General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCivics class required for high school graduation will push the envelope
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-civics-required-for-graduation-met-20150907-story.htmlUnlike the generic four years of language arts or two years of science, the civics requirement of at least one semester spells out what must be taught: "Civics course content shall focus on government institutions, the discussion of current and controversial issues, service learning, and simulations of the democratic process."
Those activities are far more provocative than memorizing the three branches of government or the Bill of Rights, and educators say civics instruction will likely be aimed at juniors or seniors, because they are more mature than younger high school students.
CrispyQ
(36,457 posts)It's shameful how many Americans can't name their Senators or Rep.
I was at a dinner party a few months ago when that topic came up somehow. Those who knew their senators/rep raised their hands. 20%. No shit. So one in five pays attention enough to know that. Good grief, no wonder we are in the spot we are in.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Or city councilmembers or county supervisors.
Now you have an idea what it's like to try and organize around state and local issues.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,307 posts)It seems an odd title for a course.
JustAnotherGen
(31,811 posts)I keep getting looped back to the Chicago Tribune landing page as a result. Is the idea that civics is a 'bad thing'?
I don't have kids and graduated in 1991 - granted a prep school in Western NY but . . .
Is civics no longer taught? Has it not been taught for the past few decades? This was a basic part of my social justice classes. They focused on Civics in the first half of our 2nd quarter of Senior years as for the most part, we started turning 18 after the first of the year.
TexasMommaWithAHat
(3,212 posts)I don't know how much more would be covered in an actual civics class.
tblue37
(65,335 posts)for our city commission election and then volunteer to work on the campaign of the candidate whose positions they favored. (This was back in 1997 or 1998.)
That was a great approach to teaching civics, which the teacher considered to be an essential aspect of the study of US history.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)back in the Cambrian.
So what is the problem?
By the way, when my husband took US Government in college it was kind of funny, We cover city hall, that is one of the assignments for the students, to go sit in at one meeting. Instructor had no idea how to deal with him, since we have some photos of well Filner's last day on the job as well.
And it is bad when the student can discuss with authority the city budget, almost line by line.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)"Those activities are far more provocative than memorizing the three branches of government or the Bill of Rights,"
<from above clip>
Without "memorizing" the Three Branches of Government,
or studying the Bill of Rights..... the rest is useless,
and may be a Trojan Horse for something far worse.
The Three Branches of Government and the Bill of Rights should be the Foundation and whole 1st Chapter of ANY "Civics" Course.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)ZING!
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Although, these days, that might be considered an AP exam.
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)We did write position papers (third grade!) and hold formal debates (fifth grade) on current events.
By middle school we were also doing service learning (we were given free rein to dream up and organize our projects) on local issues and writing our congresscritters.
Honestly, the problem with six months of civics in HS is that it's too little and too late.