A Time of Reckoning

It has been an awful and amazing two weeks – a time of reckoning that is long overdue, a time of coming together that, despite the tragic circumstances, has been enlivening. What is so remarkable is that the Black Lives Matter protests have been nested within a larger, unprecedented trauma, the pandemic. I have found the protests riveting and inspiring, and the brazen police brutality enraging.  The outpouring has issued a call to all of us, especially white people, to look beyond the engrained American norms that have made life so dangerous and demoralizing for people of color.

Anthropologist/activist David Graeber sees the spontaneous protests as part of a larger movement. As he put it in a tweet: “Direct action and social movement are about the re-creation of society. Society has been taken from us. There has been a 40-year campaign to destroy attachments unmediated by the state or capital. This is the only way to start rebuilding it.” We are witnessing a re-convening of the American people and their ideals.

However, the pain of history is not past, as Faulkner once said. That's because the past is not really past. It is very much with us, internalized, in the present. Thanks to the protests, triggered by a brazen murder carried out by an agent of the state and circulated on social media, a deeper shift in consciousness has begun. It is now clear that there are really no bystanders. We are all implicated, particularly those with white privilege. As the artist Banksy put it, “At first I thought I should just shut up and listen to black people about this issue. But why would I do that? It’s not their problem. It’s mine.”

This very idea enrages President Trump, whose denial is manifest in countless deflections and vile insults aimed at protecting white supremacy. Thankfully, history is not trending in his direction. Already major corporations and even the National Football League, the long-time nemesis of “take a knee” quarterback Colin Kaepernick, now publicly support Black Lives Matter. The burden has visibly shifted to white people to look within themselves and take affirmative steps for change.

How refreshing, too, to see ordinary people assert a new vision of history in real time! Citizens have spontaneously toppled statues honoring Confederate General Robert E. Lee and Christopher Columbus. In Bristol, England, a crowd threw the statute of 17th century slave-trader Edward Colston – responsible for selling more than 84,000 Africans into slavery -- into the harbor.

The demonstrations are welcome in these respects, but, ominously, they are also evidence of a profound crisis of legitimacy in American life to which the market/state system is not likely to be able to respond effectively. In a sobering piece in The Atlantic, “Shouting Into the Institutional Void,” journalist George Packer notes:

The protesters aren’t speaking to leaders who might listen, or to a power structure that might yield, except perhaps the structure of white power, which is too vast and diffuse to respond. Congress isn’t preparing a bill to address root causes; Congress no longer even tries to solve problems. No president, least of all this one, could assemble a commission of respected figures from different sectors and parties to study the problem of police brutality and produce a best-selling report [the official Kerner Report that studied the origins of the 1968 race riots] with a consensus for fundamental change. A responsible establishment doesn’t exist. Our president is one of the rioters.

After half a century of social dissolution, of polarization by class and race and region and politics, there are no functioning institutions or leaders to fail us with their inadequate response to the moment’s urgency. Levers of influence no longer connect to sources of power. Democratic protections—the eyes of a free press, the impartiality of the law, elected officials acting out of conscience or self-interest—have lost public trust. The protesters are railing against a society that isn’t cohesive enough to summon a response. They’re hammering on a hollowed-out structure, and it very well may collapse.

Packer’s insight suggests some troubling dangers ahead. We’ve already seen the rise of violent proto-fascist and white supremacist networks and the weakness of state institutions and law. On the other hand, we also have some rich, positive opportunities to transform our political economy and culture – if we can assert a coherent vision for a paradigm shift, if we can get beyond a reversion to a tepid (capitalist-oriented) liberalism.

The state is not impotent in the coming drama, but it is surely distrusted, for good reasons. It has been far more committed to a utopian neoliberalism than to a vision that provides dignity for all citizens, healthcare during a pandemic, basic food and shelter during an unprecedented economic recession/depression, and existential protection as the earth’s atmosphere and ecosystems collapse from too much market growth.

Since the state is so entangled in its deep alliance with capital, the real energy and thought for structural change will not likely be coming from within those circle or traditional politics. It can only come from us – commoners and care workers, families and communities, water protectors and Indigenous peoples, and all others whose fates have not been captured or co-opted by the established, dysfunctional system. 

Despite the many traumas, the past two weeks give me great hope. Deep human truths can still be expressed, heard and acted upon. They have a raw power of their own, if we dare to honor them. But how to deal with the institutional void that George Packer notes? How to build new social attitudes and institutions that can meet our urgent needs, that can build a "more perfect union"? Aye, that is the unmet challenge ahead.

on the phrase: Abolish the police!

