Annenberg Classroom

How Much do Voters Know?

Richard Johnston — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 13:30:00 GMT

Ask the expert: How much do voters know?

Richard Johnston

University of Pennsylvania

How much do voters know? How much can they learn in campaigns? Do they use what they learn when they make choices among candidates? The answers are mixed. Many voters are woefully ignorant but others learn a lot from campaigns. Well-informed voters can be decisive in elections—but not always—and they rarely are representative of their less-informed counterparts.

Voters’ knowledge

In general, voters do not know much, and most are quite oblivious to the discourse among the elites who debate and make policy. The most important statement to this effect was made in 1964 by Philip Converse [4]. He found that when respondents in U.S. National Election Study samples are asked what they like or dislike about parties and candidates, they cannot volunteer much content. When asked pre-formulated questions about policy choices, these same respondents do not link their answers to different questions on similar topics. They give conservative answers to some questions and liberal answers to others, and in no particular order. When asked the same question two or more times, respondents commonly answer in a way that suggests they are drawing answers, so to speak, out of a hat. Particularly disturbing is what this might imply about stability and change: survey respondents with real opinions rarely change them; the change that does appear is produced by a random process.

Converse’s finding dovetails with others. For example, few voters can recall the name of their member of the House of Representatives, for example. Indeed, only about half the electorate knows which party controls the House. Stories like this can be told ad nauseam.[5]

Voters’ attitudes and opinions

Not everyone buys the claim that voters’ opinions are as impoverished as this. Converse assumes that any slippage across questions or over time is the fault of respondents: they give inconsistent answers because they do not have real attitudes. One could as easily assert that the fault lies with the measures. Survey questions commonly carry some ambiguity. Even more to the point, the answers respondents are allowed to give are crude: “agree,” “disagree,” and the like. It is not hard to see that a respondent whose opinions are basically stable might vary his or her responses over an interval of years, or even days. This kind of variation makes connections among questions and among answers to the same question over time look feeble. Correction for it makes respondents’ opinions look quite robust.[2]

For all this, there is still plenty of evidence that many, perhaps most, citizens’ opinions are weakly held and not supported by concrete information. Indeed, much of what citizens think they know is misinformation. When misinformed survey respondents are supplied with correct information, they tend to resist it.[7]

Voters’ ballot choices

But does it matter? Some argue that the debate is largely irrelevant to the choices that voters actually make and to the circumstances in which they make them. On this view, the landscape, although seemingly bleak, has clear signposts that rarely play citizens false. Voters may not always have opinions, but they do commonly have feelings, about parties and social groups. These feelings align, at least crudely, with voters’ interests, and reliance on feelings is a reasonable starting point.[11] Prominent among the groups that citizens might identify with are political parties and their candidates. Candidates have a powerful incentive to simplify voters’ choices. Often merely knowing which side of a question the party is on helps voters connect means to ends.[12] When both Republicans and Democrats in Congress support a measure, the citizenry at large tends to follow, with the most educated and informed citizens leading the way. When the parties divide, their supporters tend to divide as well, and voters’ sophistication tends not to predict the direction of opinion.[15] The critical question, then, is not so much the amount of background knowledge individual voters possess as whether critically placed actors—especially the major parties—structure the choice. When they do, they make it easy for voters to deploy what little information they have. This is especially telling when voters get to legislate directly, as in an initiative or referendum. The state election authorities will circulate a detailed account of each measure, and this may help voters. For most, however, the pamphlet will just be information overload. It helps if voters can figure out who put the measure on the ballot in the first place. If they cannot, they tend to vote No, a pretty sensible choice under the circumstances. If opponents as well as supporters materialize, voters can triangulate the result. If the pattern of support and opposition follows partisan lines, the voters’ task may be quite simple.[8]

Of course, parties and other actors do not always structure the choice. There is no guarantee that the usual suspects of the political world will line up on opposite sides of a question. And when they do, the result is not always enlightening. To the extent that voters use feelings about groups as a proxy for ideas about policy, some of the feelings may be little more than ordinary prejudice and appeals to such feeling often are crude demagoguery.

Election results

Whatever the general level of ignorance, some people know the score, and these may be the voters who produce the overall result, Yes or No, Democrat or Republican. Poorly informed citizens choose sides at random. In doing so, they negate each other. On this view, Converse’s findings, described above, are actually reassuring! It is true that, even though individuals’ opinions tend to be unstable, aggregate distributions of opinion are quite stable. Movement in opinion tends to be gradual and is related in commonsensical ways to external events and to tides in congressional policy-making.[9,13] Although most citizens cannot recall key facts about Congress and indeed about their own representative, when large numbers of incumbents go down to defeat, the pattern is not random. It reflects their behavior, on roll calls [1,14] or in acts of malfeasance [10]. When survey respondents are asked about candidates’ positions on issues, they are more likely to give the correct answer at the end of an election campaign than at the beginning.[6] This reassuring characterization is true much of the time.

