subject is guided by a mental construct, the natural rights view, which holds that individuals have the right to do what they want as long as they respect others having the same right. This is a highly individualistic view.

This should change to the adoption of another construct, that being liberated federalism which is a significant communal view. That is a view in which citizens see each other as partners under a compact, the US Constitution (at the state level, the state constitution). But reality being what it is, this change might be too transformative. So, this blog has suggested, as a midway step, to first change to a consumer government approach which has students engage in problem-solving strategies where they address political problems from a local focus.

The last posting identified that such lessons can be organized by a decision-making model. The literature is full of such models, but this posting will utilize one of the older ones offered by Fred M. Newman and Donald W. Oliver.[1] That posting introduced the approach with the following:

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:

Which policies should be adopted or devised – value questions?

Which facts are pertinent – factor questions?

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

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.

That posting indicated that this posting would outline a classroom strategy that would give readers a more concrete sense of what is being suggested.

This presentation is offered as a list of steps a teacher could follow. The list is not presented as an ironclad strategy, the objective is merely to give readers a sense of how the Newman and Oliver model could be used. With that in mind, here are the steps:

A unit of study begins with students presented with a situation in which a need for governmental action would be reasonably determined by an individual or group. A la Newman and Oliver, the situation should have a moral concern.

Depending on the environmental level (e.g., neighborhood level or state), students are asked: does the situation present conflict-of-interest between or among factions (either individuals and/or groups within and/or outside government)?

If yes, students are asked to consider appropriate policy-value questions and are given time to answer or research them and formulate their responses.

If no or after students are given enough time to accomplish #3, students define key concepts associated with the problem situation.

Then students are asked: does the case under study demand a simple or complex process to derive a preferred course of action?

If simple, the teacher instructs students as to what that course of action would be. These are usually well-established process protocols.

If complex, students engage in one of a variety of information gathering and analyzing activities which are geared to answering: What governmental agencies and or individuals are involved? What are the likely actions/inactions of these individuals/agencies? When applicable, what moral values are at stake in the situation? What reasonable alternative courses of action exist for those involved? What are the reasonable consequences of these alternatives? And what is the likelihood of each consequence happening or occurring?

And, whether simple or complex, the unit ends with students formulating a preferred course of action and rationale to justify it.

Of course, this basic plan can be augmented; for example, where appropriate, it can have students actively implementing any course of action they design by the above process.

If limited to the above steps, an extra point should be made. Step #7, when used, would take up the bulk of a unit’s time. In that time, students would be led to see the problem situation from the perspective of different disciplines. With that line of thought, a teacher can ask and determine: how are the needs of the subject matter functionally addressed? That is, how can information be used in solving the problem situation?

All of this suggests various curriculum goals and objectives. These will be addressed in the next posting.

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

#consumer government #rational decision making #moral education #classroom strategy #civics education #social studies

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:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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]

Which policies should be adopted or devised – value questions?

Which facts are pertinent – factor questions?

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

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

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:

To prepare students for normal, social adult life.

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

To prepare students to recognize their social and legal responsibilities.

By the end of their formal education, to develop:

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,

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

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

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).

#community #consumer government #political environments #problem solving #rational decision making #civics education #social studies

CONSUMER GOVERNMENT COURSE STRUCTURE

This blog, in a series of postings, continues describing and justifying the adoption of a consumer government approach to secondary civics courses.[1] It is proposed as a mid-way step from the structural/national perspective that those courses currently feature to a federalist approach this blog promotes. That latter approach most generally sees the aim of civics education to encourage a sense of US citizenry as being a partnership where each citizen enjoys rights (as defined by the federalist construct) but has duties and obligations that true partners would respect.

This proposed course, due to its emphasis on student needs, must define its own structure of the subject matter. In that vein, it has students dealing with problem situations which allows students to develop appropriate skills and knowledge reflected in the course’s aims. To develop such a course, one must have students engage in enough problem situations of varied types and have them deal with different levels of government – though such a course would centrally situate the role of local government. But in the end, the course needs to be sufficiently comprehensive.

The problem of conceptualizing such a varied subject matter and yet presenting a subject adequately cohesively is that it moves curriculum planning into two different directions. Here is this blogger’s thought regarding this diversion; this proposed course is conceptualized in the following manner:

The first concern is to introduce the student to a brief overview of the structure of government at the federal, state, and local levels. This course of study will provide a foundation of what government is. As opposed to the typical government course, though, this presentation only conveys major functions and processes of the prominent governmental structures.

Second, the course then proceeds to take the individual students through a series of problem areas beginning with the self/home environment and working up to the international stage. These environments are the settings in which government-related problems manifest themselves.

With these settings accounted for one identifies, in general terms, the landscapes the course addresses.

At each environmental level, 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.). This list, in turn, serves as the main lesson topics of the subject matter and with that, one has what the next posting will address.

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

To prepare students for normal, social adult life.

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

To prepare students to recognize their social and legal responsibilities.

By the end of their formal education, to develop:

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,

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

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

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.