Abolish the police! opens vistas of a radically different world. Such prophetic visions are important in the midst of social movements.

Abolish the police! sends a message of conviction and solidarity and indicates a rejection of compromise. Such rhetorical moves can help keep a movement coherent.

Abolish the police! prompts a discussion of possible alternatives, including public safety by unarmed citizen groups. Even if the actual recipe includes policing, these alternatives are valuable to consider.

Abolish the police! is a strong opening position in a negotiation with a police union. It basically says: “We would rather do without you than settle for the status quo, so how far are you willing to move?”

Abolish the police! means changing the responsibilities of the police and moving funds from one governmental department to another–a classic example of policy reform. Note that policing uses a total of about 6% of local budgets, so shifting half of their money from police to other purposes would mean changing 3% of a city’s budget. Christy E. Lopez writes that this “is not as scary (or even as radical) as it sounds,” but it does mean literally abolishing that “aspect” of policing that involves “the unjustified white control over the bodies and lives of black people.”

Abolish the police! will be understood as: “No more police at all” (not even in your bourgeois neighborhood where the police are generally helpful). It will thus be used in advocacy against police reform, whether successfully or not.

Abolish the police! serves as a label for radical ideas, giving moderate politicians cover for incremental change. “I’m not for abolishing the police–some of my best friends are police officers–but we should definitely assign mental health crises and traffic patrol to a civilian agency.”

During mass movements and tumultuous moments in history, phrases suddenly spread from smaller groups to the society at large and are used in many contradictory ways, promoted by both their supporters and their opponents: “No taxation without representation!” “All power to the Soviets!” “Hell, no, we won’t go!”

There is no point in thinking, “This slogan will be misunderstood and will cause a backlash.” The messaging is not really under anyone’s control. I think the most important move is to try to create spaces within a movement for relatively wide-ranging conversations. In this case, those who literally want to abolish the police should continually exchange ideas with those who want to reform the police. This discussion need not include people who deny white supremacy; it need not represent the whole population demographically. But it should bring together different streams of thought to generate the best ideas as circumstances evolve.

(By the way, although my information is entirely anecdotal, I do think such conversations are happening right now.)

See also: the value of diversity and discussion within social movements; insights on police reform from Elinor Ostrom and social choice theory; practical lessons from classic cases of civil disobedience; Habermas with a Whiff of Tear Gas: Nonviolent Campaigns and Deliberation in an Era of Authoritarianism; Why Civil Resistance Works; and notes on Hannah Arendt’s On Revolution.

things to read about the protests against white supremacy

But as an historian of black social movements, my view is that as widespread and destructive as the 1968 rebellions were, neither their size nor the challenge they posed to the American political system approached what the U.S. has seen over the past two weeks. …

More than the number and size of the protests, though, what makes the 2020 uprisings unprecedented are the ways that they have pulled together multiple currents within the U.S. protest tradition into a mighty river of demand for fundamental change in American society. …

The point is not, as others have argued,* that it is the level of involvement of whites in the protests that distinguishes them from previous high points of anti-racist protest. There is in fact a long history of white support for, and participation in, black protest movements. …

[What is distinctive is the reform agenda.] Despite, or perhaps because of the protests’ decentralized and leaderless nature, they have managed to put on the table the broadest and most comprehensive set of social and economic reforms since the Poor People’s campaign that followed on the heels of Martin Luther King’s assassination in 1968.

Matthew Countryman, “2020 uprisings, unprecedented in scope, join a long river of struggle in America

I want to emphasize that I think white Americans have gone through quite radical changes in their attitudes, and that we’re talking about a more likely 25 percent of Americans who are hardcore racist, but I think most Americans have quite decent views about race.

But sociologists have argued that while some whites may have liberal views, a lot of them are not prepared to make the concessions that are important for the improvement of black lives. For example, one of the reasons why people have been crowded in ghettos is the fact that housing is so expensive in the suburbs, and one reason for that is that bylaws restrict the building of multi-occupancy housing. These bylaws have been very effective in keeping out moderate-income housing from the suburbs, and that has kept out working people, among whom blacks are disproportionate, from moving there and having access to good schools. Sociologists have claimed that while we do have genuine improvement in racial attitudes, what we don’t have is the willingness for white liberals to put their money where their mouth is.