But it is not true all of the time, and it is not the whole story about elections in the aggregate. For one thing, it is not always true that less informed persons choose sides of a question at random. On certain kinds of questions, they are systematically drawn to one side or the other. One side may reflect a widely held popular norm or a persistent piece of misinformation. On such questions, the more informed folks are the ones who divide evenly. In general, the result will be determined by whichever group exhibits the most unbalanced distribution. Moreover, more informed persons commonly have different interests and different opinions from the others. When they lead opinion, they do not necessarily take the electorate as a whole where it wants to go.[3] The result does not feel very democratic.

The summary picture is not as bleak as the early studies suggested. Opinions held by the typical individual are probably not as unstable and inconsistent as originally believed. The typical citizen does not know much, but much of the time does not need to be an expert to navigate the landscape. Even if many individuals do not have real opinions, many others do, and the electorate as a whole has meaningful opinions. In short, candidates for office do not waltz before a blind audience. Their policy commitments eventually become known to a critical fraction of the electorate. But the actual result of elections is not always what Americans would collectively wish for themselves were they fully informed.

1. Abramowitz, Alan I. “Name Familiarity, Reputation, and the Incumbency Effect in a Congressional Election.” Western Political Quarterly 28 (1975): 668-84.

2. Achen, Christopher H. “Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response.” American Political Science Review 69 (1975): 1218-1231.

3. Althaus, Scott. Collective Preferences in Democratic Politics: Opinion Surveys and the Will of the People Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.

4. Converse, Philip E. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics,” in David Apter, ed. Ideology and Discontent. New York: Free Press, 1964, pp. 206-61.

5. Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. What Americans Know About Politics and Why it Matters. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.

6. Johnston, Richard, Michael G. Hagen, and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. The 2000 Presidential Campaign and the Foundations of Party Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

7. Kuklinski, James H., Paul J. Quirk, Jennifer Jerit, David Schwieder, and Robert F. Rich “Misinformation and the Currency of Democratic Citizenship.” Journal of Politics 62 (2000): 790-816.

8. Lupia, Arthur. “Busy Voters, Agenda Control, and the Power of Information.” American Political Science Review 86 (1992): 390-403.

9. Page, Benjamin I., and Robert Y. Shapiro. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

10. Peters, John G., and Susan Welch. “The Effects of Charges of Corruption on Voting Behavior in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 74 (1980): 697-708.

11. Sniderman, Paul M., Richard A. Brody, and Philip Tetlock. Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

12. Sniderman, Paul M. “Taking Sides: A Fixed Choice Theory of Political Reasoning,” in Arthur Lupia, Mathew D. McCubbins, and Samuel L. Popkin, eds. Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000, pp. 67-84.

13. Stimson, James A. Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

14. Wright, Gerald C., Jr. “Constituency Response to Congressional Behavior: The Impact of the House Judiciary Committee Impeachment Votes.” Western Political Quarterly 30 (1977): 401-410.

15. Zaller, John. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Professional Development Series

Dr. Kathleen Hall Jamieson — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:29:00 GMT

Using the internet to stay informed about government and politics Why it’s important to understand the internet in politics: According to a study conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project in 2004, 75 million Americans used the Internet to get political information. The internet offers us unique tools to quickly learn about issues before the country and in the news. When used well, it increases citizen access to information, makes it easier for leaders to communicate with the public,...(read more)

How to create an op-ed and commentary article

sstranahan@appc — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 21:01:00 GMT

How to Create an Op-Ed and Commentary Article

Q: What is an op-ed?

A: An op-ed (so named because it traditionally is published opposite the editorial page of a newspaper) is an opinion column written by an expert on the newspaper’s staff, an outside expert, or a member of the community. It expresses a particular point of view; it is an advocacy document. Some newspapers may refer to such articles as “commentary.”

Q: What purpose does an op-ed serve?

A: An op-ed allows a member of the community to express an opinion, elaborate on a subject, or to challenge an editorial viewpoint published in the newspaper. It serves as a new “voice” in current discussions.

Q: How do I go about preparing an op-ed?

A: Most importantly: Have something fresh to say. An op-ed that raises new ideas, or explores them in interesting ways, will stand a greater chance of publication than a rehash of old ideas. Check the submission rules of the newspaper or magazine to which you plan to contribute. (Most publish the guidelines on the editorial page.) Follow those rules to the letter, especially length. Less is better in every single instance.

Formulate your arguments carefully. You must state your position, explain why you have taken that position, and offer reasons that may persuade others to accept your viewpoint, or at least acknowledge that your perspective has merit. Harangues and diatribes will go nowhere. Make your case through examples that readers can identify with.

Timeliness is essential. An op-ed about a subject that is weeks old will generate little interest – among editors or readers. Write off the news. If school security, or test scores, or changes in the curriculum are making headlines on the front pages, it’s also a good time to explore those issues on the opinion page.

Q: Who can write an op-ed?

A: Anyone with something to say. Many newspapers welcome well-crafted essays from students (there may even be a special section where such writing is promoted). Classroom projects may also receive attention. What is essential, however, is that the end product is well-written, concise and – most of all – compelling.

Q: How much research is necessary?

A: While well-crafted viewpoints are the most important aspect of an opinion article, the article must accurately reflect the facts. Op-eds also allow the author to place an issue in context. For example: Has this subject come up before? If so, how was it resolved? A little homework before writing goes a long way. It also lends credence to the arguments you make.

