http://edge.ascd.org/service/getFeed.kickAction?quantity=25 New blogs from Robert_Siegel on ASCD EDge Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:34:50 GMT Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:34:50 GMT website@ascd.org (ascdAdmin) website@ascd.org (ascdAdmin) KickApps Feed Builder 2011-06-07T22:34:50Z 10 http://edge.ascd.org/service/searchEverything.kickAction?as=127586&sortType=recent&tags=null 0 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Science-for-21st-Century-Part-7/blog/3950356/127586.html K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 7 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "Education and the economy".             Many people feel that our educational systems are driven by economic interests.  These interests are generally vested in business and seem to have a great impact on what shapes the curriculum in our schools.  A good example of this is what has driven a major push in mathematics and science education in the United States as a result of the TIMSS (Third International Math and Science Survey).  Observing that the USA ranked low in comparison to other countries, and correlating this to the potential for our young people to maintain economic competitiveness in the world market (i.e. jobs), we see an upsurge in a great amount of federal funding through grants (a la Eisenhower Funds, Title IIB) and priority on standardized testing in math, reading and science. “The best prepared workforce in the world” is one of President Clinton´s goals as he celebrated the passing of the Improving America’s Schools Act for our young people to “walk on that bridge to the 21st century” or both President George W. Bush's and President Barack Obama's statements that American citizens need to become globally competitive.             Whether or not there is much merit or culpability on business for shaping our educational curricula, there is definitely a lesson to be learned when understanding its impact on our inexorable path toward a global society.  Yet, little emphasis is placed on its effects and implications.  We definitely need to understand economy from a global perspective.  “Global citizenship is no longer just a phrase in the lexicon of futurologists. It is every bit as real and concrete as measurable changes in GNP or trade flows.” (Ohmae 1990, p. 21).  If we fail to recognize the impact that globalization is having on any one country’s economy, we are doing an injustice to our next generation while showing our ignorant pride and professional incompetence as educators. What are the implications of “the 21st century employable high school and college graduate working for a concern, a corporation or research institute that is international in identity rather than one that has a national identity”? (Duhon-Sells 1994, p. 86).  Concepts such as transnational corporations and business have superseded once-popular multinational entities.  Whereas multinational economic entities were those who kept their headquarters in their “home” country and expanded operations overseas by relocating a percentage of its employees and capital, “transnational strategies seek to blend into a synchronous whole the concept of global-scale efficiencies and market responsiveness. It is not a simple matter of allocating some resources globally and others locally, but of leveraging the interrelationships across the two axes of transnational operation while focusing managerial attention on those distinctive skills - or ‘core competencies’...that are needed to gain and sustain a competitive advantage.” (Wendt 1993, p. 115).  Thus again we see the overriding emphasis on maintaining diversity (in this case, ‘core competencies’) of the diverse strengths of the peoples of the world, while maintaining a unified goal.  Preparing students to live and work within such a context requires a new benchmark of cross-cultural capacity-building that must stem from a clear objective and firm foundation in the oneness of humankind. A paid advertisement in BusinessWeek in their December 14, 1998 issue by a group of well known business constituents proclaims and fortifies the merits of diversity.  Among such abilities and skills as defined by Griggs Productions, a commercial cross-cultural video training company and embraced by the generality of the business community, we find goals such as: building cooperative relationships across cultural and individual differences understanding and effectively dealing with cultural differences developing work relationships that have win-win outcomes, despite different cultural dictates and ways of being recognizing that with differences come discomfort and tension, and that this does not have to lead to fight or flight recognizing that differences present an opportunity - they are the ingredients that lead to creative and synergistic results (Wheeler 1998)             To further illustrate the impact that the changing economy will have on our young people, education for work force training in the traditional market sense has given way to greater emphasis, in every nation, on the third sector or civil society. With the rise of technology and an ever more automated economy, the first sector (the marketplace) and the second sector (the government) are increasingly unable to meet the job demands of employable people.  “The nation’s nonprofit sector - the Third Sector - may be the best hope for creating new kinds of employment for the millions of displaced workers cast off my corporate and government reengineering.”  (Rifkin 1997)  Combined with civic responsibility on a global scale, the “importance of service learning” looms as a new source of curricular content and opens an entirely new perspective on the reasons for and character of civic education in the social sciences.  Even in the United States, and despite some negative advocacy, “Civic education for global understanding...incorporates recognition that Americans are residents of a planet that has become a global village.  This development requires our civic attention and action on a transnational and transcultural scale.” (Titus 1994).              Related to the third sector, and perhaps a concrete manifestation of the ever-broadening common interests shared by our diverse human population is the upsurge within this century of the number of International Non-governmental Organizations which has increased from 176 in the year 1909 to over 18,000 as of 1985. This new paradigm of working alongside governmental agencies is gaining greater respect from policy-makers as they are future-oriented with a sense of world community reflecting specific human interests and needs and a growing sense of urgency that allows them to act quickly.  (Boulding 1988, pp. 35-37)             It would seem that we are definitely on the verge of a new awakening to our true humanity, but the storms on the surface wrecking havoc with our long-standing and outdated structures do not let us perceive that the foundations of a new civilization are being established.  However we encapsulate the challenges that characterize these storms, whether they be summarized more traditionally as the Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, has done into environmental protection, poverty and reforms of complex economic and social systems (Bushrui 1993, pp. 2-9) or whether we take the leap into systems thinking (Betts 1998) (Capra 1996) or wholistic learning (ASCD 1991) (Caine 1997), carefully designed educational goals could have a decisive influence on helping future generations cope with the current storms through an understanding of the “death and birth pangs” prevalent in an age of transition.  They may also provide the necessary framework of perspective and capacity-building based upon a new paradigm of oneness, interconnectedness, and unity in diversity in order for these generations to be able and willing to find solutions. After all, isn’t this truly the goal of a meaningful social science curriculum, nay education itself?  ____________________________________________________________________________ Boulding, Elise. (1988). Building a Global Civic Culture. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. Betts, Frank M. (1998). Systems Thinking and the Integrated Curriculum. ASCD Curriculum Handbook, Section 13. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Duhon-Sells and Emma Thomas Pitts, editors.(1994). A Vision of Multicultural Education for the Year 2000. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press. Ohmae, Kenichi (1990). The Borderless World. New York: HarperCollins. Rifkin, Jeremy (1997). Preparing Students for “The End of Work”.  Educational Leadership Magazine, Vol. 54, No. 6 Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Titus, Charles (1994). Civic Education for Global Understanding. Washington, DC: ERIC ED370882. Wendt, Henry (1993). Global Embrace: Corporate Challenges in a Transnational World. New York: Harper Collins. Wheeler, Michael L. (1998). Capitalizing on Diversity: Navigating the Seas of the Multicultural Workforce and Workplace. New York: BusinessWeek, December 14, 1998.   K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 7 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "Education and the economy".             Many people feel that our educational systems are driven by economic interests.  These interests are generally vested in business and seem to have a great impact on what shapes the curriculum in our schools.  A good example of this is what has driven a major push in mathematics and science education in the United States as a result of the TIMSS (Third International Math and Science Survey).  Observing that the USA ranked low in comparison to other countries, and correlating this to the potential for our young people to maintain economic competitiveness in the world market (i.e. jobs), we see an upsurge in a great amount of federal funding through grants (a la Eisenhower Funds, Title IIB) and priority on standardized testing in math, reading and science. “The best prepared workforce in the world” is one of President Clinton´s goals as he celebrated the passing of the Improving America’s Schools Act for our young people to “walk on that bridge to the 21st century” or both President George W. Bush's and President Barack Obama's statements that American citizens need to become globally competitive.             Whether or not there is much merit or culpability on business for shaping our educational curricula, there is definitely a lesson to be learned when understanding its impact on our inexorable path toward a global society.  Yet, little emphasis is placed on its effects and implications.  We definitely need to understand economy from a global perspective.  “Global citizenship is no longer just a phrase in the lexicon of futurologists. It is every bit as real and concrete as measurable changes in GNP or trade flows.” (Ohmae 1990, p. 21).  