Orlando Patterson, “Why America can’t escape its racist roots” [Not a good headline, because his piece is quite optimistic]

The situation is dire. The causes for personal anger many. In my own case, incandescent rage has blocked my capacity to think for several days. For me, prayer helps.

There is something we can do.

First, choose peace. Revolution never succeeds unless it rides on the back of a deeper commitment to the process of constitution. The goal has to be to build. These things can be done only on the basis of a commitment to peace. We need a better normal at the end of this. Not a new normal, a rinse and repeat of the old but with face masks. We need peace. …

Second, choose self-government. Societies can resolve their problems through only one of two mechanisms: authoritarian decision or self-government. Self-government delivers the sturdier foundation for human flourishing — a foundation that permits people to craft their own life courses and develop their full potential. To choose self-government, however, means to choose the institutions of collective decision-making. Voting, running for office, working through committee processes to identify and implement policy solutions. …

Third, channel the energies of protest directly into governance even through our imperfect institutions. We need a transformed criminal-justice system. Yes, it is good that the officer who knelt on George Floyd’s neck has been criminally charged. But the problems we face are not solved one case of police violence at a time. We need a systems-level goal.

Here is what we should choose: reduce our reliance on incarceration from 70 percent of the sanctions imposed in our criminal-justice system to 10 percent. This is not utopian. …

No justice, no peace, we often say. It’s also true, though, that without peace, there is no justice.

Danielle Allen, “The situation is dire. We need a better normal at the end of this — and peace

*including me, on Saturday evening, during a 5-minute interview on KCBS-San Francisco.

See also: Everyday Democracy: racism, policing, and community change; insights on police reform from Elinor Ostrom and social choice theory.

The Great Lakes Commons, Podcast Episode #3

The latest episode of the Frontiers of Commoning podcast is now live! This time, I interview Paul Baines, Outreach and Education Coordinator of the Great Lakes Commons, a project that fosters new attitudes and practices toward those massive bodies of endangered water.

The primary strategy of the Great Lakes Commons is not to pursue the usual approaches through the complicated multi-jurisdictional US/Canadian policymaking regime. While a necessary venue for advocacy, these legal and regulatory channels are often a fast track to stalemate. The goal of the Great Lakes Commons is more long-term and structural -- to change culture. It wants to change how people see and relate to the lakes and to each other, which in turn can affect larger motivations for change.

The group’s stated mission is to:

  • Awaken & restore our relationship to these incredible waters.
  • Activate a spirit of responsibility and belonging in the bioregion.
  • Establish stewardship and governance that enables communities to protect these waters forever.

As Baines told me, “I’ve always felt, since my early twenties, that the environmental crisis is not a problem with the environment, but with our culture.” 

So Baines and his colleagues have engaged people who live around the Great Lakes with projects that make them relate to these bodies of water in new ways. Through crowdsourced maps, for example, the Great Lakes Commons has invited people to share memorable personal stories about experiences with the lakes. Their stories are then “pinned” on a digital map indicating where they live, so anyone can browse the map and hear a variety of such stories.

The Great Lakes Commons larger mission is to show people that the lakes are “a revered source of life and a shared and equitable commons” and not a mere “object of management, a measurable resource or a commodity.” To help make this idea more real and public, people are invited to sign the Great Lakes Commons Charter Declaration inspired by the rich traditions within commons and the Indigenous governance of the Anishinabek and Haudenosaunee nations. 

Indigenous peoples who live around the lakes have in fact been close collaborators in the Great Lakes Commons. They have brought their ancient rituals and wisdom about the water and building a more diversified community to defend it against misuse. 

Baines in 2017 launched a “currency of care” project that invited people to imagine the value of money as tied to the quality and availability of water to serve life in the Great Lakes basin. The project co-created its own paper bills for people to give to others who have shown a commitment to the lakes. The idea was to create tangible new circuits of gratitude, reciprocity, mutualism, trust, reverence, and friendship related to the lakes. 

For more on the Great Lakes Commons, listen to Paul’s spirited explanations of its work!

Our Common Purpose: Reinventing American Democracy for the 21st Century (June 11)

The following event was shared by our friend Sterling Speirn, who has served on the Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship along with NCDD Members Martha McCoy and Carolyn Lukensmeyer. Register to attend at the link below!