Q: What should I expect after I submit something?

A: Don’t get your hopes up. Most op-ed page editors are swamped with huge quantities of submissions. Most don’t even acknowledge receipt. But your chances of having an op-ed accepted for publication are enhanced by the same basics you expect in a homework assignment from your students: Good spelling, clear thinking, a logical point of view and fresh ideas.

The National Constitution Center:In Philadelphia and In your Classroom

Eli J. Lesser — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 20:54:00 GMT

The National Constitution Center: In Philadelphia and In your Classroom

The National Constitution Center, located on Independence Mall in historic Philadelphia, opened its doors to the public on July 4, 2003. Since then, it has seen well over three million visitors, more than 25 percent of whom are educators or students. Each comes to the Center seeking a deepened understanding of our nation’s Constitution.

Visiting the National Constitution Center allows an educator to explore the Constitution and consider how to present concepts and issues relating to the Constitution in lessons for students of all ages. Lessons can be taught at the Constitution Center, only 300 yards from where the Constitution was debated and written, or the Center can provide materials for use in your classroom, wherever the location.

To understand the National Constitution Center’s educational goals and offerings, it helps to examine the Center’s educational philosophy. This philosophy attempts to create a framework for teaching active citizenship, across the curriculum and throughout a school.

The National Constitution Center’s Educational Philosophy

The National Constitution Center defines civic learning as the integration of three learning spheres: civic knowledge, public action, and democratic deliberation. This instructional framework is designed to have a positive effect on all aspects of academic and school life. The Center believes that to improve the civic mission of all schools, every educator should integrate the three learning spheres across the grade levels and in all disciplines.

The learning spheres are defined in the following way:

Civic Knowledge: Fundamental civic knowledge is defined as an understanding of concepts such as the United States Constitution, Bill of Rights, federalism, state and local government, other core facts of American government and history, and the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. This knowledge is the foundation for the functions of a representative democracy.

Public Action: A healthy democracy is dependent on citizens who choose to participate. Integrating service-learning, when appropriate, promotes active participation and further secures a representative democracy. Active participation can be demonstrated in school leadership, student media, and/or involvement with one’s community.

Democratic Deliberation: The American system is built on the free expression of conflicting ideas and will continue to thrive only if new points of view can be expressed and heard. This includes the recognition of differing points of view on current and past issues affecting American society. Schools should strive to include all voices in the classroom and the school community while working toward the goal of having all stakeholders understand multiple points of view as they develop personal opinions.

National Constitution Center: Visiting Philadelphia

From the moment you enter our building on Independence Mall, two blocks from the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, the National Constitution Center encourages you to actively participate. Every student and teacher becomes a part of The Story of We the People as they explore the museum:

· Located in historic Philadelphia, America’s first metropolis, the National Constitution Center is actually within Independence National Historic Park. Why is this historic square mile the birthplace of our country? In the 18^th century, Philadelphia was the nation’s largest city and was the most centrally located in the 13 original colonies. Following the American Revolution, the capital moved to New York City, but the convention of 1787, whose original purpose was to revise the Articles of Confederation, was held in Philadelphia. These historic events have provided the ideal home for a Center dedicated to the study of American history, government, and the Constitution. When you walk through the front door of the Center, you enter the Grand Hall Lobby, a meeting space where activity tables and programs occur daily.

· Next, you enter the Philadelphia 1787 exhibit. Images, sounds, and historically based conversations show what life was like in Philadelphia that summer of 1787, setting the scene for the museum’s introductory multimedia performance in the adjacent theater. Artifacts in the 1787 gallery were found on this site during an archeological excavation prior to construction. Take a look at the map in the back of the hall to find out about the Quakers, shopkeepers, enslaved Africans, craftsmen, laborers, and immigrants, who lived in this vibrant neighborhood in the 1780s.

· Freedom Rising is a spectacular 17-minute multimedia production that combines images, video, audio, and a live actor. Freedom Rising tells the story of the founding of our country and the creation of the Constitution and its impact on the nation from 1787 to today. It is a moving and unforgettable performance that many visitors consider a highlight of the museum experience.

· Once the show ends you will enter The American Experience, our main exhibit space. The exhibit gallery circles the theater in three parallel paths. The outside wall, the Chronology, uses artifacts, story panels, videos, walk-in environments, and interactives to tell the story of the Constitution and how it has shaped American history. The Preamble path, in the middle of the exhibition space, is highly interactive. It explores the functions and operations of American government today, allowing you to take the presidential oath of office, sit at a replica of the Supreme Court bench, hear the arguments in a landmark case, and serve on a jury. Finally, the inner ring encourages you to find your own answers by exploring our Interactive Constitution computer stations and voicing your opinions on key constitutional issues on our talk-back panels.

· Signers’ Hall, filled with 42 life-sized, bronze statues of the Founders, recreates the moment that the Constitution was signed on September 17, 1787. Here, you can choose to add your name to the Constitution or to dissent and choose not to sign, as three of the Convention delegates did.

The story continues beyond the main exhibit space. Information on current daily and special programs for schools, families, and general visitors can be found at the lobby Information Desk and on our website (www.constitutioncenter.org). There are also many evening programs that bring in local and national authorities on constitutional topics with either free or discounted admission for K-12 students and teachers. Finally, our changing Gallery space hosts many traveling exhibits created by the National Constitution Center or other institutions across the country.

