Posts com a Tag ‘Educação para a cidadania’
l Ciclo Hidrosocial. Una propuesta didáctica desde la historia, la geografía, las ciencias sociales y la educación para la ciudadanía – SIMÓN RUIZ; ARAVENA RODRÍGUEZ (RHYG)
SIMÓN RUIZ, Inmaculada; ARAVENA RODRÍGUEZ, Brandon. El Ciclo Hidrosocial. Una propuesta didáctica desde la historia, la geografía, las ciencias sociales y la educación para la ciudadanía. Santiago: Universidad Autónoma de Chile, 2020. 114p. Resenha de: VENEZUELA MATUS, Carolina. Revista de Historia y Geografía, Santiago, n.43, p.273-275, 2020.
La reciente propagación del covid-19, de la que hemos sido testigos durante 2020, ha puesto una vez más en evidencia la fragilidad de las relaciones entre el hombre y la naturaleza. Desde hace décadas, la búsqueda del equilibrio con el medio natural parece más un ideal que un hecho concreto y requiere, hoy más que nunca, el cumplimiento de metas y objetivos claros para propiciar un desarrollo sostenible que asegure la vida para las próximas generaciones. Uno de los objetivos más importantes planteados por la ONU en esta materia es garantizar la disponibilidad de agua y su gestión sostenible, y el saneamiento para todos, objetivo que cobra cada vez mayor relevancia en el contexto de la pandemia actual para la lucha contra la propagación de enfermedades infecciosas.
En este sentido, el libro El Ciclo Hidrosocial. Una propuesta didáctica desde la historia, la geografía, las ciencias sociales y la educación para la ciudadanía es una contribución significativa en la visualiza- ción de la importancia y el cuidado de los recursos hídricos. El libro va dirigido a un público no especializado y orientado especialmente hacia jóvenes en etapa escolar, combinando, de forma novedosa, la di vulgación de un conocimiento académico acerca del tema con la nece- sidad de propuestas pedagógicas didácticas concretas para aplicar en el aula. A través de sus páginas se plantea claramente que, si se mira el ciclo hidrosocial desde la demanda y no desde la oferta, la cantidad y la calidad del agua disponible para el consumo humano no es, de ma- nera alguna, inagotable. Leia Mais
Democratic Social Education: Social Studies for Social Change – HURSH; ROSS (CSS)
HURSH, David W.; ROSS, E. Wayne. Eds. Democratic Social Education: Social Studies for Social Change. New York: Falmer Press, 2000. 263p. Resenha de: BRADLEY, Jon G. Bradley Canadian Social Studies, v.38, n.2, p., 2004.
Democracy is a way of life controlled by a working faith in the possibilities of human nature. Belief in the Common Man is a familiar article in the democratic creed. That belief is without basis and significance save as it means faith in the potentialities of human nature as that nature is exhibited in every human being irrespective of race, color, sex, birth, and family, of material or cultural wealth. This faith may be enacted in statutes, but it is only on paper unless it is put in force in the attitudes which human beings display to one another in all the incidents and relations of daily life (Dewey, 1940, p. 226).
Democratic Social Education: Social Studies for Social Change is the third volume to be released within the Garland Reference Library of Social Science series. This is a timely publication, not only in that it nicely balances the first two books that dealt with the dramatic arts and art education, but more importantly in that the whole issue of democratic/citizenship education is coming to the fore in many differing and varied societies. Taking their cue from George S. Counts’ (1932) professional admonishment to educators to develop a new democratic society within a new social order, Hursh and Ross have compiled an extremely interesting array of articles that attempt to rise to this long-ago issued challenge.
The authors clearly note that they feel that Counts’ seventy-year old challenge still needs to be met, albeit within a revised world framework that takes into account the modern realities that currently confront the educational landscape. Additionally, they state the essays in this collection respond to Counts’ question with theoretical analyses of education and society, historical analyses of efforts since Counts’ challenge, and practical analyses of classroom pedagogy and school organization (p. 1).
Without wishing to wander too far from the centrality of this book review, it is necessary to take a small side step in order to quickly review Counts’ 1932 tome. Readers are asked to bear in mind that the Great Depression was in full swing and that both Europe and Asia were experiencing the rise of various forms of autocratic regimes. It is within this somewhat unsettling world situation that Counts issued his famous educational challenge.
For those of us who have an interest in the history of philosophical ideas, George Sylvester Counts can be ranked along with John Dewey, Charles Beard and Harold Rugg (to name but a few) as notable and vocal American philosophers who were actively engaged in confronting the realities that [North] America was experiencing during this time frame. To some, the collective and empowering ideals of socialism were an attractive carrot that appeared to mute the harshness of the loss of individuality promulgated by other more strident forms of governmental control.