#consumer government #course structure #civics education #social studies

AIMS FOR CONSUMER GOVERNMENT COURSE

The effort to shift the focus of secondary government courses from where it is now – on national political factors and the major structure and processes of the national government – to a consumer orientation – how individuals identify, seek, and secure governmental services – is more involved than one might suspect. One area of responsibility and in which individuals have a right to seek satisfaction is in them advancing their interests when interacting with their government.

Therefore, before those individuals finish their formal education, a course of study should be dedicated to how and why they can be functional and responsible regarding how they interact with what would probably be their local government. And unlike other dealings, interactions with government have added elements to which citizens should be aware.

That is, that instruction assumes that one, interaction with government calls for reflective decision-making (not reflexive responses), and two, citizens engage in public decision-making not private ones. Individuals, once dealing with government and the public domain, are subject to public scrutiny, at least in terms of the reasoning they bring to bear in their dealings. Surely, most such interactions stay below the radar, but the possibility to solicit public interest is always there.

There are times when individuals interact with government and the matter is fairly straight forward. All that individuals need to know is the process by which to successfully conclude the interaction. At other times though, individuals are faced with moral decisions. That is, they must decide to engage in cases in which their self-interests or the interests of loved ones are involved, and some moral or ethical element is engaged.

In the first case, the straightforward ones, a cognitive deficiency might exist (lack of knowledge). A consumer government course would be geared to remedy this deficiency to a meaningful degree. Naturally, it would provide the appropriate information or share the appropriate sources where that information can be found. In the second case, the moral ones, individuals need to apply rational, public decision-making skills. This course can be organized and committed to teaching a rational decision-making process.[1]

From what this blog has shared concerning the offering of a consumer government course – a sharing that started with the posting, “A Practical Turn” (March 19, 2024) – this course of study could strive to achieve the following relevant educational aims:

To prepare students for normal, social adult life.

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

To prepare students to recognize their social and legal responsibilities.

And at a more specific level:

By the end of their formal education, to develop:

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,

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

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

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.

And with those aims this posting comes to an end and suggests that to come in upcoming postings are instructional ideas that can be utilized in achieving these aims.

[1] There are various rational decision-making models that are designed for classroom use. See for example, “Jack Woerner and Jennifer Lombardo, “Rational Decision-Making Model: Overview, Steps, and Examples,” Study.com, November 21,2023, accessed March 23, 2024, URL: https://study.com/academy/lesson/the-rational-decision-making-model-steps-and-purpose-in-organizations.html#:~:text=The%20model%20involves%20comparing%20multiple,or%20other%20significant%20life%20events.

#consumer government course #legitimate political interests #rational decision-making #public domain #civics education #social studies

INITIAL PRACTICAL ABILITIES

The proper role of education in the US, including that of public schools, is to prepare young ones to be functioning adults in a democracy.[1] More specifically, in order to fulfill the democratic requisite to provide equal opportunity, an individual has a right to a public education and the preparation that education provides.

A secondary responsibility of the educational system is directed at society: that is to develop citizens who are responsible in their duties as prescribed by law and to some extent by customs. And to do this, certain goals need to be identified and achieved. That is, in order to be functional and responsible, adults should:

know certain knowledge (for example, how local government functions within the nation’s federal system),

be able to reflectively process certain information (for example, figure out how local government agents rank in power allocations),

be able to form conclusions and evaluations (for example, judge how effective the acts of various agents are in relation to citizen’s desires or needs) and,

at least, be willing to engage in rational thought and discussion among themselves and with others (for example, in discussion, treat opposing arguments reasonably and objectively).

But as with most social concerns, when addressing these fundamental requirements, one deals with certain complexities.

For example, the educational school system must avoid indoctrinating value positions even if one is addressing basic functions. But this is not as straight forward as it might seem initially. Just promoting the notion that students make up their own minds over social issues, assuming choices are within legal limits, is a fine notion but oversimplified.

Why? Because that view, if held in an uncompromising way, promotes a holistic view about how one sees the way societies should be governed and what economic system they should sustain. That would be a liberal – as in classical liberalism – capitalist nation and with that, it entails a lot of policy biases – e.g., biases against welfare-based policy choices. In short, no approach to civics education is totally value free and commits some level of indoctrination.

So, to be functional or responsible about content choices does not prohibit the acceptance of a list of preordained values no matter how pro or anti-individual rights they may sound. The only exception is the value of being rational on which modern life is dependent. All this is pointed out to further couch the suggestion that the last posting proposed, i.e., the adoption of a consumer government approach to secondary civics and American government courses.

This change would have as its aim to shift attention from the structure of government and a national focus – where current civics instruction lies – to how individuals’ roles and duties can and should function in more local environments. This is seen as a midway step to adopting a civics curriculum based on a liberated federalism construct.[2] While this suggested approach can be described as eclectic, this blog will emphasize its progressive qualities.

Mostly, its progressive quality would be reflected in how the suggested approach addresses student interests, but this is geared toward having students seeking satisfaction in their communities, towns, and cities. This would naturally lead toward interacting with local fellow citizens, their neighbors, in dealing with governmental issues and problems.

On a practical basis, this more local emphasis shifts most students’ attention from book information to community information. A shift in concern is also anticipated from a third-person perspective to a first-person perspective as more attention to local and personnel conditions is more likely to be achieved. Assuming the reader agrees that these changes are preferable, this blog will continue presenting this proposal in its next post.

