TakingITGlobal - Panorama

Published on: Jul 27, 2004

Topic:

Type: Opinions

https://www.tigweb.org/express/panorama/article.html?ContentID=4029

Introduction

“In all actions concerning children…the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration…” UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, Article 3

Although I am not a political expert on socialization, the subject of Schools and Political Socialization touches home to me. The subject of how the nation’s flag is a major political symbol in a child’s life, which directly connects children to the political community, and is one of the many processes of political socialization. During my childhood I witnessed that event every morning at school. There was a picture of George Washington, our first president, hanging on the wall, and an American Flag in the front right hand corner of the room. My teachers would motion everyone to rise and sing the Pledge of Allegiance. Everyone would rise except for me because it is against my religious beliefs to salute the flag, or honour it. It’s giving your honour to your country, and to God, and you are not going to participate?

Schools serve as the first political socialization of children outside of their home. Political socialization is seen as the whole of processes through which an individual develops particular political behaviours and acquires particular political orientations under the influence of his or her environment. (Dekker, 99) Why would some children, such as Bill Clinton, feel motivated enough to serve a term in office, or even become President, and some decide not to vote at all? It is true that even in a democratic country children are not treated fairly, even in declining to participate in “political” activities, which I will discuss later. And, is it unrealistic to expect all citizens, including children to feel politically motivated?

The importance of any functioning political system and source of stability is seen as the political education of its youth, and political socialization research examines that factor. To nurture the theory of the factors that contribute to the stability of different political systems include these questions: How can we make better citizens out of those coming of age, how can we educate children.

So that they will be better informed in politics and more highly motivated to take an interest in public affairs? Children are expected to be “good citizens” by being supportive of democracy, being informed about politics, and the public school is the most important and effective instrument of political socialization in that process. (Dekker, 1999)

I will cover the political messages aimed directly at students from the school system, such as in the ‘hidden’ curriculum, and in educational materials such as textbooks. My last point will be about the new concept of child rights education taken from an interview I had with Defense for Children International, (DCI), and the benefits it could bring to political socialization in schools. My source of information came from research in the articles in both readers for this class, out of the Review of Politics; a political journal, and materials I received during and after my interview with Defense for Children International.

‘Hidden’ Curriculum in the Process of Political Socialization

“Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person…” UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, Article 37

But the goal mentioned above is far from reality. According to Jean Anyon in Schools as Agencies of Social Legitimation, “Schools in working class and middle class income areas were not observed to provide students with conceptual tools or classroom activities to analyze or criticize U.S. society. Textbooks and class discussions in these schools emphasized ones personal duties: to honour the country, to uphold its laws, and support the decisions of its leaders. In upper-middle class and wealthy schools, teachers provided frequent situations which students were asked to analyze their own society, and about general solutions to problems they may encounter. So what was the message given to the students in these schools in the United States? On page 203 of Jean Anyons article the message is explained. Low income students “deserve” menial jobs because that is “all” they know how to do; and students from highly advantaged backgrounds “deserve” to be executives, because they are “capable” of carrying out the activities. School experience thus “explains” makes socially reasonable, the future “success” of wealthier students, and the “failure” of those from the poor and working classes. This kind of message would lead many unprivileged ones to the idea, ‘people like me have no influence’, which could also be described as political powerlessness.

With that in mind, we can now move to the idea of manipulation and control in this ‘hidden’ curriculum. These patterns of school authority predispose students to judgements of powerlessness in the face of inequality. One example I know of the manipulation and control in American schools is how many Native American and Spanish children a few decades ago were punished for speaking their first language at school, and some of these punishments were extremely harsh. The woman that I know, Mary Helen, had stopped speaking Spanish almost entirely altogether, even in front of her children, which is directly linked to a violation of her rights in school.

What do children feel regards toward any political authority if they are punished for not conforming? The answer is powerlessness, which carries into the adult life. It has been found that by a preschool age children have already formed a crude conception of political authority and some feelings with regard to its worth. (Easton and Hess, 1962) The idealization of approved authority reflects important psychological needs of the child. Confronted with the inescapable authority of adults, and realistically aware of their own helplessness, a child must seek some form of accommodation. Easton and Hess go on to say in the article A Child’s Political World,” For a small majority, rebellion, aggression, and mistrust may be chosen avenues. But for most, adaptation is more likely to take the form of imputing to authority qualities that would permit the child to think of authority in a favourable light.” But the point here is that attitudes toward achievement, change, cooperation, obedience and competitiveness, can be shaped by the cultures of the classroom. A child that is ‘rebellious’ or ‘aggressive’ towards authority does not choose that ‘avenue’, as described in Easton and Hess’s, A Child’s Political World. The school gives the impression that a ‘good citizen’ is expected to have respect for authority, but does not discuss the respect that these ‘good citizens’ deserve from authority.