In many ways, Dare the School Build a New Social Order? is a timeless document. Counts opens his epistle by noting that we are convinced that education is the one unfailing remedy for every ill to which man is subject (page 3). While his views must be tempered by his times and his own heritage, Counts nonetheless raises some of the age-old issues that surround the place and purpose of public education within a democratic society. He criticizes, to be sure, but also holds out the hope that it is this general education adventure which will eventually triumph and permit democracies to overcome, not only current ills, but to potentially make the future a better place for all citizens. In particular, Counts notes that it is the classroom teacher (see particularly pages 27 – 31) that might well wield the most significant power and influence such that meaningful societal transformations might occur.
Hursh and Ross recognize that Counts’ long-forgotten call to teachers to become meaningful agents of social change still resonates today. While the historical times of the mid-thirties are clearly not applicable to the beginning of the twenty-first century, some of the same general ailments still persist. The call for teachers to become democratic leaders within their own small communities drives this volume and provides, at the same time, a framework upon which to construct an active (or, to use Counts’ phrase ‘progressive’) model of education.
The fourteen chapters that make up Democratic Social Education offer the reader a wide-ranging overview of contemporary views. While the Hursh and Ross opening chapter is a tad staid and preachy in its introductory comments, and although this is too often the case with overview chapters, this reviewer was nonetheless captivated by the remaining entries. The following thirteen offerings are wonderfully varied and stimulating intellectual forays into the domain. One grounding feature that resonates time and time again, regardless of individual chapter author or topic, is the centrality of the classroom practitioner to affect and effect change. Honouring Counts, the individual authors have each in their own diverse way placed teachers and teaching at the core of the landscape. They have anchored this social democratic process solidly within the contemporary realities of the classroom.
The editors are to be congratulated for allowing all of the contributors to authenticate the voice of elementary and secondary teachers. After all, it is in the privacy of individual classrooms that great things are wrought and it was to individual practitioners that Counts issued his seminal challenge. Hursh and Ross have compiled a scintillating collection of material that must be read by anyone who has even the most passing interest in citizenship education within a democratic framework.
References
Counts, G. S. (1932). Dare the School Build a New Social Order? New York: The John Day Company.
Dewey, J. (1940/1991). Creative Democracy – The Task Before Us. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925-1953, Volume 14 (pp. 224-30). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
John G. Bradley – Faculty of Education. McGill University. Montreal, Quebec.
[IF]Citizenship: Issues and Action – EVANS; SLODOVNICK (CSS)
EVANS, Mark; SLODOVNICK, Michael; ZORIC, Terezia; EVANS, Rosemary. Citizenship: Issues and Action. Toronto: Prentice Hall, 2000. 230p. Resenha de: MEYER, John. Canadian Social Studies, v.38, n.2, p., 2004.
This is one of four recent textbooks on the Ontario Trillium list of approved resources for grade ten civics courses. Hence, it conforms to the prescribed civics framework and the strands of the Ontario curriculum, i.e., informed citizenship, purposeful citizenship, and active citizenship. There is a teachers’ resource aid and a companion web site, www.pearsoned.ca/civics, available but not for this review. There are ten commendable features of this book, namely, focus questions, definitions of key terms, info sources, profiles of people and organizations in action, case studies, supplementary visuals, activity blocks, skill builders, chapter reviews, and icons for media and technology analysis.
The six chapters begin with the individual as citizen and extend outward to global citizenship. While providing opportunities to investigate what it means to be a responsible citizen in a democratic setting it also assists in understanding three essential elements: a sense of membership, a set of rights and freedoms, and a corresponding set of obligations (p. vii). In chapter one, Me, A Citizen?, the reader is introduced to some fundamental skills, for example, identifying a main idea and supporting evidence as described in the citizen’s toolkit (p. 11) or developing a personal decision-making strategy (p. 15). The feature, Activities: The Inquiring Citizen, includes extended activities that may be used in the classroom or for homework. The activities promote being informed, purposeful, and active. Perhaps a few more leads or examples could have been included for a more in-depth analysis but these might be contained in the teacher resource material. In the section on the meaning of democracy, the concept of equality and social justice is introduced without any analysis of what those concepts mean (p. 17). Occasionally, I find quotes that do not provide specific references which means that either the teacher has to supply such or the authors of these statements may go unrecognized. Also, mention of the Education Act (p. 29) should have been modified by the word provincial.