National Constitution Center: Resources Wherever you Are www.ConstitutionCenter.org

o Interactive Constitution: Using the text of Linda Monk’s The Words We Live By, the Center has created an online tool allowing students to study and understand the text of the Constitution. The interactive Constitution is updated regularly to connect to current events and issues. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/constitution

o Constitution Newswire: A daily update of current events related to the Constitution. The National Constitution Center’s education staff updates the newswire from news sources around the country. Complete text of the story is provided, along with direct connection to the appropriate section of the Center’s Interactive Constitution. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/education/CurrentEventsfortheClassroom/ConstitutionNewswire

o Centuries of Citizenship: Interactive Timeline: Based on one of the primary portions of the National Constitution Center’s permanent exhibit, the Centuries of Citizenship Timeline is an interactive learning module. Students and teachers can use this online module to examine how the concepts of citizenship in the United States have changed over the course of American history. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/timeline/

o Citizen Action Center: This component of the National Constitution Center’s website is a robust tool for connecting directly to the operations of both local and national government. The Center allows students to research their elected officials, track bills in Congress, research the effect of lobbying on elected officials, and identify elected state representatives. This unique web-based system also provides templates for contacting these officials via email or traditional mail service.
http://capwiz.com/constitutioncenter/home/

o Podcast and Video Archive of Public Programs: The growing library of public conversations held at the National Constitution Center features conversations with elected officials, public intellectuals, and citizen debates. Students can access archived programs via a number of deliverable media options. http://www.constitutioncenter.org/visiting/PublicPrograms/ProgramArchives

Exploring The Fall Campaign Season Through Student Voices

nirenberg@appc — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 19:42:00 GMT

EXPLORING THE FALL CAMPAIGN SEASON THROUGH STUDENT VOICES With state campaigns barreling toward November general elections, you may find a unique opportunity to have students learn about government and the election process by following important campaigns in the area. The place to start is the [Student Voices Campaign Curriculum] , which will guide students from lessons about the voting system in the United States all the way through the election and analyzing media information about candidates....(read more)

Educating for Democracy in the 21st Century

DKTrevaskis — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:36:00 GMT

Educating for Democracy in the 21^st Century:

Civic Learning and Project PEACE in Interesting Times

By David Keller Trevaskis

Co-Authored by Amy Niedzalkoski, Esquire

Robert F. Kennedy once said, “There is a Chinese curse which says, ‘May he live in interesting times.’ Like it or not, we live in interesting times…” We still live in interesting times. The litany of events that make these times so interesting underscores why the ancient Chinese would make such a curse, but rather than rail against the curse, the job of educators today is to teach our children how to handle all of the conflicts that arise in creative and constructive ways. Too many forces in our culture reinforce the opposite message, that conflict is somehow bad and something that we must avoid. It is not that we, as Americans, dislike conflict. Indeed, every weekend, from “Friday Night Lights” to “Any Given Sunday,” millions across the United States revel in the violent conflict of Americans’ version of football. Yet, many of these same people fail to vote, serve on juries or get involved in local civic activities, often citing distaste for conflict as their reason for such inaction. Although we must recognize that mere participation in the democratic process without the development of effective democratic skills may actually make people less inclined to have future involvement, educators must consider ways to teach children to handle conflict more effectively than just avoiding it if we wish to have our young people grow up to be involved participants in our representative democracy. The nexus between conflict resolution education and the civic mission of our schools will be discussed below, with an emphasis on how one program—Project PEACE—offers a chance for our young people to find their voice in their schools, communities and nation.

In The Civic Mission of Schools (CMS), the consensus goal of civic education was identified as helping students gain and apply citizenship skills, knowledge and attitudes. This is also the goal of public education in Pennsylvania as outlined in the Public School Act of 1949. CMS recognized the need to provide resources and encouragement to ensure that all students may become the kind of competent and responsible citizens who are informed and thoughtful; involved in their communities; active politically; and concerned for the rights and welfare of others.

CMS offered six promising approaches for civic education. Although conflict resolution education was not a specific prescription of the CMS report, the approaches of the report outlined below provide a strong framework for connecting conflict resolution education and civic learning:

1. Provide instruction in government, history, law and democracy. Formal instruction in U.S. government, history, and democracy increases civic knowledge. This is a valuable goal in itself and may also contribute to young people’s tendency to engage in civic and political activities over the long term. However, schools should avoid teaching only rote facts about dry procedures, which is unlikely to benefit students and may actually alienate them from politics. History is full of conflict and the many ways conflict is dealt with in history—from war to peace—provides ample opportunity to teach about handling conflict in such instruction. Creative teachers have for years excited their students and informed their teaching by freezing historic events at certain points in time and then exploring how historic figures might respond if certain dispute resolution techniques were employed. A mock trial of Columbus for crimes against Native Americans might provide special insight into the cultural clashes of the past and present. Similarly, a mock mediation between Ben Franklin and Charles Pickney at the Constitutional Convention might allow students to better understand the conflict over slavery that led to the major compromises in the Constitution.