If we fail to recognize the impact that globalization is having on any one country’s economy, we are doing an injustice to our next generation while showing our ignorant pride and professional incompetence as educators. What are the implications of “the 21st century employable high school and college graduate working for a concern, a corporation or research institute that is international in identity rather than one that has a national identity”? (Duhon-Sells 1994, p. 86).  Concepts such as transnational corporations and business have superseded once-popular multinational entities.  Whereas multinational economic entities were those who kept their headquarters in their “home” country and expanded operations overseas by relocating a percentage of its employees and capital, “transnational strategies seek to blend into a synchronous whole the concept of global-scale efficiencies and market responsiveness. It is not a simple matter of allocating some resources globally and others locally, but of leveraging the interrelationships across the two axes of transnational operation while focusing managerial attention on those distinctive skills - or ‘core competencies’...that are needed to gain and sustain a competitive advantage.” (Wendt 1993, p. 115).  Thus again we see the overriding emphasis on maintaining diversity (in this case, ‘core competencies’) of the diverse strengths of the peoples of the world, while maintaining a unified goal.  Preparing students to live and work within such a context requires a new benchmark of cross-cultural capacity-building that must stem from a clear objective and firm foundation in the oneness of humankind. A paid advertisement in BusinessWeek in their December 14, 1998 issue by a group of well known business constituents proclaims and fortifies the merits of diversity.  Among such abilities and skills as defined by Griggs Productions, a commercial cross-cultural video training company and embraced by the generality of the business community, we find goals such as: building cooperative relationships across cultural and individual differences understanding and effectively dealing with cultural differences developing work relationships that have win-win outcomes, despite different cultural dictates and ways of being recognizing that with differences come discomfort and tension, and that this does not have to lead to fight or flight recognizing that differences present an opportunity - they are the ingredients that lead to creative and synergistic results (Wheeler 1998)             To further illustrate the impact that the changing economy will have on our young people, education for work force training in the traditional market sense has given way to greater emphasis, in every nation, on the third sector or civil society. With the rise of technology and an ever more automated economy, the first sector (the marketplace) and the second sector (the government) are increasingly unable to meet the job demands of employable people.  “The nation’s nonprofit sector - the Third Sector - may be the best hope for creating new kinds of employment for the millions of displaced workers cast off my corporate and government reengineering.”  (Rifkin 1997)  Combined with civic responsibility on a global scale, the “importance of service learning” looms as a new source of curricular content and opens an entirely new perspective on the reasons for and character of civic education in the social sciences.  Even in the United States, and despite some negative advocacy, “Civic education for global understanding...incorporates recognition that Americans are residents of a planet that has become a global village.  This development requires our civic attention and action on a transnational and transcultural scale.” (Titus 1994).              Related to the third sector, and perhaps a concrete manifestation of the ever-broadening common interests shared by our diverse human population is the upsurge within this century of the number of International Non-governmental Organizations which has increased from 176 in the year 1909 to over 18,000 as of 1985. This new paradigm of working alongside governmental agencies is gaining greater respect from policy-makers as they are future-oriented with a sense of world community reflecting specific human interests and needs and a growing sense of urgency that allows them to act quickly.  (Boulding 1988, pp. 35-37)             It would seem that we are definitely on the verge of a new awakening to our true humanity, but the storms on the surface wrecking havoc with our long-standing and outdated structures do not let us perceive that the foundations of a new civilization are being established.  However we encapsulate the challenges that characterize these storms, whether they be summarized more traditionally as the Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, has done into environmental protection, poverty and reforms of complex economic and social systems (Bushrui 1993, pp. 2-9) or whether we take the leap into systems thinking (Betts 1998) (Capra 1996) or wholistic learning (ASCD 1991) (Caine 1997), carefully designed educational goals could have a decisive influence on helping future generations cope with the current storms through an understanding of the “death and birth pangs” prevalent in an age of transition.  They may also provide the necessary framework of perspective and capacity-building based upon a new paradigm of oneness, interconnectedness, and unity in diversity in order for these generations to be able and willing to find solutions. After all, isn’t this truly the goal of a meaningful social science curriculum, nay education itself?  ____________________________________________________________________________ Boulding, Elise. (1988). Building a Global Civic Culture. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. Betts, Frank M. (1998). Systems Thinking and the Integrated Curriculum. ASCD Curriculum Handbook, Section 13. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Duhon-Sells and Emma Thomas Pitts, editors.(1994). A Vision of Multicultural Education for the Year 2000. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press. Ohmae, Kenichi (1990). The Borderless World. New York: HarperCollins. Rifkin, Jeremy (1997). Preparing Students for “The End of Work”.  Educational Leadership Magazine, Vol. 54, No. 6 Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Titus, Charles (1994). Civic Education for Global Understanding. Washington, DC: ERIC ED370882. Wendt, Henry (1993). Global Embrace: Corporate Challenges in a Transnational World. New York: Harper Collins. Wheeler, Michael L. (1998). Capitalizing on Diversity: Navigating the Seas of the Multicultural Workforce and Workplace. New York: BusinessWeek, December 14, 1998.   Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:34:50 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Science-for-21st-Century-Part-7/blog/3950356/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2011-06-07T22:34:50Z ASCD EDge K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 7 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "Education and the economy".             Many people feel that our educational systems are driven by economic interests.  These interests are generally vested in business and seem to have a great impact on what shapes the curriculum in our schools.  A good example of this is what has driven a major push in mathematics and science education in the United States as a result of the TIMSS (Third International Math and Science Survey).  Observing that the USA ranked low in comparison to other countries, and correlating this to the potential for our young people to maintain economic competitiveness in the world market (i.e. jobs), we see an upsurge in a great amount of federal funding through grants (a la Eisenhower Funds, Title IIB) and priority on standardized testing in math, reading and science. “The best prepared workforce in the world” is one of President Clinton´s goals as he celebrated the passing of the Improving America’s Schools Act for our young people to “walk on that bridge to the 21st century” or both President George W. Bush's and President Barack Obama's statements that American citizens need to become globally competitive.             Whether or not there is much merit or culpability on business for shaping our educational curricula, there is definitely a lesson to be learned when understanding its impact on our inexorable path toward a global society.  Yet, little emphasis is placed on its effects and implications.  We definitely need to understand economy from a global perspective.  “Global citizenship is no longer just a phrase in the lexicon of futurologists. It is every bit as real and concrete as measurable changes in GNP or trade flows.” (Ohmae 1990, p. 21).  If we fail to recognize the impact that globalization is having on any one country’s economy, we are doing an injustice to our next generation while showing our ignorant pride and professional incompetence as educators. What are the implications of “the 21st century employable high school and college graduate working for a concern, a corporation or research institute that is international in identity rather than one that has a national identity”? (Duhon-Sells 1994, p. 86).  Concepts such as transnational corporations and business have superseded once-popular multinational entities.  Whereas multinational economic entities were those who kept their headquarters in their “home” country and expanded operations overseas by relocating a percentage of its employees and capital, “transnational strategies seek to blend into a synchronous whole the concept of global-scale efficiencies and market responsiveness. It is not a simple matter of allocating some resources globally and others locally, but of leveraging the interrelationships across the two axes of transnational operation while focusing managerial attention on those distinctive skills - or ‘core competencies’...that are needed to gain and sustain a competitive advantage.” (Wendt 1993, p. 115).  Thus again we see the overriding emphasis on maintaining diversity (in this case, ‘core competencies’) of the diverse strengths of the peoples of the world, while maintaining a unified goal.  Preparing students to live and work within such a context requires a new benchmark of cross-cultural capacity-building that must stem from a clear objective and firm foundation in the oneness of humankind. A paid advertisement in BusinessWeek in their December 14, 1998 issue by a group of well known business constituents proclaims and fortifies the merits of diversity.  Among such abilities and skills as defined by Griggs Productions, a commercial cross-cultural video training company and embraced by the generality of the business community, we find goals such as: building cooperative relationships across cultural and individual differences understanding and effectively dealing with cultural differences developing work relationships that have win-win outcomes, despite different cultural dictates and ways of being recognizing that with differences come discomfort and tension, and that this does not have to lead to fight or flight recognizing that differences present an opportunity - they are the ingredients that lead to creative and synergistic results (Wheeler 1998)             To further illustrate the impact that the changing economy will have on our young people, education for work force training in the traditional market sense has given way to greater emphasis, in every nation, on the third sector or civil society. With the rise of technology and an ever more automated economy, the first sector (the marketplace) and the second sector (the government) are increasingly unable to meet the job demands of employable people.  “The nation’s nonprofit sector - the Third Sector - may be the best hope for creating new kinds of employment for the millions of displaced workers cast off my corporate and government reengineering.”  (Rifkin 1997)  Combined with civic responsibility on a global scale, the “importance of service learning” looms as a new source of curricular content and opens an entirely new perspective on the reasons for and character of civic education in the social sciences.  Even in the United States, and despite some negative advocacy, “Civic education for global understanding...incorporates recognition that Americans are residents of a planet that has become a global village.  This development requires our civic attention and action on a transnational and transcultural scale.” (Titus 1994).              Related to the third sector, and perhaps a concrete manifestation of the ever-broadening common interests shared by our diverse human population is the upsurge within this century of the number of International Non-governmental Organizations which has increased from 176 in the year 1909 to over 18,000 as of 1985. This new paradigm of working alongside governmental agencies is gaining greater respect from policy-makers as they are future-oriented with a sense of world community reflecting specific human interests and needs and a growing sense of urgency that allows them to act quickly.  (Boulding 1988, pp. 35-37)             It would seem that we are definitely on the verge of a new awakening to our true humanity, but the storms on the surface wrecking havoc with our long-standing and outdated structures do not let us perceive that the foundations of a new civilization are being established.  However we encapsulate the challenges that characterize these storms, whether they be summarized more traditionally as the Director General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor, has done into environmental protection, poverty and reforms of complex economic and social systems (Bushrui 1993, pp. 2-9) or whether we take the leap into systems thinking (Betts 1998) (Capra 1996) or wholistic learning (ASCD 1991) (Caine 1997), carefully designed educational goals could have a decisive influence on helping future generations cope with the current storms through an understanding of the “death and birth pangs” prevalent in an age of transition.  They may also provide the necessary framework of perspective and capacity-building based upon a new paradigm of oneness, interconnectedness, and unity in diversity in order for these generations to be able and willing to find solutions. After all, isn’t this truly the goal of a meaningful social science curriculum, nay education itself?  ____________________________________________________________________________ Boulding, Elise. (1988). Building a Global Civic Culture. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. Betts, Frank M. (1998). Systems Thinking and the Integrated Curriculum. ASCD Curriculum Handbook, Section 13. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Duhon-Sells and Emma Thomas Pitts, editors.(1994). A Vision of Multicultural Education for the Year 2000. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press. Ohmae, Kenichi (1990). The Borderless World. New York: HarperCollins. Rifkin, Jeremy (1997). Preparing Students for “The End of Work”.  Educational Leadership Magazine, Vol. 54, No. 6 Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Titus, Charles (1994). Civic Education for Global Understanding. Washington, DC: ERIC ED370882. Wendt, Henry (1993). Global Embrace: Corporate Challenges in a Transnational World. New York: Harper Collins. Wheeler, Michael L. (1998). Capitalizing on Diversity: Navigating the Seas of the Multicultural Workforce and Workplace. New York: BusinessWeek, December 14, 1998.   21st century curriculum, global education, social science nonadult false K-8 Social Science for 21st Century - Part 7 text blog 21st century curriculum,global education,social science 622 10 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 3950356 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocScience-for-21st-Century-Part-6/blog/3287593/127586.html K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 6 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "The Oneness of Humankind".             The concept of the oneness of humankind undoubtedly “implies an organic change in the structure of present day society, a change such as the world has not yet experienced.” (Effendi 1955, p. 43).  Such an organic change infers a deep change, a mature attitude, a true paradigm shift in understanding, something which must take its time to happen, but nevertheless must happen if we are to truly thrive on living in a global society.  If we continue to think (as some nations insist) that independence and sovereignty is the goal, we cannot enter the reality of interdependence. This was a noble goal for humankind in the past, and probably was one of the major reasons for the expansion of life on the planet. But now there is no more planet on which to expand! We have reached our physical limits. All the signs indicate that we must take the leap to interdependence, since every culture has a piece to offer and no culture or nation will allow for its existence to be supplanted (and they increasingly have the wherewithal to defend it).  