I believe that part of the problem for the inactivity of many citizens is that there has been undue emphasis on human rights and insufficient attention to responsibilities within those societies that have achieved an acceptable level of the implementation of human rights. Hence, I would have preferred that any discussion about a citizen’s responsibilities in a democratic society be considered before the discussion about human rights and that it be emphasized that human rights are limited. We need more codes of responsibilities rather than codes of rights and the natures of both should be reinforced. Note that only three pages are given to the section on responsibilities (pp. 26-28). The concluding section (pp. 32-34) on young Canadians’ potential for making a difference lacks the opportunity to provide the current thrust on service or volunteerism in the community. There are abundant examples and guidelines in most jurisdictions for such young citizenship in action. Certainly, citizens tend to be generous in times of crisis but there is a need for early development of altruism prior to crisis.
Chapters two, three, and four are heavy with information about federal, provincial, and local governments. Some aspects of these topics were probably introduced in previous grades or subject such as history, Canadian studies, and social studies. If that is the case, then these information sections should be confined to a review or avoided in favour of more attention to the purposeful and action sections which are excellent. Other minor flaws include: no mention in the profile of the date appointment (p. 117); no reference to the web site, www.electionscan.com (p. 122); no specific reference to the political party web sites (p. 129); insufficient elaboration of skills for detecting bias (p. 134); and no reference as an activity to the many and excellent web sites on various governments (p. 145). Also, the teacher and readers should try to update any data (info source 2-11, p. 62) from current and reliable resources such as Stats Canada.
Of course, since this book was published the array of internet resources has grown exponentially and students will discover them if challenged or mandated to do so. It is an increasing challenge to teachers to fill the gaps and reinforce skill building so that students will access and use the resources in the most meaningful ways. I am very much impressed with the format of this book and the many features which enhance the attraction to learning for the readers. The topic of citizenship or civics deserves more than the time permitted by the Ontario curriculum. Let us hope that other jurisdictions and Ontario itself will allocate at least a full semester or year’s course carefully integrated with competing and compatible subjects.
Perhaps, a more important measure of the effects of this text resource would be an assessment of those who have been using it in their Ontario classrooms on the half semester basis for the past two years. To my knowledge, there are no results or even comparative results from an assessment study. If there is a significant use of these resources as textbooks in the classroom, then a comparative analysis and assessment of this resource and the other three approved texts and their supplementary teacher’s resource publications should be done. This might inform us about the effects of consistent use of a resource or text upon student learning in conjunction with teacher skills.
John R. Meyer (Retired) – Faculty of Education. University of Windsor. Windsor, ON.
[IF]
Citizenship in Transformation in Canada – HÉRBERT (CSS)
HÉRBERT, Yvonne M. ed. Citizenship in Transformation in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002. 289p. Resenha de: GLASFORD, Larry A. Canadian Social Studies, v.39, n.1, p., 2004.
Ideologically, the editor and contributing authors of this collection of thirteen essays on citizenship and citizenship education have written from the perspective of democratic pluralism. In this vision of utopia, equality trumps liberty and group rights take precedence over individual prerogatives. Equality itself is re-engineered as equity, a measured equality which seeks to factor in the negative effects of historic and systemic inequality, and then to alter the balance from the top down to ensure fairness. The intended result is harmony and social justice for all, and especially for new Canadians.
Implicitly understood as the antithesis of the authors’ democratic pluralism is classic liberalism, variously described in our time as neo-liberalism (in Europe), or neo-conservatism (in America). Individual freedom is sacrosanct, and the ideal role for the community, as embodied in the coercive state, is simply to ensure that personal liberty is maximized. Equality is understood to mean equality of rights, and equality before the law. As much as possible of human endeavour is kept beyond the realm of state intervention. Individual citizens are free to sink or swim, to prosper or suffer, as their own merits dictate.
Somewhere in the middle of these two poles is a third position: democratic liberalism. Proponents of this perspective seek to harmonize liberty with equality, and likewise to balance the competing claims of individuals and groups. Rather than an either-or proposition, they see democratic citizenship as a both-and challenge. Freedom and equality are important; people are unique individuals and they belong to, as well as self-identify with, a series of groups The book begins well. Inside the front cover, an abstract identifies two key questions as being the focus of the author team. First, what constitutes a ‘good’ citizen in today’s liberal democracy? And second, what social and educational policies are needed to sustain the lives of these citizens, while not impinging on liberal democratic principles? (p. i). Had the book concentrated on these two questions, had the editor imposed a disciplined structure on her own and her colleagues’ contributions, this volume would indeed be a valued addition to the shelf.