2. Incorporate discussion of current local, national, and international issues and events into the classroom, particularly those that young people view as important to their own lives. When young people have opportunities to discuss current issues in a classroom setting, they tend to have greater interest in politics, improved critical thinking and communications skills, more civic knowledge, and more interest in discussing public affairs out of school. Conversations, however, should be carefully moderated so that students feel welcome to speak from a variety of perspectives. Both students and teachers need support in broaching controversial issues in classrooms since they may risk criticism or sanctions if they do so. Here is an obvious place for conflict resolution education. As politicians and others bemoan the lack of civility in our society, there are great opportunities in such discussions for students to learn how to disagree without being disagreeable, learning to give “I” statements instead of “You” statements.

3. Design and implement programs that provide students with the opportunity to apply what they learn through performing community service that is linked to the formal curriculum and classroom instruction. Service programs are now common in K-12 schools. The ones that best develop engaged citizens are linked to the curriculum; consciously pursue civic outcomes, rather than seek only to improve academic performance or to promote higher self-esteem; allow students to engage in meaningful work on serious public issues; give students a role in choosing and designing their projects; provide students with opportunities to reflect on the service work; allow students – especially older ones – to pursue political responses to problems consistent with laws that require public schools to be nonpartisan; and see service-learning as part of a broader philosophy of education, not just a program that is adopted for a finite period in a particular course. Some school service programs involve the creation of mediation programs for the school or for the larger community; other programs involve cross-age teaching of conflict resolution skills. Whatever the service program, working in the community requires the ability to handle conflict and thus reinforces the need for and the value of such education.

4. Offer extracurricular activities that provide opportunities for young people to get involved in their schools or communities. Long-term studies of Americans show that those who participate in extracurricular activities in high school remain more engaged in civics activities than their contemporaries even decades later. Thus, everyone should have opportunities to join school groups, and such participation should be valued. Group participation means interaction with peers and others as part of that participation, thus providing real-life conflict resolution exercise.

5. Encourage student participation in school governance. A long tradition of research suggests that giving students more opportunities to participate in the management of their own classrooms and schools builds their civic skills and attitudes. Thus, giving students a voice in school governance is a promising way to encourage all young people to engage civically. The conflicts associated with school governance often mirror the conflicts found in political life in the larger society and the need for skill development here is vital if the experience for the students is to be positive. Although a developmentally appropriate approach is needed, there is room at every level for students to participate in school governance, with that level of participation growing as the students mature.

6. Encourage students’ participation in simulations of democratic processes and procedures. Recent evidence indicates that simulations of voting, trials, legislative deliberation, and diplomacy in schools can lead to heightened political knowledge and interest. The data is not conclusive, but these approaches show promise and should be considered when developing programs and Curriculum. Mediation Showcases (CMS) are just one way dispute resolution education can be brought into the schools, providing an interactive connection between conflict resolution education and civic learning. For many years, the Pennsylvania Statewide Mock Trial Competition has also featured dispute resolution exercises tied to the issues in the case being tried.

Project PEACE (Peaceful Endings through Attorneys, Children and Educators) is a peer mediation training program implemented in Pennsylvania by the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA) and the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office that follows the approaches outlined in the CMS report to provide, at the elementary school level and up, an education in the skills of conflict resolution that are necessary for civic participation. This public-private partnership introduces dispute resolution techniques to elementary school students throughout the Commonwealth. Originally brought to Pennsylvania by then Attorney General Mike Fisher in 1999 after the tragedy at Columbine High School, the program has continued to flourish under Attorney Generals Jerry Pappert and Thomas Corbett. Seven presidents of the PBA have also endorsed the program. Over the past six years, Project PEACE has brought peer mediation programming and conflict resolution education to 80 Pennsylvania schools directly and another 120 indirectly. All schools, regardless of socioeconomic status, diversity and location, have been forced by outbreaks of school violence to confront the issue of conflict among school students and with faculty and staff, and to help students address and resolve it before it escalates into violence. That initial look at tackling the problem of violence has led to a broader look at building involved communities, first at the school level, and then beyond. Social studies lessons often focus on the local community, using approaches that build and reinforce the sense of community in the class and in the school. Unfortunately, in this era of high stakes testing, double periods of math and reading are taking the place traditionally reserved for social studies in the early grades. In such schools, Project PEACE provides a valuable means of providing civic learning in the schools that would otherwise be lost. It empowers children with the important life-skills that promote constructive communication, problem-solving, critical-thinking and self-esteem.

During Project PEACE training, school teams - composed of one administrator, one educator, one guidance counselor or second educator, one parent and one attorney - are introduced to the peer mediation and conflict resolution education process through hands-on learning activities. They receive instruction in such areas as adjudication vs. mediation, diffusing conflict situations and the skills of conflict resolution. At the end of the training, the schools write their own conflict resolution education and mediation plans, which are introduced to their local schools. At home, the schools then select and train their student mediators and teach the skills of conflict resolution to all of the school community. The student mediators then help fellow students resolve disputes peacefully when the students cannot do so on their own. The schools with the most effective Project PEACE programs recognize that they must do more than train a corps of mediators and send the mediators out into the community to help promote a peaceful school. Effective Project PEACE programs reach out to teach all members of the community the skills of conflict resolution that are so necessary to have a democratic community.

