“TEACHER” AS A COMMONPLACE, IV
This blog is currently describing how apt teachers are to incorporate the tenets of a liberated federalism model in the teaching of civics at the secondary level. This blog in past postings reviewed the makeup of another version of federalism, that being parochial/traditional federalism.
As compared to that earlier version, liberated federalism, while based on federalist ideas and ideals, one, sheds parochial federalism’s parochialism, two, adopts, to a guarded level, natural rights views that accept a more pluralistic populus with its varied cultural perspectives and, three, approaches civics from a more contemporary perspective. This is not to say it would neglect the federalist foundations of the nation, but in the bulk of its inspired materials, it would emphasize current political conditions.
The judgment of this account is that the proposed liberated construct offers an approach that can be seen as being more congruent with teachers’ stated orientation of social studies. That is, social studies subject matter is responsible, along with the efforts of parents and other institutions, to socialize the nation’s youth concerning citizenship attributes[1] including those that promote mutual responsibilities. That includes the transmission of a political culture more in tune with federalist principles.[2]
Other points that might appeal to teachers would include the fact that research shows teachers are significantly more likely than the general population to become involved in political activity.[3] They are also noticeably more religious than the general population which might indicate a leaning toward moral concerns. Adding to that, they tend to hold onto social capital values that promote non-economic goals and aims to further the health of society.[4]
This account judges that the teacher corps would potentially be receptive to materials that emphasize political interaction and moral behavior that would advance the commonwealth. And further, such concerns transcend both the public and the private sectors, both what government is about and what one’s next-door neighbor is about if what he or she is doing hurts or helps the common condition, short of being a busybody.
The last point to be made about teachers in relation to their receptiveness to the liberated federalism perspective is that, given the proclivity of most teachers, a textbook based approach with a federalist view, or at least conducive to a federalist view would be essential. This textbook reliance is not considered as being helpful, but it is what it is.
Timothy Scott, et al., write of this reliance. After listing some significant shortfalls with American education, they observe:
Policymakers, believing achievement gaps result from teaching performance, have argued for additional academic controls that promote rigorous standardized instruction to reduce existing achievement gaps. However, a state-mandated textbook-driven curriculum that prioritizes test-taking strategies will only exasperate previous educational deficiencies. As numerous schools face significant financial constraints, technological and resource investment is severally limited, and teacher professional development is marginalized. Without appropriate tools or skills to adapt curriculum, classes devolve into simple rote-learning of textbook content lacking any semblance of differentiated instruction. Students in impoverished communities [for example] disassociate with taught content as textbooks lack a multicultural presentation; thus [sic] they perceive school environments as unwelcoming and hostile towards their lived-experiences [sic]. Performance-based funding through high-stakes accountability further … [incentivizes] underfunded schools to abandon student-centric learning designs and prioritize a textbook dependent ‘one-size-fits-few’ strategy to avoid sanctions to meet state benchmarks.[5]
And, in agreement, Stephen Thornton, back in 1991, states that the content of most classes, including social studies, is defined by the textbook used. This is because most teachers are not comfortable with their own knowledge of the material.[6] This has a possible positive consequence and a more likely negative one.
This account holds that there is no substitute for teacher knowledge of subject matter. But given the state of affairs articulated by Thornton and, by implication, Scott et al., perhaps teachers are not that committed to the content of the material they are presently using. If an alternative could be presented in a professional and responsible fashion, teachers might be open to an alternative view that meets many of their social concerns that this research indicates.
Again, though, teachers might be so unsure of their position that any change might be seen as a threat. This account believes that the effort to make the change to the liberated federalism model is worth it and that convincing teachers of its merits is a possibility. Now it is up to administrators to see the prudence of making the change. And with that, this blog will move on from the commonplace, “teachers,” and next address the commonplace, “milieu,” in which the proposed change is offered.
[1] For example, Rebecca Winthrop, “The Need for Civic Education in 21st-Century Schools,” Brookings (June 4, 2020), accessed October 16, 2023, URL: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-need-for-civic-education-in-21st-century-schools/.
[2] Federalist principles are those that support the make up of a federalist polity. A federalist model is one in which a nation’s polity results from its people directly or through representatives coming together, on an equal basis, to develop and agree upon a covenant or compact forming a legalized partnership. Such an agreement is held as sacred – either on a sectarian or secular basis – that establishes the aims for the polity, the structure of a government, other provisions, consequences for noncompliance, soliciting God (in the case of a covenant) to witness the agreement, and the signatures of those coming to the agreement. If the agreement is arrived at by representatives, a ratifying process follows the submission of the agreement. The US Constitution is a compact.
[3] While current rates of political activity among teachers was difficult to cite, union membership, a sign of political engagement, does hover around 70% as compared to 10% among the work force. See for example, “Total Number of Public School Teachers and Percentage of Public School Teachers in a Union or Employees’ Association, by Selected School Characteristics: 2015-16,” National Teacher and Principal Survey (n.d.), accessed October 16, 2023, https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/ntps/tables/Table_TeachersUnion.asp.
[4] Robert O. Slater, “American Teachers: What Values Do They Hold?” Education Next, 8, 1, accessed October 16, 2023, https://www.educationnext.org/american-teachers/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20NORC%20survey,Americans%20say%20they%20do%20so.
[5] Timothy Scott, Hua Mak Campus, and Farhat N. Husain, “Textbook Reliance: Traditional Curriculum Dependence Is Symptomatic of a Larger Educational Problem,” Journal of Educational Issues, 7, 1 (April 23, 2021), accessed October 17, 2023, URL: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1304270.pdf.
[6] Stephen J. Thornton, “Teacher as Curricular-Instructional Gatekeeper in Social Studies,” in Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning, edited by James P. Shaver (New York, NY: MacMillan Publishing Company, 1991), 237-248.