[1] For example, see Brett Grell, “Public Education: Definition, Purpose, & Importance, Study.com, November 21, 2023, accessed March 20, 2024, URL: https://study.com/academy/lesson/what-is-the-purpose-of-public-education.html#:~:text=The%20original%20purpose%20of%20public,These%20goals%20continue%20today.

[2] This blog has dedicated a good deal of text to describing and explaining this view of governance and politics. For the purposes of this posting, the reader should understand that the view promotes a partnership sense of citizenship in which all citizens are in it together to advance the betterment of the commonwealth. At the same time, it provides a strong defense of individual rights but not as a radical element, i.e., it recognizes that individuals have duties and responsibilities toward the nation.

#role of schools #role of public schools #promotion of values in school #consumer government #civics education #social studies

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:

Structural problems, such as, should presidential primaries be conducted on the same day? Or

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.

#consumer issues #government courses #civics education #social studies

CHECK THE PERCEPTUAL EXTREME

To carry on with the series of postings, this blog has been presenting a view that argues civics education, and social studies in general, should focus on the local communities of students. In that effort, this posting presents a taxonomy useful in developing a curriculum aimed at instituting such a change.

The general idea has been that extreme levels of individualism and self-centeredness have encouraged a high degree of deviant behavior. Students dealing with local issues and residents are judged to shift students’ concerns from themselves to others. This is particularly true if opportunities to interact with neighbors or other community members, face-to-face, are possible.

The last posting introduced Stephen Toulmin’s argument model – one that presents a conclusion and the logical elements one should provide to make a case for that conclusion.[1] That presentation is judged to be useful in forming a taxonomy, presented below, that would, in turn, assist educators devising an appropriate curriculum that would focus on local issues and problems.

This blogger has tentatively devised this taxonomy based on Toulmin’s model. Basically, Toulmin expands the syllogistic model of logic and demands that arguments be based on externally verifiable “warrant” statements which are really generalizations or laws. Summarily, the presented taxonomy begins with various attributes.

These attributes include skills dealing with conceptualizing and dealing with variables, a set of skills that has the students devise generalizations, and use them in identifying, evaluating, and formulating defensible arguments. While presented as a process, these attributes should more appropriately be seen as individual elements that can be utilized as needed.

This blogger believes that a communal, problem-solving curriculum will both place students in the social setting where they begin to define meaning beyond individual concerns – be they materialist or otherwise – and help empower them with the proper skills and the acquisition of functional substantive knowledge to help them in the modern global economy. It will also help students grasp the function and meaning of societal norms that check deviant behavior.

How? As students deal with social institutions in local settings, they can begin to appreciate, implicitly, the necessity for social order and that personal success is based on organizational opportunities. And to further accomplish a proper socialization of social norms, education should do away with the simplistic notions of perceptual psychology (which has become the dominant construct guiding educators[2]).

While this blogger does not dispute the needs identified by perceptual psychology advocates, these should be couched in more encompassing theories of behavior. The message that one need only perceive a goal and believe one can accomplish it and, further, will then transform the individual to assume all the sacrifice necessary for success, is absurd. Notions that students can learn only in “democratic” classrooms (where they determine what is studied) or where they can learn to think and behave democratically, is equally without basis.

Proactively involving students with respected members of local communities, working under the democratic rubric of the nation’s society, with its opportunities and constraints, can be sufficient to achieve the “democratic” goals. That includes such objectives as students appreciating that there are occasions to become involved and that they can express their preferences when it comes time to decide on policy.

This is different from a perceptual view that has defined democracy as exclusively being a system established to protect individual rights. Actually, this does not agree with the definition of many constitutional scholars. They see democracy exclusively based on a more communally founded system that allows collective action based on majority rule.[3]

But this is not the fault of the perceptual advocates alone. A supportive tradition has long been entrenched. Modern developments have made the intrinsic, dysfunctional nature of that tradition evident and acute. All institutions will have to address the challenges that excessive individualism poses to American institutions. The educational institution, including its curriculum workers, are not immune. And with this inclusionary observation, this series of postings comes to an end.

[1] See Stephen Toulmin, The Uses of Argument (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1958). A logical argument contains:

a datum statement (e.g., since Daniel is a union laborer),

a claim (e.g., therefore, Daniel is a registered Democratic voter),

a warrant statement (e.g., because organized labor has a strong partisan allegiance for the Democratic Party),

a backing or data statement (e.g., because union workers vote Democratic at a 51% rate as voter choices are documented by studies such as that offered by research outfits such as PRO Morning Consult),

a qualifier (e.g., unless Daniel is among 23% who vote Republican or otherwise), and

a rebuttal, (e.g., Daniel is not a union laborer or even human – perhaps a dog)

[2] See the posting “The Perceptual Angle,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 23, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_02_18_archive.html.

[3] See for example Helene Landemore, “Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence, and the Rule of the Many,” Yale University/Department of Political Science, 2024, accessed March 13, 2024, URL: https://politicalscience.yale.edu/publications/democratic-reason-politics-collective-intelligence-and-rule-many.