The lawyer partner is a unique aspect of Project PEACE. It provides a partner who is connected to the community beyond the school and who, by nature of professional training, should be grounded in the rule of law and the world of civic engagement. In addition, by nature of their profession, lawyers deal with conflict on a daily basis, and have developed some expertise in doing so. Research in why kids and schools succeed, as well as research on school mediation programs, suggests that the partner from the outside community can have a significant impact in improving school climate. Many lawyer volunteers have helped their schools find speakers for kickoff programs and other meetings or obtain proclamations from local and state elected officials recognizing Project PEACE.

In The Quickening of America: Rebuilding our Nation, Remaking our Lives, Francis Moore Lappe and Paul Martin DuBois attack the myths that they say keep people from becoming more involved in solving the problems of our day creatively. Myth Three is that “public life means ugly conflict.” The authors argue that “conflict can be healthy and informative, bringing insights about ourselves and new perspectives for solving problems.”

This insight comes straight from a Project PEACE mediation lesson about conflict being neither good nor bad, that what matters is what you do with the conflict to make it positive or negative. When I ask children to find conflicts in the newspaper, they almost always pick out the articles and pictures that show conflict in a negative manner.

One of the primary benefits of Project PEACE is that it teaches students that conflict is an inevitable part of life that they should not fear. Through their experience, students see how conflict can create opportunities for growth and development. As a fifth grader told his school’s attorney partner, “It’s good to be in conflict because it helps you learn to solve problems.” Project PEACE students feel confident in their ability to handle conflict. How many adults do you know who wish they felt that way?

Research on Project PEACE has found that teachers perceived less verbal harassment, physical harassment, and uncooperative behavior among their students after those students had participated in Project PEACE. The report also found that students who participated in Project PEACE were able to resolve more problems themselves or through other student intervention. That, in turn, enabled teachers to devote more of their time and energy to teaching rather than disciplining.

When teachers, administrators, and parents first observe the results of Project PEACE, they often are amazed at the ease with which students diffuse and resolve conflicts. But conflict management skills are not all the students learn. Students in Project PEACE also gain a profound understanding of life—they discover truths that many adults have forgotten. When asked by a lawyer working with their school what they had learned from their participation in Project PEACE, fifth graders in an urban elementary school listed the following: “patience,” “commitment,” “trust,” “setting a good example,” “reflecting,” “communicating,” “helping others,” and “understanding.” In a world where violence and disruptive behaviors have become increasingly common, Project PEACE promotes civility and tranquility.

Educating the Public: Why teachers matter

Maggie M — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:57:00 GMT

Educating the Public: Why teachers matter

Historically, public schools in the United States have been charged with a civic mission to educate younger generations for participation in the life of democracy. In fact, the constitutions of many states justify public financing for schools on the basis that education ensures a healthy democratic culture (See Civic Mission of Schools report available at http://www.civicmissionofschools.org). How do schools accomplish this goal? The answer that many of us would give is that schools are where children gain knowledge – an understanding of our democratic system, its institutions, and their rights and responsibilities as citizens.

Schools’ roles in a democracy

However, knowledge is a necessary but insufficient basis for making democracy work. As was evident in the struggles of the fledgling democracies in Central and Eastern Europe, a democratic society also has to nurture certain psychological dispositions in people including:

tolerance of opposing views
trust in others
commitment to civic participation

Schools play a central role in nurturing democratic dispositions in younger generations by creating different types of learning climates both in the classroom and in the school as a whole. There is a large body of literature linking school climates with students’ academic motivation and achievement. That work suggests that students are more motivated to learn when they:

identify as members of the school community
feel that they and fellow students “belong” there

As the authority figures in classrooms, teachers play a critical role in creating democratic climates for learning. Students have greater confidence in their capacities and are more committed to learning when they perceive that teachers:

respect them
apply fair standards
challenge all students rather than only high achievers

In our research we have found that similar dimensions of a school’s climate are important in nurturing students’ civic dispositions. Specifically, students are more committed to civic participation and more tolerant and trusting of others when they:

feel a sense of solidarity with fellow students and pride in being part of the school
feel that teachers at their school encourage students to voice their opinions and to respect the views of others

(For a fuller discussion of teachers’ roles in sustaining democracies, see Flanagan, Cumsille, Gill, & Gallay, in press, or Flanagan & Faison, 2000. Both are available at http://aee.cas.psu.edu/faculty/Flanagan.html.)

Defining ‘citizenship’

To understand why these two dimensions of school climates are associated with citizenship, we can turn to the definition of citizenship proposed by political theorist Michael Walzer:

“A citizen is most simply, a member of a political community, entitled to whatever prerogatives and encumbered with whatever responsibilities are attached to membership” (Walzer, 1989: 211).

In short, citizenship involves:

the experience of membership in a community
the exercise of one’s voice and rights in that community
assumption of responsibilities to the community

Establishing a climate for citizenship in the classroom

Community should be understood here not in a geographical sense, but in terms of a group of people, organization, or institution where one can develop a sense of oneself as part of a “public.” Clearly, citizenship, to be meaningful, cannot be memorized. It must be practiced, and schools are key sites in which younger generations enact and negotiate the meaning of citizenship. The two dimensions of school climate outlined above are important factors in how younger generations become engaged citizens.

