Before the recommendation of an interesting new book, there is a new survey to report on in connection with the subject of a recent essay here, which advocated the reinstatement of Civics classes in our schools. These classes would educate students about our Constitution and governmental institutions so they will be prepared to participate more fully and knowledgably in our democratic form of government.
The University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Center recently released what it called “disturbing” results of a survey on Americans’ knowledge of our Constitution. The survey found that 53% incorrectly think that illegal immigrants have no rights under the Constitution. It also found that 37% cannot name any of the several rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Although 48% correctly said that freedom of speech was a First Amendment right, far fewer could name other rights guaranteed by that same Amendment: only 15% correctly named freedom of religion; 14%, freedom of the press; 10%, the right to assemble peaceably, and 3%, the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Moreover, only 26% of the respondents could name all three branches of our federal government — executive, legislative, and judicial. This percentage was down from 38% who could do so in 2011. In both 2011 and 2017, 33% could not name any of the three branches.
Some of this ignorance can be attributed to the decline in the teaching of Civics in schools during the past two decades. The teaching of social studies peaked in the 1993-94 school year, but then began to decline after the passage of the No Child Left Behind law. Perhaps one reason for the decline in teaching classes in Civics is that standardized tests administered after the No Child Left Behind legislation focused on English and math. Since students’ performance scores were linked to the amount of federal funding schools received, schools naturally tried to raise students’ performance levels in English and math. The result was that other subjects such as social studies which included Civics tended to be neglected.
It is a hopeful sign that some educators are now calling for the return of Civics to school curricula, and the disappointing results of the 2017 Annenberg study clearly affirm the need for such a course. A literate, informed, and thoughtful electorate is essential to a well-functioning democracy.
Wait, What?
Being a literate and informed member of society entails reading books which can in turn spark further thoughts and ideas. A small gem of a book that does this is Wait, What? by James E. Ryan, dean of the Graduate School of Education at Harvard. Ryan wrote this short but provocative and powerful book with the belief that questions can be as important as answers. He concentrates on five questions and devotes a chapter to each, accompanied by discussion and illustrations from his life experiences. These questions – “Wait, what?”, “I wonder …?”, “Couldn’t we at least …?, How can I help?, and “What truly matters?” – can elicit both simple and profound answers and initiate interesting and important conversations. Ryan believes that these questions “can just as readily help you get through a Monday morning as they can help you figure out what you want to do with your life.”
As one who has interviewed hundreds of well-known people on PBS and CBS, Charlie Rose also believes that questions can be powerful. He believes that asking the right question is 95% of getting a good answer.
“Wait, what?”, the first question that Ryan analyzes and illustrates essentially asks for clarification in order to reach a better understanding of what the speaker has said. That often means that the person asking “Wait, what?” needs more explicit information. But the asking of that question implicitly asks the recipients of that question to clarify their own thinking before answering. And this can result in a better understanding for both. In our hurried lives, it’s easy to quickly jump to conclusions or make snap judgments without taking the time and effort to understand the other persons or what they are trying to convey.
As a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the author had an opportunity to listen to all the lawyers’ arguments before the Court as well as the questions the justices posed to the lawyers. Although Ryan acknowledges that Justice Stevens never used the words “wait, what?”, this was essentially what he was asking – to clarify key points of the lawyers’ arguments. Ryan believes that Justice Stevens’ approach illustrates a critical point: it is better to ask clarifying questions first and argue afterwards; that is, inquiry should precede advocacy. This essential question is also at the heart of understanding.*
*Available at the local library, Ryan’s book is delightful, not only for its wisdom but for its engaging stories as well.