#individualism #self-centeredness #community #local politics #logical argumentation #civics education #social studies

GETTING TO THE ABSTRACT

To this point, this blog, through a series of postings,[1] has developed an argument that promotes a basic change to social studies, particularly civics. That is, that that portion of a school curriculum should focus its efforts on the social realities of students’ local communities. This would counter the ever-increasing levels of individualism and self-centeredness that have affected the nation and led to a good deal of dysfunctional elements within the American society such as polarized politics.

The last posting, “Localize It,”[2] indicated that this posting would, as an example, describe a construct, nativist theories, offered by Jerome Bruner. Those theories state that the mind “is inherently or innately shaped by a set of underlying categories, hypotheses, forms of organizing experiences.”[3]

In other words, instruction should not be so concerned, as pedagogues have encouraged classroom teachers to be, with teaching inductive skills, such as with inquiry models of instruction based on the scientific method. One should recognize that the mind already operates in such a fashion as to approximate that process. What is needed are experiences that further the student to feel and appreciate the function of disciplinary knowledge. This idea is original with John Dewey in his promotion of “occupations” for elementary students.[4]

More specifically, community-based activities and skills at the secondary level can act as a continuance of Dewey’s aim and as a bridge from the elementary school efforts to the goals of higher education and adult communal life. The ultimate aim is for students to more centrally view their local environs as the natural setting where political realities come to bear on their welfare and that of their neighbors.

Cognitive processes used for pedagogical purposes should not be limited by scientific logic and concern. To advance the social action skills (introduced in the last posting) and the communal agenda described above, relevant cognitive skills should be based on a continuum because different students act on different levels of abstraction when it comes to schoolwork or life in general.

It is believed by this blogger, based on his years of teaching and as a parent, that children operate at all levels of abstraction even at the earliest grades.[5] The problem lies in applying abstract thinking to sophisticated and to some degree foreign cognitive substance or content. A continuum is needed by teachers to devise activities that are both suitable for their students and functional for handling the issues, problems, or other situations a teacher chooses to study.

One such continuum is suggested by an argumentation model, offered by Stephen Toulmin.[6] To see a summary account of Toulmin’s model, see this blogger book, Toward a Federated Nation, in its subsection, “Toulmin’s Elements of a Logical Argument.”[7] But for those not so disposed, here is a thumbnail summary. A logical argument contains:

a datum statement (e.g., since Daniel is a union laborer),

a claim (e.g., therefore, Daniel is a registered Democratic voter),

a warrant statement (e.g., because organized labor has a strong partisan allegiance for the Democratic Party),

a backing or data statement (e.g., union workers vote Democratic at a 51% rate as voter choices are documented by studies such as that offered by research outfits such as PRO Morning Consult),

a qualifier (e.g., unless Daniel is among 23% who vote Republican or otherwise), and

a rebuttal, (e.g., Daniel is not a union laborer or even human – perhaps a dog)

The distinction here, simplistic but illustrative, between these elements and the inductive, scientific processes that were prominent among progressive educators, is that generalization formation – such as a scientific finding – is not the end or goal. The end is to have students generate knowledge useful in solving issues or problems and dealing with community sources.

If devised and used correctly, such a continuum or taxonomy can assist students in overcoming their apparent inability or reluctance to think abstractly. The purpose is to have students deal with it at an appropriate level. Then the lesson allows the students to work toward resolution in their natural fashion of problem-solving. The next posting will review a taxonomy this blogger has devised using Toulmin’s model to further illustrate what this blog is promoting.

[1] This series of postings begins with the posting, “Early On.” See Robert Gutierrez, “Early On,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 13, 2024, accessed March 10, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_02_11_archive.html.

[2] Robert Gutierrez, “Localize It,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, March 8, 2024, accessed March 10, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_03_03_archive.html.

[3] Jerome Bruner, “Models of the Learner,” Educational Researcher, June/July 1985, 5-8, 6.

[4] Herbert M. Kliebard, The Struggle for the American Curriculum: 1893-1958 (New York, NY: Routledge, 1986).

[5] For example, a form or type of abstract thinking is hypothesizing. See “Hypothesizing: How Toddlers Use Scientific Thinking to Learn,” Baby Sparks/Cognitive, June 9, 2020, accessed March 9, 2024, URL: https://babysparks.com/2020/06/09/hypothesizing-how-toddlers-use-scientific-thinking-to-learn/.

[6] Stephen Toulmin, The Uses of Argument (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1958. For a summary review of the Toulmin’s model, see this blogger’s book,

[7] Robert Gutierrez, Toward a Federated Nation: Implementing National Civics Standards (Tallahassee, FL: Gravitas/Civics Books, 2020). Available through Amazon and other booksellers. The referred to subsection begins on page 86.

#community #nativist theories #abstract thinking #logical argumentation #scientific thinking #civics education #social studies

LOCALIZE IT

After a series of postings, this blog has attempted to report a discouraging picture of the current US political landscape. Those postings reviewed the historical effects of several movements, particularly transcendentalism, pragmatism, and perceptual psychology, that have led to the current situation. Their sum effect was to help normalize and legitimize high levels of individualism and self-centeredness.

In the process, communal qualities have suffered, and a basic constitutional underlying element has all but been discarded. “We the People” has, at best, become we, a collective of individuals. That is, the nation’s assumed sense of a grand partnership – a federated people – has suffered greatly and the consequences of that development are being experienced today.