Textbooks in the Process of Political Socialization

“The education of the child shall be directed to the preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, a friendship among all peoples” UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 29

Another area of political socialization in schools that is interesting is the politically charged messages made in “the glue of the nation”. Social science textbooks subtly justify the activities of persons and groups who are powerful, but do not draw the attention to undemocratic decision-making procedures. It was found that descriptions in elementary textbooks of persons with political power as being always responsive individuals, when in fact it is not always the case. And this lack of criticism engrained in the learning process of institutional arrangements only makes the problem continue. (Anyon, 1981) Another example of the ‘glue of the nation’ could also be by describing socialism in textbooks in terms of its political restrictions, and not a “real democracy” as well as uncritically describing the United States as the only ‘rational’ one. (Anyon, 1981)

The reader Elites, Followers and Contrarians, page 16 states, “Most political orientations are acquired when we accept messages from others, for example, parents, teachers, and mass media. These messages may be offered unintentionally, or intentionally, such as a civics teacher providing the pupils with political information. Then the “great books” have come under attack. The dispute has certain urgency: educating the young for democratic citizenship. Teaching or to defend teaching of Western moral and civic values and those, on the other hand, who take the same texts and the teaching of them to represent the silencing of the oppressed and the expression of unjustifiable privilege. (Euben, 1999)

Another point that could explain the incorrect or unbalanced political messages that exist in the schools is the fact that some educators are not interested in politics themselves, and some even have their doubts about their own preparation or competence to teach this subject. (Dekker, 1999) In his book, Corrupting Youth: Political Education, Democratic Culture, and Political Theory, Euben says, the highest vocation for a political educator is to encourage thought and independent judgement. The “old way of doing things”is no longer feasible when seen in the light of present and future problems of the sector. New institutional forms or “fits” may have to be developed that determine the future of this sector. (Boin and ‘T Hart, 1999). The ‘old ways’ of teaching are noticeably wrong since the serious question comes up; why are not enough young people interested in politics?
How can we make young people interested in politics? What can schools or educators be expected to do to contribute to political education of children? Schools should be expected to provide children with up to date textbooks and messages that are not discriminating in any way towards other cultures, political systems, and social class. In this case new reforms had to be developed that determine the future of children, which in turn is the future stability of political systems. The new reforms that have been created are basically ‘new’ in the international arenas. There is clearly a growing acceptance of the basic principle that children have rights, and that their rights deserve respect.

Conclusion

A sense of reality for many children is that they are powerless in anything to do with their government, which is a message that is directly given to them by their environment, such as the school. My first example of political socialization in schools was to describe the ritual of saluting the American flag that I observed. The other ways schools influence children in political socialization were described through the examples of the ‘hidden’ curriculum and in textbooks, such as the ways of manipulation of the masses through discrimination and ethnocentrism. And my last point was about the importance for children to have an influence on what decisions the government makes in regards to children as a factor to stimulate qualities for leadership. My points of discussion were about the UN Millennium project for youths and two positive educational lessons that could be learned from Defense for Children International Spain and the Netherlands, in which the children involved could participate in follow up research in the area of their political socialization.

References

• Anyon, J. “Schools as agencies of Social Legitimation.”International Journal of Political Education, 3, 4, 195-218.Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, 1981.
• Boin, A. & ‘T Hart, P. “Institutional Crisis and Reforms in Policy Sectors.” University of Leiden, 1999.
• Dekker, H. “Politics and the Individual: Elites, Followers and Contrairians.” University of Leiden, 1999.
• Dekker, H. “Citizenship Conceptions and Competencies in the Subject Matter ‘Society’ in the Dutch Schools.” Torney-Purta,J.&J. Schwille, J.-A. Amadeo (eds.). Civic education across countries:twenty-four national case studies from the IEA civic education project. Amsterdam: The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. 438, 441-454, 458-462.
• Easton, D.& R.D.Hess. “A Child’s Political World.” University of Chicago,1962.
• Euben, J.P. “Corrupting Youth: Political Education, Democratic Culture, and Political Theory.”
The Review of Politics, 538-41. University of Notre Dame, Indiana,1999.
• Powell, Jan “Defense For Children International Review”. Lynx Offset, UK, 1998.
• United Nations 52nd Convention Commemorating the Rights of the Child. November 11,1999.
http://www.un.org.

