Well, friends in civics, it is a new week, and this new week brings us more good online video resources from Palm Beach Schools. This week’s lessons cover Articles I, II, and III and Federalism! Let’s take a look. As always you will find a link back to the original Civics360 resource as well. Thanks again to Lori Dool!
Be sure to check out earlier videos in this resource collection! I’ve compiled them below.
Week 1 (Forms of Government, Systems of Government, International Organizations, International Conflicts) Week 2 (Enlightenment Ideas, Impact of Historical Documents, Pursuit of Independence, Articles of Confederation) Week 3 (The Preamble, Constitutional Limits, Federalists and Anti-Federalists, Rule of Law, Sources and Types of Law) Week 4 (Citizenship, Citizen Responsibilities and Obligations, Bill of Rights and Other Amendments, Constitutional Safeguards and Limitations, Constitutional Rights) Week 5 (Impact of the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments, Significant Supreme Court Cases, Political Parties, and Evaluating Candidates) Week 6 (Influencing the Government; Bias, Symbolism, and Propaganda; Public Policy Problem-solving; and Multiple Perspectives.
A recent paper entitled “A Complex Systems Approach to the Study of Ideology”* presents a theory much like the one I have begun to develop in a series of posts on this blog and other work.
If we construe ideologies as complex systems, we have (at least) two levels of systems embedded in each other. At the individual level, the elements are ideas, beliefs, and values, whose interactions give rise to a person’s understanding of society, which in turn guides individual political behavior. At the group level, the elements are individual minds whose interactions give rise to discourses and power dynamics, which in turn guide collective action and societal change. We thus conceive of an ideological system as a network of minds, where minds are networks of concepts.
The authors of “A Complex Systems Approach” also diagram the ideology of the Tea Party Movement, using the qualitative analysis in a well-known article by Vanessa Williamson, Theda Skocpol, and John Coggin as their material.
Their diagram of the Tea Party is not heavily documented, but it demonstrates a payoff of their method. A paradox about the Tea Party is that they were powerful opponents of Obamacare yet passionate defenders of Medicare. The authors of “A Complex Systems Approach” explain this pattern by arguing that “representations of social programs are connected on one hand with representations of the self as a hard worker contributing to society and, hence, deserving of the government check …, but on other hand with the highly negative representations of government, spending, and taxation common to conservative ideologies.”
Each idea and link in the Tea Party ideology is consistent enough in its own way, and the overall system generates a combination of policy positions that only seem inconsistent if you try to place the whole ideology on one linear spectrum from pro- to anti-welfare. As a network of ideas, the ideology is as well structured as many others are. This is not an endorsement, since some of the specific nodes in the Tea Party’s network are objectionable by my lights. But a complex systems model offers a more refined analysis.
The word “complex” is used loosely and in various ways, but the authors of “A Complex Systems Approach” mean systems that exhibit “emergence, nonlinearity (disproportionality of cause and effect), path dependency, and multiple equilibria.” In the Tea Party ideology, for example, resentment of groups perceived as undeserving (which, in turn, is a racialized perception) has a powerful effect because of its location in the whole network. The Tea Party can land in several places (libertarian or #MAGA) that reflect multiple equilibria.
I find it intuitive that our ideas are structured and that the structures matter apart from the lists of individual ideas we hold. I acknowledge that we are not necessarily conscious of the whole structures of our own thought. Self-consciousness requires critical introspection and/or interaction with other people, and it is always partial.
However, I do believe we are conscious of portions of the network at any given time–not just the individual ideas, but the connections among them. Much of our discourse is about mini-structures of ideas, e.g., “I think this because of that.” Methods that reveal structures of ideas and links are alternatives to the family of methodologies that use latent variables to “explain” lists of specific beliefs, as in Moral Foundations Theory. I believe that such methods assume rather than demonstrate that human beings are driven by a few unconscious psychological traits. Although such explanations offer some insight, they should be combined with methods that allow us to see how people and groups build more complex structures. This is why I am excited to see this new paper and the work that underlies it.
* Homer-Dixon, Thomas, Jonathan Leader Maynard, Matto Mildenberger, Manjana Milkoreit, Steven J. Mock, Stephen Quilley, Tobias Schröder, & Paul Thagard. “A Complex Systems Approach to the Study of Ideology: Cognitive-Affective Structures and the Dynamics of Belief Systems.” Journal of Social and Political Psychology [Online], 1.1 (2013): 337-363. Web. 4 May. 2020. I had been previously influenced by Thagard’s work although I have not made the detailed study of it that it deserves.
On April 24th, NCDD hosted a special event from NCDD sponsoring member Susan Stuart Clark of Common Knowledge, titled Cultivating Community Capacity with Four “Deep Wisdom” Practices. The event, attended by more than 60 participants, was the start of a series of activities and collection of resources at sense-us.org, a new pro bono project for Common Knowledge and allies in the arts, healing and community transformation.