What should the role of social studies be in this current state of affairs? The belief here is that there is a role but not one that can singularly save the day. Social studies curriculums can help alleviate the condition by making their study a great deal more communal. For only through a communal structure and processes can students begin to define a sense of citizenship other than what prevails today.

One simple change would be to focus a social studies courses’ content, especially in civics courses, on local, communal issues that students should address. By placing these issues in a more central position – in terms of positioning within the timeframe of a course of study and in the number of references a course utilizes – students are more apt to become aware of the human challenges – economic, social, political – that manifest in their communities. But more important, the curriculum can emphasize communal action skills.

That is, the curriculum can have students work with members of their community. They can also analyze how relevant societal forces operate in contemporary life. Care should be exercised to make sure such contact does not pose any dangers to students or other negative effects on their welfare.

For example, one can arrange interactions beyond person-to-person sessions. Even if such efforts are limited to reading about local conditions, this would be more revealing of those conditions than what usually happens today. A review of a typical civics textbook reveals a heavy emphasis on national governmental arrangements and national issues with little concern for the local political landscape.

Neil Postman[1] (1931-2003) sees, for example, the only way to neutralize the effects of television – effects an earlier posting described[2] – is to have students analyze them. Extending this idea, social action skills can be intentionally utilized in the classroom to analyze all aspects of a studied problem or situation. This blogger proposes a list of such skills:

Devising a social plan

Negotiating

Advocating / counter advocating

Being a change agent or status quo defender

Being a concerned citizen

Being a constructive follower

Being an effective leader

The first three skills are seen as fundamental social action skills and the last four are operational social action skills.

This blogger would like to note that these skills are not seen as linked to a particular ideology or educational philosophic construct, such as reconstructionism,[3] because every effort should be extended to have students decide which way these skills will be utilized. More specifically, schools should not impose a particular form of communalism.

What schools should do is have students begin participating in defining communalism as they deem appropriate. A qualifier to this claim is that whatever form students adopt needs to be conducive with federalist principles – principles that undergird the US Constitution and promote a sense of partnership among the nation’s citizens.

Therefore, the skills are seen as getting students involved with community institutions and with other citizens. The communal aspect does not have to be explicitly central to the issue addressed but will be implicitly a concern as students engage in the appropriate activities they are to perform, i.e., all social/political issues have their communal aspect to them.

A problem with other reform efforts of social studies is the application of social science disciplinary processes to define or strongly suggest classroom activities. The assumption was that students would be equally intrigued with the mysteries that the social sciences address if they were creatively presented to students.

This blogger feels that the interests of scientists are often too abstract and foreign to secondary students. Even early advocates of these methods, such as Jerome Bruner (1915-2016),[4] eventually admitted that other methods can be utilized to engage student interests. Bruner identified several learning paradigms that are successful in the appropriate context. Among them, appropriate for what is being advocated here, is the nativist school of thought.

By way of illustrating the array of ideas one can employ in pursuing this communal option, the next posting will describe this nativist school of thought and other approaches educators have introduced. This blogger has often refuted the notion of an ideal teaching style or methodological approach can be applied to the teaching strategies of all teachers.

That is, he has argued that teaching is too much a form of personal expression and needs to respect what sort of person that teacher is. But that does not preclude describing and reviewing the positive elements of various approaches. In that vein, this series of postings proceeds and hopefully shares with readers forms of instruction with which they are not as familiar and might prove to be effective in promoting communal requisites.

[1] Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (New York, NY: Penguin Books, 1986).

[2] Robert Gutierrez, “The TV Effect,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 20, 2024, accessed March 6, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/2024_02_18_archive.html.

[3] “The philosophy of Social Reconstructionism is a student-centered philosophy. This philosophy is rooted in the belief that education should be focused on reconstructing society. This emphasis is a result of the perceived lack of leadership on the part of schools to create an equitable society.” ‘Chapter 9: Social Reconstructionism,” Center for the Advancement of Digital Scholarship (n.d.), accessed March 8, 2024, URL: https://kstatelibraries.pressbooks.pub/dellaperezproject/chapter/chapter-8-social-reconstructionism/#:~:text=The%20philosophy%20of%20Social%20Reconstructionism%20is%20a%20student%2Dcentered%20philosophy,to%20create%20an%20equitable%20society.

[4] Jerome Bruner, “Models of the Learner,” Educational Researcher, June/July 1985, 5-8.

#individualism #self-centeredness #communal #community #social action skills #civics education #social studies

THEN THERE’S ANOMIE

Two honored sociologists who have contributed to the general understanding of deviant behavior have been Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) and Robert Merton (1910-2003). The last posting of this blog, which has been presenting a series of postings regarding the development of deviant proclivities in American culture, introduced the work of Durkheim and Merton. That posting indicated this one would share a model these writers, from different time periods, collectively present regarding deviance.

To begin, Durkheim noted that suicide rose in times of prosperity. Baffled, he began to theorize that in modern times people are subject to egoistic suicides, that is, suicides that are motivated by the inability to deal with fast paced societies and their unrealistic goals. In general, modern society promotes lofty goals while designating norms regarding acceptable behavior as it addresses those goals.