Our Common Purpose: Reinventing American Democracy for the 21st Century

Join us for the release of the final report of the Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship. Hear from the Commissioners, dedicated Americans, and organizations who came together to make these recommendations. Learn more about the steps we can take to improve the resilience of our democracy by 2026, our nation’s 250th anniversary.

This event takes place Thursday, June 11th at 1:00 PM Eastern/10:00 AM Pacific. Please register to join us via Zoom videoconference at amacad.org/events/our-common-purpose.

The event features Commission Co-chairs:
Danielle Allen, Director, Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University
Stephen B. Heintz, President, Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Eric Liu, President and CEO, Citizen University

Moderated by Judy Woodruff, Anchor, PBS NewsHour

With Remarks by:
David Brooks, Columnist, The New York Times
and David Oxtoby, President, American Academy of Arts & Sciences

The Commission on the Practice of Democratic Citizenship, a project of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, will deepen the national dialogue around democracy, citizenship, and community, by exploring civic engagement and political participation in the United States today and will set out a plan of action for promoting the values and behaviors that define effective citizenship in a diverse 21st century democracy. Read more about the Commission here.

learning from Memphis, 1968

This clip from Eyes on the Prize* shows the first and only moment in the career of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. when a march that he led involved violence. He had to be ushered away in a car and left Memphis. When he returned, he gave perhaps his greatest speech, “I’ve Been to the Mountaintop” (April 3, 1968) in which he prophesied his own death.

In this, his final speech, he describes the historical moment: “The nation is sick, trouble is in the land, confusion all around. That’s a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars.”

He decries media coverage of the movement:

Let us keep the issues where they are. (Right) The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers. [Applause] Now we’ve got to keep attention on that. (That’s right) That’s always the problem with a little violence. You know what happened the other day, and the press dealt only with the window breaking. (That’s right) I read the articles. They very seldom got around to mentioning the fact that 1,300 sanitation workers are on strike, and that Memphis is not being fair to them, and that Mayor Loeb is in dire need of a doctor. They didn’t get around to that. (Yeah) [Applause]. Now we’re going to march again, and we’ve got to march again

He lays out a strategy that includes boycotting white-owned companies and “strengthen[ing] black institutions.” He says, “I call upon you to take your money out of the banks downtown and deposit your money in Tri-State Bank.”

And he makes the case that a massive nonviolent protest movement–in which the sheer number of nonviolent protesters overwhelms both the police and any citizens who use violence–is powerful. It is not (I would say) powerful in the sense of being moving and rhetorically effective, like a “powerful” song or speech. It is powerful in the sense that it seizes the ability to determine outcomes. The Birmingham movement compelled the Civil Rights Act; Selma compelled the Voting Rights Act. “And there was a power there which Bull Connor couldn’t adjust to, and so we ended up transforming Bull into a steer, and we won our struggle in Birmingham.”

King gave this speech in the evening of April 3, despite a thunderstorm and his own deep qualms about speaking in Memphis. The next day, he was murdered. Riots, uprisings, insurrections (or whatever you want to label them) began across the country. And on Nov. 5., 1968, Richard M. Nixon won a national election that has been attributed to white backlash.

A few observations:

– The backlash was in no way the responsibility of the Civil Rights Movement. The causes included King’s assassination, the police and the FBI, media frames, and a racially biased majority. In Memphis and elsewhere, the Civil Rights Movement was doing what it had to do. To take a phrase from the “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” blaming the protesters for the backlash would be “like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery.” As King wrote in The Atlantic in 1967, “Let us say it boldly that if the total slum violations of law by the white man over the years were calculated and were compared with the lawbreaking of a few days of riots, the hardened criminal would be the white man.” We must “keep the issues where they are”: on the injustice, not responses to it. On the other hand, 1968 was a year of defeat, and it’s important to strategize about how to win instead of losing.

– Mass nonviolent movements are miraculous. They defy predictions about human behavior based on self-interest, limited information, and powerful emotions. They are also fragile–easy to disrupt with agents provocateurs, misinformation, and violent responses. King fully grasped that a mass nonviolent uprising is a kind of rupture in ordinary history. It is a moment when a better future suddenly becomes visible in the present. That is why delaying it can easily kill it. In the “Letter,” he writes that time can be made “an ally of the forces of social stagnation.” Therefore, “We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood.”