« return.



by melanie mae
Published on: Jul 27, 2004
Topic:
Type: Opinions
https://www.tigweb.org/express/panorama/article.html?ContentID=4029


Introduction “In all actions concerning children…the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration…” UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, Article 3 Although I am not a political expert on socialization, the subject of Schools and Political Socialization touches home to me. The subject of how the nation’s flag is a major political symbol in a child’s life, which directly connects children to the political community, and is one of the many processes of political socialization. During my childhood I witnessed that event every morning at school. There was a picture of George Washington, our first president, hanging on the wall, and an American Flag in the front right hand corner of the room. My teachers would motion everyone to rise and sing the Pledge of Allegiance. Everyone would rise except for me because it is against my religious beliefs to salute the flag, or honour it. It’s giving your honour to your country, and to God, and you are not going to participate? Schools serve as the first political socialization of children outside of their home. Political socialization is seen as the whole of processes through which an individual develops particular political behaviours and acquires particular political orientations under the influence of his or her environment. (Dekker, 99) Why would some children, such as Bill Clinton, feel motivated enough to serve a term in office, or even become President, and some decide not to vote at all? It is true that even in a democratic country children are not treated fairly, even in declining to participate in “political” activities, which I will discuss later. And, is it unrealistic to expect all citizens, including children to feel politically motivated? The importance of any functioning political system and source of stability is seen as the political education of its youth, and political socialization research examines that factor. To nurture the theory of the factors that contribute to the stability of different political systems include these questions: How can we make better citizens out of those coming of age, how can we educate children. So that they will be better informed in politics and more highly motivated to take an interest in public affairs? Children are expected to be “good citizens” by being supportive of democracy, being informed about politics, and the public school is the most important and effective instrument of political socialization in that process. (Dekker, 1999) I will cover the political messages aimed directly at students from the school system, such as in the ‘hidden’ curriculum, and in educational materials such as textbooks. My last point will be about the new concept of child rights education taken from an interview I had with Defense for Children International, (DCI), and the benefits it could bring to political socialization in schools. My source of information came from research in the articles in both readers for this class, out of the Review of Politics; a political journal, and materials I received during and after my interview with Defense for Children International. ‘Hidden’ Curriculum in the Process of Political Socialization “Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person…” UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, Article 37 But the goal mentioned above is far from reality. According to Jean Anyon in Schools as Agencies of Social Legitimation, “Schools in working class and middle class income areas were not observed to provide students with conceptual tools or classroom activities to analyze or criticize U.S. society. Textbooks and class discussions in these schools emphasized ones personal duties: to honour the country, to uphold its laws, and support the decisions of its leaders. In upper-middle class and wealthy schools, teachers provided frequent situations which students were asked to analyze their own society, and about general solutions to problems they may encounter. So what was the message given to the students in these schools in the United States? On page 203 of Jean Anyons article the message is explained. Low income students “deserve” menial jobs because that is “all” they know how to do; and students from highly advantaged backgrounds “deserve” to be executives, because they are “capable” of carrying out the activities. School experience thus “explains” makes socially reasonable, the future “success” of wealthier students, and the “failure” of those from the poor and working classes. This kind of message would lead many unprivileged ones to the idea, ‘people like me have no influence’, which could also be described as political powerlessness. With that in mind, we can now move to the idea of manipulation and control in this ‘hidden’ curriculum. These patterns of school authority predispose students to judgements of powerlessness in the face of inequality. One example I know of the manipulation and control in American schools is how many Native American and Spanish children a few decades ago were punished for speaking their first language at school, and some of these punishments were extremely harsh. The woman that I know, Mary Helen, had stopped speaking Spanish almost entirely altogether, even in front of her children, which is directly linked to a violation of her rights in school. What do children feel regards toward any political authority if they are punished for not conforming? The answer is powerlessness, which carries into the adult life. It has been found that by a preschool age children have already formed a crude conception of political authority and some feelings with regard to its worth. (Easton and Hess, 1962) The idealization of approved authority reflects important psychological needs of the child. Confronted with the inescapable authority of adults, and realistically aware of their own helplessness, a child must seek some form of accommodation. Easton and Hess go on to say in the article A Child’s Political World,” For a small majority, rebellion, aggression, and mistrust may be chosen avenues. But for most, adaptation is more likely to take the form of imputing to authority qualities that would permit