Further, people are socialized to accept these goals.

American culture is characterized by great emphasis on the accumulation of wealth as a success symbol without a corresponding emphasis on using legitimate means to march toward this goal … [D]eviant behavior among certain classes in American society cannot be explained by a lack of opportunity alone or by an exaggerated emphasis on a pecuniary value nexus … It is the set of equalitarian beliefs in American society, stressing the opportunity for economic affluence and social ascent for all of its members, which makes for the difference.[1]

If true, certain recent developments can’t help adding to deviant levels. That is, one can add to this mix of sentiments that a certain condition promotes. That is, a significant portion of the population has had its economic foundations pulled out from under it, such as the exportation of a significant number of manufacturing jobs during the recent past.

This results in the chasm between aspirations and reality and consequently, one can expect levels of deviance to increase. They can even be justified by disrupters as means to attain the goals Durkheim identifies. It is the opinion of this blogger that much of the polarized state of American politics one observes today can be attributed to this development.

And Merton outlines forms of behavior patterns that such disruptive conditions encourage, but common to these deviant adaptive patterns is the feeling of anomie. Anomie can be defined as a pervading sense: a fatalistic lack of cohesion with society. This sense can permeate among certain groups within the nation. Merton believed that lower income groups were naturally more predisposed to anomie.[2]

Given the historical progression this series has outlined in earlier postings – the progression from transcendentalism, pragmatism, and perceptual psychology – the progression has glorified individualism and self-centeredness. Plus, sociological/economic developments – increasing divorce rates, globalization of the economy, exportation of manufacturing jobs – anomie has become prevalent among larger segments of the population.[3]

This state of conditions naturally affects schools. The teacher corps and other school professionals around the country should be concerned with augmenting social norms which encourage non deviant behavior, and at the same time try to impart the necessary skills that empower individuals in attaining their social and economic goals. But beyond that, those very goals need to be questioned. While this blogger denotes a tinge of elitism in the Merton model, the reality is that pecuniary rewards are inordinately emphasized in this nation’s society.

As pointed out earlier in this series, American society lacks a substantive cultural philosophy. What philosophy it has is made up of vague notions of the “American dream” and individual rights. Institutions such as American education have promoted individualism. One finds oneself hearing only a limited social message in this vacuum, from Madison Avenue or disinformation being constantly emitted through social media.[4]

As for advertising, the message is simple and direct: buy things and services. As for social media: “you are getting screwed and you need to support X.” Either way, social worth is most exclusively tied to the ability to attain the things advertised or be associated with those who are sharing a delegitimate status while joining together to save the day.

With more and more misalignment – i.e., social ties lacking meaningful commitments – or the availability of meaningful employment especially among low educated people, the social conditions leading to anomie are readily observable. Add to this the communication facility that social media affords, and the mix is quite disruptive and deviant.

With that staging, social studies curriculum development has a “full plate” of challenges to address. That will be the topic of the next posting as this blog continues this series of postings addressing deviance in the American culture. And just to give this notion of a curricular response legitimacy, one should keep the meanings of anomie – lacking social and ethical standards – and nihilism – rejecting moral principles due to seeing life as meaningless – in mind.

[1] Marshall B. Clinard, “The Theoretical Implications of Anomie and Deviant Behavior,” in Anomie and Deviant Behavior, edited by Marshall B. Clinard (New York, NY: The Free Press, 1964), 1-56, 14-15.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Given inherit challenges with measuring anomie among a population, the literature is not “one-sided” as to the levels and consequences of anomie to American society. See for example, Jean Paul Azzopardi, “America’s Overdose of Anomie,” Medium, January 10, 2017, accessed March 4, 2024, URL: https://medium.com/@jp_azzopardi/americas-overdose-of-anomie-1c0049844774#:~:text=They%20believe%20that%20American%20society,actively%20resist%20any%20institutional%20controls.

[4] In terms of the latter, see Barbara McQuade, Attack from Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America (New York, NY: Seven Stories Press, 2024).

#deviant behavior #anomie #economic disruptions #individualism #civics education #social studies

AVOID THE EITHER/OR

On February 13th, with the posting, “Early On,”[1] this blog began a series of offerings that argue American society has higher levels of deviant behavior than one finds in many other societies – particularly advanced countries. This claim is hard to define and measure. Here is what Statista reports:

In the United States, violent crimes are defined as incidents involving force or the threat of force. … Comparing the number of committed crimes in U.S. by category, property crime far outnumbers violent crime, while aggravated assault accounts for some two-thirds of all violent crime. Over the last two decades, the number of violent crimes in the United States has fallen dramatically; there were 1.93 million violent crimes in 1992 in comparison to 1.2 million violent crimes in 2022. A similar story is told by looking at the violent crime rate per 100,000 residents, which factors in the role population growth plays in increasing the overall number of crimes.[2]

Or as Data Pandas reports:

Despite being one of the world's most developed countries, the United States ranks 52nd, with a Crime Index of 47.81. The relatively high index in an advanced nation like the U.S. underscores the fact that crime is not merely a problem of underdeveloped or developing countries but a universal challenge.[3]

While there are other nations with higher rates of crime and other forms of deviance, the above amply reports levels that should capture the nation’s attention.