– 2020 seems similar to 1968, yet different in important ways. Nixon was a far more skillful than Trump at exploiting backlash. He made the maintenance of racial hierarchy appear respectable by acting like a sober statesman. Trump is the face of white supremacy but happens to be grievously wounded by the pandemic, which would have been a threat to him even if he hadn’t grotesquely bungled it. (Sheer chance often determines outcomes in human events.) The country has also become more diverse: whites constituted 88% of the US population in 1970 versus 72% in 2020. On the other hand, the virus does make it harder to sustain nonviolent protests that are big enough to marginalize the police and violent individuals. People who would be relatively likely to maintain nonviolent discipline are also relatively likely to stay home to avoid the pandemic. Finally, the media landscape is far more fragmented, so that some Americans can see police rioting against innocent protesters while others see a nation devolving into crime. It is hard even to assess who is seeing what, let alone change the balance.

*Shearer, J. Stekler, P. (Director). (1990). The Promised Land [Video file]. PBS. Retrieved June 3, 2020, from Kanopy.

Watch the May Confab: Envisioning a More Intentional Future

Last week NCDD hosted our May Confab Call, led by NCDD Board Member Lori Britt. On the call, over 60 participants identified topics their communities are discussing or will need to discuss in planning for the future after COVID. Thanks again to all who participated, and to those who shared report-outs and notes at the end, so we could capture these conversations!

During this event twenty topics were identified by participants as important to their communities in envisioning a more intentional future. Of these twenty, twelve were discussed by small groups and notes were taken to capture these conversations, including sharing opportunities, ideas, and potential actions. The full list of topics, as well as the notes from the small groups have been captured in the Google Doc accessible here. NCDD hopes this is the start of many conversations, so we encourage those interested to use to document to connect with one another and continue these conversations. You can also use our listservs as applicable – learn more about that here.

In addition to the notes, the event recording includes report-outs from each of these groups on their discussions. Check out the recording here.

Our sincere appreciation to Lori for leading this conversation, and for all participants for engaging thoughtfully with one another! We hope this conversation was the start of many to come, and NCDD will reach out in the future to follow-up about some of these conversations and how they have progressed as our communities begin to reopen and plan for the future. In the meantime, feel free to share what your community is grappling with or what you are working on in the comments below.

Confab bubble imageTo learn more about NCDD’s Confab Calls and hear recordings of others, visit www.ncdd.org/events/confabs. We love holding these events and we want to continue to elevate the work of our field with Confab Calls and Tech Tuesdays. It is through your generous contributions to NCDD that we can keep doing this work! That’s why we want to encourage you to support NCDD by making a donation or becoming an NCDD member today (you can also renew your membership by clicking here). Thank you!

Our Modern Obsession with Financializing Nature

Language is surely one of the greatest political weapons ever invented because it invisibly defines the world in narrow ways and can impair our capacity to see and think clearly. This is one of the takeaways I had after looking through Sian Sullivan’s new website, “The Natural Capital Myth and Other Stories,” which collects twelve years of her writing (2008 to present) on this theme. 

Sian has long brought laser-beam clarity to the ways in which capitalism redefines the more-than-human world in financial terms. The investor class has not just introduced a handful of words; they have invented an entire worldview that erases nature and turns it into an essential element of capitalist production and profit. The natural world is re-interpreted through the scrim of money. That may not be pernicious in and of itself, but now that this perspective informs how the market/state order relates to the natural world, well….that’s a serious problem.

By “financialization,” Sullivan means the “revisioning and rewriting of the natural world in terms of financial terms and concepts.” She also means that banks and financiers regard “environmental conservation activities as new possibilities for speculative investments and products” – a new zone for profiteering and capital accumulation. 

This is deeply concerning because, as conservation itself becomes a way to make money, the line between “nature” and “capital” is starting to blur. The Orwellian term “natural capital” has become a way to justify a relentless extractivism, in the name of preserving nature!

In a 2008 essay on “Bioculturalism, shamanism and unlearning the creed of growth,” Sullivan suggests that modern economics suffers from a perpetual hunger that can never be sated. This affliction resembles one that the Greek god Demeter gave to a greedy king who refused to respect a scared grove of trees. Sullivan writes:

Permanent dissatisfaction and unfulfilled desire similarly are a zeitgeist of the freedom to produce and consume that is the hallmark of the creed of growth of state-corporate capitalism. And with indicators everywhere of decline and collapse in both global economy and ecology – from housing and finance markets, to disruptions in the dance of the seasons, the wake-up call of imminent ‘peak oil’ productivity, monstrous inequalities in the distribution of material wealth and resources, and reductions of cultural and biological diversity – perhaps we now are experiencing the inevitable inability of contemporary structures to sustain that hunger.