1. Feelings of solidarity with others and pride in the institution

The sense that they are an integral part of the school community is fundamental to students’ evolving sense of themselves as part of the public. The affective ties youth gain when they feel a sense of community at school generalize to the larger polity and give meaning to phrases like “We, the people.” According to psychological studies, people who identify with an organization or institution feel a sense of responsibility to the group and its members. Likewise, a student’s sense of belonging or connectedness at school is positively correlated with his or her civic commitments, and even predicts later engagement in the affairs of his or her community in adulthood.

Participation in extracurricular activities is an especially strong predictor of civic engagement in adulthood because it develops students’ competencies in perspective taking, team work, and cooperation. Furthermore, students may gain a sense of collective efficacy, i.e., they may learn that there are some things in life (like political action) that we can only accomplish by working with others.

2. Teacher-student relationships and open-classroom climates

Open-classroom climates have been described in the civic education literature as settings in which a teacher encourages a respectful exchange of students’ opinions, even when the views that students voice differ from those of the teacher. Such practices are positively correlated with students’ ability to think critically about civic issues and their tolerance for dissenting views. Why? Several “lessons” about democracy and citizenship are communicated when teachers encourage the diverse perspectives of their students to be aired:

First, students learn that they have a right to an autonomous opinion, even if the adult authority holds a different view.
Second, students learn that they have a responsibility to listen and to defend the right of others to voice their own opinions, however much they may disagree with them. One curriculum that encourages such perspective-taking opportunities and inter-group understanding is “Facing History and Ourselves” (http://www.facing.org).
Third, when teachers encourage a free and respectful exchange of opinions in their classrooms and allow students to disagree with them, they welcome students into a community of fellow learners/citizens. As Deborah Meier argues in her book, In Schools We Trust, when teachers let it be known that they do not have all the answers, they reveal that the best way to learn is to be public and open to learning new things: “There is no way to get around it: The willingness to take risks, ask questions, and make mistakes is a requirement for the development of expertise. We can learn secretly, but at a price” (Meier, 2002: 14).
Lastly, when students are encouraged to express their opinions, and adults in positions of authority actually listen, the youth learn that they have the capacity to effect change. Their sense of political efficacy and belief that citizens can and should hold elected officials accountable are shaped in part from these everyday experiences. To sustain a healthy democracy, we need an informed and motivated citizenry that feels its participation in the polity matters, its voice counts, and the ordinary citizen’s involvement is what makes democracy work.

In summary, democratic learning climates in schools affect students’ civic values and dispositions because the students develop a sense of themselves as members of a political community and as effective civic actors in that community. Through their interactions with students, teachers convey messages about social inclusion (i.e., who belongs, whose opinions count) and tolerance and respect for differing opinions, fundamental principles of democracy in the United States. Although the civic role of public schools is regularly challenged by pressures to increase student achievement, we have learned that the types of school climates and teacher-student relationships that are known to promote students’ academic motivation and achievement also promote their democratic disposition and civic commitment.

Rebuilding a Strong Democracy

Todd Clark — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:54:00 GMT

Rebuilding a Strong Democracy

What, or who influenced your attitudes toward becoming involved in civic life? In asking that question of many people over the years, I have always been astonished that virtually no one remembers a teacher or a school experience. My most vivid memory involved my father and his commitment to civic action. Other’s memories may involve the 4-H or the Y, raising money door-to-door for an important cause, or running in a 10K to help obliterate a dread disease. How about you, what memories come to mind? Although few of us think of school as the place that caused us to become involved in our communities, it should be a more important source of inspiration. What can we do to change that?

Unfortunately, even though our nation created public education to prepare young people to be effective citizens, as educators, we rarely think about that goal or talk about how to achieve that end. Recently, there has been growing attention given to preparing youth for civic engagement.

The Civic Mission of Schools report published by The Carnegie Corporation of New York and CIRCLE, a research center at the University of Maryland, looks at that issue. Scholars and practitioners were asked to identify research and present ideas that can help strengthen current practice regarding this important, but largely overlooked aspect of schooling in America. If you haven’t seen it, the report is available on the Carnegie website: www.carnegie.org and on the sites listed below.

The report identified six promising approaches supported by research which, when they are part of a comprehensive school effort, increase the likelihood that students will become engaged citizens. These approaches offer few surprises for teachers who favor interactive classrooms that are connected to their school and community life. 1) Provide instruction in government, history, law and democracy. 2) Incorporate discussion of current local, national and international issues and events in the classroom, particularly those students view as important to their lives. 3) Apply what is learned through service connected to the curriculum. 4) Offer extracurricular activities that provide opportunities for young people to get involved in their schools or communities. 5) Encourage student participation in school governance by soliciting ideas and suggestions to improve the quality of school life as well as to engage in student government. 6) Encourage students’ participation in simulations of democratic processes and procedures.

For a more comprehensive look at the report, take a look at the national Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools website, www.civicmissionofschools.org or the website of our California Campaign; www.cms-ca.org to discover the range of materials and activities that you can integrate into your present work.