Of course, there are many factors involved in this state of dysfunction. Using a historical approach, recent postings described the effects of various constructs, e.g., transcendentalism and perceptual psychology, in the development of this deviance. The postings have attempted to explain how the claims of these constructs dispose their advocates to champion meaningful degrees of individualism and self-centeredness, mental dispositions one can see as disposing people to engage in deviant behavior.

Consequently, such socialization has even led to problematic levels of other anti-social mindsets, even nihilism. Of course, all of this can’t help affecting how civics education will be conducted in American schools. A good deal of those effects are underlying factors and not conscious to the educators who man those classrooms. But before describing what these forces mean to curriculum, it is important to keep in mind that this is a societal problem. In no way can schools be given the task, single-handedly, of definitively solving the problem.

While this disclaimer might seem obvious, it has been the practice of societal decision makers to dump many components of the above situation in the “laps” of educators. Of course, this is counterproductive and only serves to stretch the limited resources schools have at their disposal to try to meet the educational responsibilities cited in these earlier postings.

What this blog will describe is limited to how the curriculum can, from its perspective, consider the forces causing the dysfunctional elements of this state of being, i.e., a society full of deviant related strife. This blogger hopes that interested parties understand the central source of these problems has had a long history and goes to the core of American attitudes.

Again, it’s a cultural problem. Only societal wide changes can shift these attitudes. That aim is surely beyond the ability of schools to accomplish. So, given all of this, what are the implications for social studies – that portion of curriculum most relevant to societal concerns emanating from its culture.

And here, a bit of context is in order: The general custom among people, this blogger notes, is to think dichotomously. In this case, either a person is authoritarian or democratic; either loves children or is indifferent to their needs. These are lazy reactions. The problems these postings address and the problems they have caused, place educators on guard against the easy, sentimentalist answers to those problems.

In that vein, this blogger is not against many of the sentiments expressed by those expounding the virtues of individualism – often mistakenly treated as being synonymous with liberty. The concern here lies in the fact that reality does not exist only in the domain of one’s own house and family, but also in the communal parameters individuals and families find themselves.

The overall described conditions this blog has reviewed have implications for the social studies curriculum but also curriculum in general. With a more contained ambition than is usually expressed by curriculum writers, what follows are adjustments that can allow a more useful posture given the challenges. That is, a functional curriculum should adjust in certain dimensions:

There should be a heavy emphasis on the concerns of communities – that in which a school’s students live and, in the nation, generally.

Knowledge, as an element of a curriculum, should be treated beyond sets of facts to memorize, but as functional, useful elements in solving societal problems or addressing societal concerns.

Curriculum proposals should be in the form of options that a teacher can manipulate, tweak, or otherwise accommodate the students and/or social conditions teachers face. And …

Discipline, beyond the prescriptions from perceptual psychology or any other strategy, should be treated by teachers in a realistic manner – avoiding simplistic generalized approaches (either too lenient, ala perceptual psychology, or too demanding, ala “I take no guff” approach).

These dimensions are suggested by the pioneer work on deviance by Emile Durkheim and Robert Merton.[4]

While a formal development of an argument suggested by Durkheim and Merton is beyond the purposes of this presentation, these sociologists’ collective work presents a social model for explaining deviance. And this marks a good place to end this posting and invite readers to click onto this blog’s next posting for a description of these giants’ contribution to addressing deviance.

[1] See Robert Gutierrez, “Early On,” Gravitas: A Voice for Civics, February 13, 2024, “Representations of Reality,” February 16, 2024, “The TV Effect,” February 20, 2024, “The Perceptual Angle,” February 23, and The Ongoing Factors Affecting Nihilism, February 27, 2024, URL: https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/. Use archives feature to access individual postings,

[2] “Violent Crime in the U.S. – Statistics & Facts,” Statista, December 18, 2023, accessed February 28, 2024, URL: https://www.statista.com/topics/1750/violent-crime-in-the-us/#topicOverview.

[3] “Crime Rate by Country,” Data Pandas (n.d.), accessed February 29, 2024, URL: https://www.datapandas.org/ranking/crime-rate-by-country. Out of 136 countries, the US is ranked the 56th most crime ridden.

[4] Marshall B. Clinard, “The Theoretical Implications of Anomie and Deviant Behavior,” in Anomie and Deviant Behavior, edited by Marshall B. Clinard (New York, NY: The Free Press, 1964), 1-56.

#deviance #crime #curriculum #culture #communal concerns #individualism #civics education #social studies

THE ONGOING FACTORS AFFECTING NIHILISM

To date, this blog has been presenting the argument, through a historical lens, that American culture has evolved to promote a highly individualistic view with little concern for communal interests and demands. This has led, as compared to other societies, for Americans to engage in deviant behaviors. That is, they are more likely to behave in ways that go contrary to more communal norms and laws.