It's not just that we, or the king, try to consume too much. It is that we have conceptually divorced ourselves from nature. The problem is that we see nature as "some thing to be measured, mapped, modeled, commodified, conserved, used. It is not felt, celebrated, danced, or given gifts.” We moderns don’t have a “bioculturalism” that links biological diversity with a diversity of cultural knowledge, languages, and practices.

Sullivan has many other essays that speak to the ways in which our language, technologies, and desires have separated us from the more-than-human world, while paradoxically promising to emancipate and enrich us.

Check out her piece on the ontological assumptions of environmental knowledge and policy, for example, or an account of new accounting protocols that attempt to measure and monetize “natural capital” and associated flows of “ecosystem services.” Another interesting essay looks at the misguided potential of blockchain technologies to host a cryptocurrency exchange for “natural capital assets.”

While the financialization of nature may seem like a niche topic, it is really part of a larger cultural phenomenon. A few weeks ago, senior White House advisor Kevin Hassett told CNN that America’s “human capital stock” is ready to get back to work as the pandemic (supposedly) recedes. Er, yeah...but most of us regard ourselves as human beings, not machines for driving ROI.

Other Administration officials have famously opined that old people should be willing to risk death by Covid-19 for the sake of reopening the US economy. As President Trump himself tweeted, “WE CANNOT LET THE CURE [shelter-at-home restrictions] BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF.” 

Of course, this money-obsessed sensibility is not confined to our ethically challenged president. For several decades, with the ardent backing of corporate America, the US Government has used a calculation known as Value of a Statistical Life, or VSL, to assign a value to a person’s life. The current value is $10 million. Under cost-benefit analysis protocols, a new regulation is considered too expensive if it requires an industry to spend more than $10 million per estimated life saved. 

How did we get to this amoral immersion into the financial worldview? How did we forget the primary sensuous experience of life itself and appreciation for its intrinsic, priceless value?

Read poets like Wendell Berry to rediscover the embodied joys of living. But for a more clinical, archeological dissection of what’s gone wrong with modernity and economics, check out Sian Sullivan’s outstanding oeuvre. Her writings are a refreshing forensic account of  how we have financialized our understanding of nature, warping our souls in the process -- and how we need to rehumanize ourselves with a new vocabulary of value.

the shrinking field of vocational education

Before you look at the graph …

What subjects do you think have become more or less prevalent in US high schools since the late 1980s?

If we measure the percentage of all high school teachers who are assigned to each major subject, this is the pattern:

Almost all the subjects were similar in 1988 and 2012, except that vocational education dropped a lot and health/physical education shrank by a bit. The other subjects all gained about the same amounts at the expense of those two.

It isn’t worth showing the trends for most of those subjects by year, because the lines would be pretty flat. But here is the proportion of vo-tech teachers for all the years in the survey.

Posted without a comment, except to say that this may surprise people who think that some of the arts and sciences have expanded at the expense of others.

My analysis of U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), “Public School Teacher Data File,” 1987-88 through 2011-12; “Private School Teacher Data File,” 1987-88 through 2011-12; and “Charter School Teacher Data File,” 1999-2000.

The Civics Classroom: A Free Online Course Series for Civics Teachers, Newly Revised and Completely Self-Paced

CivicsClassroomLogo

Good afternoon, friends in Civics. You may recall that we had previously offered a free online course series for civics teachers. While we remain proud of that initial iteration and are pleased with the outcomes, our most important goal is to always respond to the needs and desires of our stakeholders. As such, we are excited to announce that we are now enrolling folks into the newly revised and completely self paced The Civics Classroom Course Series! The course has been redesigned based on feedback from participants, and we believe it meets the needs of teachers much better.

Courses begin June 15, 2020.  A certificate of completion, for 5 hours of professional development, will be issued for each course successfully completed. While the first course, The Prepared Classroom, is especially designed for Florida civics teachers, the courses are free and open to all civics and government educators throughout the country.

TCC EMBED

You can download the above flier here: Civics_Classroom.

Courses open on June 15th, and you can enroll in any of the courses at any time! To learn more about each course (including access to the syllabi), or to enroll, head over to Florida Citizen. Questions? Shoot us an email!