the child to think of authority in a favourable light.” But the point here is that attitudes toward achievement, change, cooperation, obedience and competitiveness, can be shaped by the cultures of the classroom. A child that is ‘rebellious’ or ‘aggressive’ towards authority does not choose that ‘avenue’, as described in Easton and Hess’s, A Child’s Political World. The school gives the impression that a ‘good citizen’ is expected to have respect for authority, but does not discuss the respect that these ‘good citizens’ deserve from authority. Textbooks in the Process of Political Socialization “The education of the child shall be directed to the preparation of the child for responsible life in a free society, in the spirit of understanding, peace, tolerance, equality of sexes, a friendship among all peoples” UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 29 Another area of political socialization in schools that is interesting is the politically charged messages made in “the glue of the nation”. Social science textbooks subtly justify the activities of persons and groups who are powerful, but do not draw the attention to undemocratic decision-making procedures. It was found that descriptions in elementary textbooks of persons with political power as being always responsive individuals, when in fact it is not always the case. And this lack of criticism engrained in the learning process of institutional arrangements only makes the problem continue. (Anyon, 1981) Another example of the ‘glue of the nation’ could also be by describing socialism in textbooks in terms of its political restrictions, and not a “real democracy” as well as uncritically describing the United States as the only ‘rational’ one. (Anyon, 1981) The reader Elites, Followers and Contrarians, page 16 states, “Most political orientations are acquired when we accept messages from others, for example, parents, teachers, and mass media. These messages may be offered unintentionally, or intentionally, such as a civics teacher providing the pupils with political information. Then the “great books” have come under attack. The dispute has certain urgency: educating the young for democratic citizenship. Teaching or to defend teaching of Western moral and civic values and those, on the other hand, who take the same texts and the teaching of them to represent the silencing of the oppressed and the expression of unjustifiable privilege. (Euben, 1999) Another point that could explain the incorrect or unbalanced political messages that exist in the schools is the fact that some educators are not interested in politics themselves, and some even have their doubts about their own preparation or competence to teach this subject. (Dekker, 1999) In his book, Corrupting Youth: Political Education, Democratic Culture, and Political Theory, Euben says, the highest vocation for a political educator is to encourage thought and independent judgement. The “old way of doing things”is no longer feasible when seen in the light of present and future problems of the sector. New institutional forms or “fits” may have to be developed that determine the future of this sector. (Boin and ‘T Hart, 1999). The ‘old ways’ of teaching are noticeably wrong since the serious question comes up; why are not enough young people interested in politics? How can we make young people interested in politics? What can schools or educators be expected to do to contribute to political education of children? Schools should be expected to provide children with up to date textbooks and messages that are not discriminating in any way towards other cultures, political systems, and social class. In this case new reforms had to be developed that determine the future of children, which in turn is the future stability of political systems. The new reforms that have been created are basically ‘new’ in the international arenas. There is clearly a growing acceptance of the basic principle that children have rights, and that their rights deserve respect. Conclusion A sense of reality for many children is that they are powerless in anything to do with their government, which is a message that is directly given to them by their environment, such as the school. My first example of political socialization in schools was to describe the ritual of saluting the American flag that I observed. The other ways schools influence children in political socialization were described through the examples of the ‘hidden’ curriculum and in textbooks, such as the ways of manipulation of the masses through discrimination and ethnocentrism. And my last point was about the importance for children to have an influence on what decisions the government makes in regards to children as a factor to stimulate qualities for leadership. My points of discussion were about the UN Millennium project for youths and two positive educational lessons that could be learned from Defense for Children International Spain and the Netherlands, in which the children involved could participate in follow up research in the area of their political socialization. References • Anyon, J. “Schools as agencies of Social Legitimation.”International Journal of Political Education, 3, 4, 195-218.Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, 1981. • Boin, A. & ‘T Hart, P. “Institutional Crisis and Reforms in Policy Sectors.” University of Leiden, 1999. • Dekker, H. “Politics and the Individual: Elites, Followers and Contrairians.” University of Leiden, 1999. • Dekker, H. “Citizenship Conceptions and Competencies in the Subject Matter ‘Society’ in the Dutch Schools.” Torney-Purta,J.&J. Schwille, J.-A. Amadeo (eds.). Civic education across countries:twenty-four national case studies from the IEA civic education project. Amsterdam: The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. 438, 441-454, 458-462. • Easton, D.& R.D.Hess. “A Child’s Political World.” University of Chicago,1962. • Euben, J.P. “Corrupting Youth: Political Education, Democratic Culture, and Political Theory.” The Review of Politics, 538-41. University of Notre Dame, Indiana,1999. • Powell, Jan “Defense For Children International Review”. Lynx Offset, UK, 1998. • United Nations 52nd Convention Commemorating the Rights of the Child. November 11,1999. http://www.un.org. « return.