Upon reviewing that history, one can detect adherence to a set of constructs which encouraged this progression toward deviance. The constructs are transcendentalism, pragmatism, and perceptual psychology, with an assistance from the effects of TV. The reader is encouraged to review the last four postings of this blog which describe this development.[1]

The claim here is that what has resulted from this development among many is a general sense of illegitimacy, mostly revolving around political issues, and even encouraging a strong dose of nihilism. Individualism has gone a long way to render asunder meaningful community living from contemporary American life. Instead, a growing sense of societal conflict seems to have perforated the nation’s social landscape.[2]

The concept of individualism, used freely in this series of postings, needs more substance than what has been given it up to this point. Individualism does not make itself known similarly in all situations. Robert Bellah, et al., looked at individualism in the American social make-up. They wrote, in Habits of the Heart, “[i]ndividualism is more moderate and orderly than egoism”[3] and go on to quote Alexi Tocqueville:

Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and friends; with the little society formed to his taste, he gladly leaves the greater society to look after itself.[4]

They describe individualism as a habit of thought well ingrained in America’s historical psyche.

While the mass phenomena to find true self, ala perceptual psychology, and the extravagance attached to that quest is recent, Americans are basically a people who look to themselves as individuals, as opposed to members of society or community, and they rely on their personal resources for social and personal goals and the source of meaning for those goals. These resources include those derived from personal characteristics as well as material assets.

Those writers, Bellah, et al., cite Ralph Waldo Emerson (who wrote an essay entitled “Self-Reliance”), the Puritans, John Winthrop, and Thomas Jefferson as repeating the same theme. Among the middle class, individualism is highly tied to work ethic, something still strongly felt in America.

“The problem is not so much the presence or absence of a ‘work ethic’ as the meaning of work and ways it links, or fails to link, individuals to one another.”[5] And this invites one to question how work affects Americans. Work, which forces the individual to have a public life, has become, due to a large-scale industrial/service society, segmental and a self-interested activity.[6] With that, individualism can express itself in two modes: utilitarian individualism and expressive individualism.

Utilitarian individualism tends to be single-minded, and goal driven toward advancing careers. Expressive individualism values relationships, forms of art, and even social improvement goals. In either form, Bellah, et al. are concerned that goodness is defined by one feeling good. “Acts, then, are not right or wrong in themselves, but only because of the results they produce, the good feelings they engender or express.”[7]

They continue that this forms a basis of morality and ethics which is highly subjective; therefore, the distinguishing character of individualism remains ineffable.

The touchstone of individualistic self-knowledge turns out to be shaky in the end, and its guide to action proves elusive … [T]o what or whom do our ethical and moral standards commit us if they are “quite independent of other people’s standards and agenda”?[8]

From the American experience, one can surmise that without external standards of morality, either of a secular or religious nature, a sense of nihilism pervades among many. Is there proof of this nihilism?

When this blogger first worked on these ideas, by doing research for a paper, the Waco tragedy unfolded. Since then, other tragedies have hit the American society to varying degrees of human suffering – school shootings, shootings in theaters, town centers, places of worship, etc. Why were these people in the Waco case so willing to be led to their deaths by a religious fanatic? Why are others willing to engage in disastrous events that often end in violent death often to themselves?

Is meaning for life so hard to find in this nation’s common lot? Or perhaps the report by various writers on the detrimental and accumulative effects of trends, e.g., the divorce rate, on the children of this country can provide further insight.[9] A bit of literature among the press and published articles and books have documented how popular it has become to encourage adults to take on more self-centered goals which then manifests in irresponsible behaviors on the part of adults who are often parents.

American society, over the last number of decades, has experienced several disruptive events and trends. Along with the divorce rate, there have been riots, increasing crime rates (currently going down), suicide rates, drug use, etc. And with that disruptive setting, this posting will end and promise that the next one in this series will address the implications of the above challenges to those charged with developing curriculum for American schools. Surely, these societal challenges should influence what schools plan for their students.

[1] The series of postings begins with “Early On,” and can be accessed on the URL, https://gravitascivics.blogspot.com/. Readers can use the archive feature to see this posting and the three that follow.

[2] Aidan Connaughton, “Americans See Stronger Societal Conflicts Than People in Other Advanced Economies,” Pew Research Center, October 13, 2021, accessed February 23, 2024, URL: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/10/13/americans-see-stronger-societal-conflicts-than-people-in-other-advanced-economies/.

[3] Robert N. Bellah, Richard Madsen, William M. Sullivan, A. Swindler, and Steven M. Tipton, Habits of the Heart: Individualism in American Life (New York, NY: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1985).

[4] Ibid., 37.

[5] Ibid., 55-56.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid., 78.

[8] Ibid., 78-79.

[9] For example, see Daniel Siegel, “Generation Doomer: How Nihilism on Social Media Is Creating a New Generation of Extremists,” Global Network on Extremism and Technology, December 16, 2022, accessed February 24, 2024, URL: https://gnet-research.org/2022/12/16/generation-doomer-how-nihilism-on-social-media-is-creating-a-new-generation-of-extremists/#:~:text=Because%20of%20digital%20echo%20chambers,and%20humanity%20is%20inevitably%20doomed. To illustrate how long this concern has been addressed, see Barbara Dafoe, “Dan Quayle Was Right,” The Atlantic Monthly, 274, 4 (1993), 47-84.

#individualism #illegitimacy #nihilism #civics education #social studies

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Gravitas: A Voice for Civics