Susan shared with us the four practices identified by cross-cultural pioneer Angeles Arrien, which we can use to help deepen our individual and collective capacity for discovering the deeper wisdom in and between us. Susan outlines the interpretation of these four practices and their importance to us and our work designing and facilitate community engagement during and after this pandemic in this wonderful piece.
Drawn from ancient and indigenous wisdom, these practices invite us to bring our whole selves – heart, body and mind – to our work as cultivators of community, dialogue stewards and/or peace builders. During this time of physical isolation, let’s embrace the ways we can bring closeness to one another through sharing our truest selves with each other. Let’s see how we can expand our capacity to understand the patterns and structures that brought us to this current moment and choose more inclusive and collaborative ways to co-create our future.
The event was purposefully held on Arbor Day to acknowledge how trees can teach us a lot about nurturing individual and collective resilience. After an overview of the four practices, break out groups compared their experiences and what is inspiring their work. Participants had the opportunity to connect more deeply with one another, sharing how the practices resonate for them, as well as how they relate to their work in and with communities.The full group reflection served as a wonderful stepping off point for future discussions.
Julie Gieseke created a wonderful visual map during the event which can be viewed below. The full session can be watched at this link, and the chat transcript can be found here. If you’d like to contribute resources and participate in future discussions, visit www.sense-us.org.
Graduate students and advanced undergraduates at the University of Kentucky, watch this VIDEO (4m29s) about why you should take my EPE 525 / 640 course in the fall of 2020 on the Philosophy of Education. The EPE 525 course is the undergraduate version of the EPE 640 class, which is for graduate students, and both meet at the same time and in the same room.
If you can’t see this video in your RSS reader or email, then click here.
Why study the Philosophy of Education?
a) Educators and leaders are expected to have a meaningful grasp of their own philosophies of education;
b) All research is rooted in frameworks of ideas that support and contextualize our work and thought, and that can clarify and help us to focus or be conflicted and confuse us if not carefully considered;
c) Everyone working in educational administration contributes to a system that functions with respect to or in conflict with underlying philosophical ideas. That calls for appreciating and always keeping in mind what we ought to be doing in education.
What you’ll get out of it / create:
Photo Credit: Jacob Slaton
1) A short “teaching statement,” “Statement on Educational Philosophy,” or related document commonly requested in academic job applications, as well as for administrative positions that often involve teaching courses or otherwise supporting them;
2) A book review for possible publication (optional route for students’ presentation);
3) A conference-length paper ready for submission to professional calls for papers;
4) A full-length research paper suitable for submission to journals and that could support your other projects;
John Dewey, concerned that you’re not yet signed up for the course.
5) An op-ed-length version of the research paper for possible submission to newspapers or educational periodicals (optional);
6) Credits that can contribute to the Graduate Certificate in College Teaching and Learning.
When & Where?
It’ll be on Mondays from 4-6:30pm in Dickey Hall rm 127. It is possible that we may start the semester with online meetings via Zoom, but details on such arrangements are yet to be determined. Decisions will follow the University of Kentucky’s guidelines for the sake of safety in the midst or wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
NCDD member organization MetroQuest is hosting another of their great webinars on optimizing online engagement for planning. This webinar is free and happening next Wednesday, May 6th at 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern. You can read more in the post below and find the original on MetroQuest’s site here.
MetroQuest webinar – “Optimizing Online Engagement for Planning with MetroQuest”
Wednesday, May 6th
11 am Pacific | 12 pm Mountain | 1 pm Central | 2 pm Eastern (1 hour)
Educational Credit Available (APA AICP CM)
Complimentary (FREE)
After reviewing hundreds of case studies, it turns out that there’s a formula for success with online public engagement to support planning.
Online tools are a critical part of the planner’s public engagement toolbox, especially as we look for safe, effective methods to engage during the COVID-19 pandemic. Digital town halls? Online surveys? Social media? Online forums? Find out which options result in positive, actionable community input for your urban and transportation plans.
It’s time to learn from the best performing case studies. In this webinar, you’ll learn how hundreds of agencies have engaged 1000s of participants, collecting 30,000 to 200,000 data points by combining well-designed surveys with targeted social media.
Discover the critical success factors to help you replicate the exceptional results that agencies and firms have been able to achieve – unprecedented levels of participation, broader demographic reach, informed public input, and actionable results to support data-driven plans.
This deep-dive session is the fastest way to get up-to-date on MetroQuest and a wide range of other tools and best practices for optimizing public engagement for planning.
Online public engagement can help teams move forward safely and effectively. In this webinar, we’ll explore how to:
Identify the right tools to achieve the best engagement results for planning
Deliver outstanding public engagement experiences using online tools
Embed microlearning to ensure that public input is informed
Achieve your top public engagement goals
Collect thousands of data points to support local plan