STILL long winded

Assignment D: 

Response to: 

Kahne & Westheimer “Teaching Democracy: What Schools Need To Do” Kahne & Westheimer “What Kind of Citizen? The Politics of Educating For Democracy” (2003).

Rahima Wade “Service Learning For Social Justice in the Elementary Classroom: Can We get There from Here?” (2007).

Which one of these programs best "fits with" my personal philosophy and conception of citizenship. To be blunt (and a pain-in-the-ass)... I dont know.

I know that I perked up after reading a few of the Kahne & Westheimer's sentiments ("We say that we value a democratic society [but] our schools have moved far from this central mission"). But then, I threw my packet across the room when other things were stated ("...school-based programs embrace a vision of citizenship devoid of politics... community service and character education initiatves... aim to promote service and good character, but not democracy")

Don't the two go hand in hand??
I understand that this article advocated for us to push past "simple character education"... HOWEVER, The creation of "good" (while individual) citizens is still an important building block to a better democracy.

In a high school you are dealing with a group of humans who are going through Adolescence. By definition, Adolescence is the most selfish time EVER (vernacular intentional). The thoughts of ME ME ME and a student's adhearence to their "percieved inner fable" dictates every choice.
At this stage in life, when students are defining how and where they fit in, and what ROLES they play. Why not take that self-involvment, shape it in a positive way with character education and community service and explain the importance of the ME within______ (a system, a group, a community). By making sure that before students think about policy/politics, they understand (on an adult level) that their very adult actions affect others on an adult level... a departure from the grade school "golden rule"

While I had some trouble with the reading. I think one of the most valuable things I gleaned from the Kahne & Westheimer article was a strengthend vocabulary to explain service-learning.
Terms that were solid and clear and really resonated with me:
"commitment to participate" -

"commitment to and capacity for democratic participation" -

"Positive experience while working toward a solution" -
The whole idea of a positive first experience is SO crucial. (it works the same
way when introducing kids to ANYTHING new)

"join with other people" -
Not just "work with" but join.

"engage...effectively in volunteer service" -
Effectively... key word... you can throw a kid into a soup kitchen but it doesn't mean they're goign to refrian from spirring in the soup.

---
Onto Wade:
Oh this was just delightful. I couldnt help but smile at both the writing style and the vignettes of "star elementary teachers fostering tomorrow's activists - too cute.
To be honest, the paper was a rather solid statement on service-learning's role in the elementary classroom and truly helped me answer my initial question of, "at what level is this going to work?.
BUT, the imagery of these 2nd graders grilling the director of food services was too freaking great.

I remember doing the activities spoken about in my schooling (writing an "op ed" letter about businesses being open on MLK day, advocating for the school's "no hat rule" to be ammended). However, I don't remember them being framed as "social-justice."

I think this happens often in elementary ed. The larger connection is lost.. I understand that it isn't until about age 12 that kids begin to be metacognitive and THINK about their thinking.

However as teachers, in our facilitation and activities, how can we make a better connection of ideas for elementary students? How can we bridge the gap between the op ed piece and the larger ideas in "active citizenship, social justice and participant democracy"

I'm thinking... puppets?