Although the essays seem to have been written over several years, the book in its final form still appears to be a rushed job. On page 4 we read Much of the citizenship debate is concern [sic] with four dimensions of citizenship. A few pages later we are told only within this century [sic] have women gained the federal vote (1918) (p. 7) despite the fact the book was published in 2002, well into the ‘next’ century. The appendix, a well-intended chart purporting to display a breakdown of key models of democratic citizenship, is flawed, almost worse than useless. In the first place, it analyzes fourteen historic governmental arrangements, far too many to be meaningful, without providing any rationale for their inclusion. Why was Machiavellian Florence analyzed, for example? More seriously, factual and conceptual errors abound. The prerogatives of the Emperor are discussed under the heading of Roman republican model (p. 250). Yet the institution of Emperors signalled the death of the quasi-democratic republic. Et tu Brut? Edmond Burke, famous for his liberal-conservative response to the French Revolution of 1789, is mysteriously identified with 17th-Century England (p. 252).
In too many places, the book’s language is excessively turgid and jargon-ridden, serving to exclude from understanding all but the ‘inside’ experts – ironic, given the sincerely inclusionary aims of the authoring team. Here are two examples. From the opening essay, we read that policy and institutional goals are marked by a range of conceptual possibilities and affect lived Canadian realities (p. 14). The authors appear to be saying that, with the best of intentions, government policy can sure mess up the lives of ordinary Canadians. Half-way through the book, we are informed that teachers mediated the curriculum and could challenge official views and even generate a political space in the classroom by using a critical alternative perspective (p. 122). Presumably, the author is saying that conscientious teachers closed the classroom doors and taught their students what they needed to learn.
Still, the verdict on this book is only partly negative. Yvonne Hbert and a co-author, Michel Pag, nicely capture the overlap of history and citizenship, in their concluding chapter. across Canada, the teaching of history is controversial as soon as it touches upon the face of national identity, which is still under construction (p. 245). So true, despite the mixed metaphor. A very useful feature of the book is the collective (appropriate for democratic pluralists) bibliography at the back, which draws upon the combined sources of each author, as cited in their individual chapter Notes.
Predictably, the quality of the specific chapters is uneven. For example, Veronica Strong-Bag’s contribution on the struggles of women, aboriginals and blue-collar workers is passionate, but vastly under-estimates the significance of multiple over-lapping identities. Romulo Magsino provides a very useful overview of three approaches to citizenship, which he classifies as liberalism, communitarianism, and republicanism, but how does critical pedagogy fit in? The article by Marie Battiste and Helen Semaganis is a fascinating, if one-sided, presentation of the hard-line First Nation perspective on treaties, culture and citizenship. The piece by Roberta J. Russel drones on in careful bureaucratese, piously informing us that The focus of citizenship education in a pluralistic society should be inclusive and should empower everyone to participate (p. 146). What else could an employee of the Department of Justice say? Nevertheless, her paper rewards a second reading, with good material on civics and citizenship, and insightful hints as to the federal government’s role in promoting citizenship.
Harold Troper’s article provides a sound historical overview of Canadian attitudes toward, and public policy about, the ideal of population diversity. For something completely different, try to follow the thread of Celia Haig-Brown’s meandering post-modern musings on appropriate democratic educational research, written as an unedited stream-of-consciousness flow. Or not. Cecille de Pass and Shazia Qureshi capture our attention by interspersing dramatic first-person narratives of blatant racial discrimination into their essay, then throw it all away with a dated, almost obscenely careless, stereotyping of the 21st -century Canadian upper middle class as the sectors of the population who share an attachment to historic Anglo symbols like the Union Jack and who became [sic] misty eyed when they hear the anthems and songs associated with the British Empire (p. 180). Hello! Did you miss the great flag debate of 1964? Only in the concluding chapter do we learn the underlying rationale for this book. These essays represent the work of a group of interested researchers, decision makers and practitioners who met in 1998 and developed a consensus around a pan-Canadian research agenda in citizenship education (p. 229). Known as the Citizenship Education Research Network (CERN), its primary task is the coordination of the research efforts of the founding members as well as of all others who wish to participate in the process (p. 232). In 1999, an elite national team of researchers was formed with responsibility for securing funding (p. 243). The mention of money brings us back to the conundrum of the democratic state. Is it (a) the likeliest threat to our freedom (classic liberal view), (b) the benevolent source of both our influence and our funds (democratic pluralist position), or (c) a two-edged sword to be watched, but wielded with cautious purpose in the interests of liberty and equality (democratic liberal perspective)? As every university student knows, the odds in a multiple-choice question ride with response (c).
Larry A. Glassford – University of Windsor. Windsor, Ontario.
[IF]