Our California Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools is a collaborative effort of the Constitutional Rights Foundation and the Center for Civic Education. CRF regularly publishes The Bill of Rights in Action to support classroom instruction and has developed many materials that include simulations, and service learning opportunities. We also developed Active Citizenship Today, a framework for planning and implementing school and community projects. Our CityWorks program can be used with traditional U.S. Government texts to teach about local government. To learn more about CRF materials visit our website, www.crf-usa.org. CCE sponsors “We the People” a state and national competition based on the U.S. Constitution and “Project Citizen,” a program which stimulates students to plan projects to improve their community. Their materials can be viewed at; www.civiced.org . Many other groups have developed outstanding programs and materials for classroom use which are described on the websites of both the national campaign for the civic mission of schools and our California campaign. Both these sites are listed above.

Accept the challenge that we must do more to excite and prepare our young people to connect and engage in our democracy.

Let’s get busy; the health of our democracy is very important to our future!

Todd Clark

Constitutional Rights Foundation

Los Angeles, California

Teens and the Right to Gamble Online in America

NAES_Admin — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:52:00 GMT

The Right to Gamble Online in America

Study finds an enormous growth in poker and online gambling in young people

Gambling has become a major source of entertainment for Americans with Las Vegas regarded as a premier vacation destination and nearly all states now allowing or sponsoring a variety of legal gambling opportunities. There has also been a recent boom in televised poker tournaments with large audiences of young people learning to play the latest versions of this game.

Despite the dramatic growth of this business, gambling on the web remains a contentious issue. The federal government maintains that use of the web for placing bets violates laws that prohibit the use of interstate communication media for gambling purposes. As a result, all of the gambling websites originate from offshore in the Caribbean or in exotic locations such as the Isle of Gibraltar. Although outside of the federal government’s jurisdiction, these sites draw many visitors from the U.S., and web-based gambling, especially online poker, has become a multi-billion dollar international business.

One of the more compelling arguments against allowing online gambling is that, unlike land-based casinos such as the ones in Las Vegas, it is very difficult to exclude young people from using gambling websites. Just as the states control the sales of liquor and cigarettes, they also have an interest in preventing access to gambling by young people. Unless gamblers control their spending, they can find themselves in debt without any means to cover their losses. Gambling can also be addictive for some people, just as alcohol and tobacco can be subject to abuse. States see it in their interest to control access to such potentially hazardous activities and to prohibit young people from engaging in them.

This all raises the question: How should the U. S. treat online gambling? Should it attempt to strengthen existing laws so that online gambling continues to be illegal? Or, should it face up to the inevitability that this form of gambling will only continue to grow and, as a result, permit online gambling? If it did decide to permit online gambling, should it attempt to control access so that young people are restricted from using the sites, much as land-based casinos do? These are difficult questions with no easy answers. The sites below will give you some background and viewpoints, both pro and con, regarding the best way to proceed.

You might want to start with a report released by our policy center on the prevalence of gambling among young people ages 14 to 22 and the problems that are associated with it. We have been tracking gambling activity in young people since 2002 and have witnessed the enormous growth in poker and online gambling since that time.

[Annenberg Public Policy Center press release]

See how some members of Congress have proposed to control online gambling by persons of all ages, especially for such games as poker, by preventing the use of credit cards or other bank related devices to pay for gambling transactions. US Senate Policy Committee background report on Internet gambling to support Senator Jon Kyl’s Bill. A similar bill was introduced this year in the House.

http://www.ncalg.org/Library/Kyl_Internet.pdf

A good basic introduction to how Internet gambling operates is contained in this legal review of the problem. Also includes a description of state and federal laws pertaining to the control of online gambling as well as possible solutions to controlling it. (1998).

http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/iclp/alessani.html

A pro-legalization viewpoint from a business perspective can be found at this site. E-Commerce News: Legal questions in advertising for online gambling.

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/42696.html

Facts about Gambling and Addiction: A collection of reports and literature on gambling compiled by The National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling.

[NCALG: Facts About Gambling and Addiction]

A scientific review of the effects of gambling was released in 1998. The National Gambling Impact Study Commission Final Report has lots of valuable information about the spread of gambling in the U.S. and problems associated with this recent development.

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc/reports/fullrpt.html

To see how another country plans to deal with online and other forms of gambling, see: A guide to the UK’s Gambling Commission, including their objectives and approaches to regulate Internet gambling. (2005).

http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/UploadDocs/publications/Document/Introductory%20guide.pdf

BBC 2005 broadcast investigating the global boom in gambling. Four part series, all programs available for listening in RealPlayer. The segment on Internet gambling (Part 3) is particularly relevant to this discussion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/documentary_archive/4173698.stm

Teaching Separation of Powers

kitty — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:48:00 GMT

BASIC CONCEPTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE LESSON: The Constitution separated power into 3 equal branches of government so that no one branch of government would become too powerful. The federal legislative branch -- the Congress which is created by Article 1 -- has the power to pass laws. The federal executive branch -- that is the President and executive agencies created by Article 2 -- has the power to administer the laws and to conduct foreign policy. The President is also the commander in chief of...(read more)