Even nationalistic economic sovereignty has succumbed to interdependence and the global system of wealth. (Toffler 1990, p. 56).  But this takes a leap of maturity.  Stephen Covey  indicates that for the individual’s relationship to others, interdependence is “a far more advanced concept” and “a choice only independent people can make.”  (Covey 1989, p. 51) It seems that collectively, it may apply to humankind as well.  In order to make that choice, it requires a paradigm shift in thinking and in values.             In their under-recognized brilliant work on educational reform, Education on the Edge of Possibility, Caine and Caine (1997) discuss the need that children have for the “opportunity to explore ultimate questions and larger purposes.”  (p. 95).  They frame “the purposes of education in terms of what sort of person one needs to be to develop sustainable communities and thrive within the new paradigm” of becoming “the Possible Human”.  In line with the aforementioned premise of our ever-wider sense of being part of a global society and “the development of more complex and integrated people”,  Caine and Caine (p. 97) summarize the attributes of such a people as having: an inner appreciation of interconnectedness a strong identity and sense of being a sufficiently large vision and imagination to see how specifics relate to each other the capacity to flow and deal with paradox and uncertainty a capacity to build community and live in relationship with others Akin to the notion of the Possible Human are Leon Eisenberg’s words concerning the ultimate potential or humankind’s reaching a state of maturity, when he states that one whose “concerns extend beyond family and beyond nation to mankind has become fully human.” (Eisenberg 1972, pp. 123-128)             Taking the next leap toward a global society, and what some would term a “more complex and integrated people” is not a new phenomena, as explained above through the ever-widening social groupings that have distinguished human organization throughout history.  We might even say it is a common trait of human nature and has characterized its survival as a species.  In fact, recent brain research has debunked what is prevalent thinking about the competitive nature of the human race since “much of our brain’s capability is tied up in processing activities that are chiefly social and cooperative.” A reason we tend to disagree is  “probably because the mass media focus on such events as wars, competitive crimes, business acquisitions, and sports victories.  The mass media focus on the dramatically unusual, not on the norm in human behavior...The human race wouldn’t have survived if it were principally and violently competitive.”  (Sylwester 1995, p. 117).              Beyond such a misnomer, what are the further barriers that prevent adopting such a paradigm and why is there pain and resistance? Among systems thinkers, Ervin Laszlo suggests that we search for solutions to the problems facing humankind on what he terms “outer” or “physical” limits of blame such as limited fossil fuels, food production capacity, climatic stability, increased population, and accommodation of urban demographics. Yet, claiming that these are symptoms and not causes, he postulates that “truly decisive limits are inner, not outer” and that “the root causes even of physical and ecological problems are the inner constraints on our vision and values,” the lens through which we see all things, the base against which we compare. He goes on to offer a diagnosis of our “serious case of culture lag” (Laszlo 1989, p. 26) since “modernism has become obsolete” as it “no longer serves the genuine interests of human beings” owing to the fact that we are “badly in need of a global partnership.” (p. 39 and 104). Such a partnership requires more than what we are teaching in schools under the guise of tolerance education or even co-existence among differences. It might be termed, as Laszlo says, “interexistence” (p. 109), which implies a sort of symbiotic relationship among the peoples of the world.  In fact, such a relationship and conscious sense of global community might even lead one to likening all of humankind as one body, with many interconnected and interdependent parts in order to produce the whole - a whole whose potential is synergistically far greater than even the sum of its component parts.             As opposed to the concept-cliché of a world melting pot, more transcendent than the Gaia principal - “the idea that the planet Earth as a whole is a living, self-organizing system” (Capra 1996, p. 100), and even more profound than what some educator pundits of a multicultural curriculum term as the need for education for “cultural pluralism - people living side-by-side from different backgrounds”, (Glatthorn 1995, p. 239) it would foster differentiation along with integration, thereby creating unity with diversity, a sort of “crazy-quilt pattern of evanescent life styles”  (Toffler 1970, p. 302).  On the one hand we have a colorful display of uniqueness while on the other the rich potential far beyond what each of its component parts would ever be capable of alone.  One way this combination of apparent opposites can be achieved is through the development of a sense of empathy in order to understand and feel connected to others. Educator Alfie Kohn uses a strategy that he describes as “a twofold attitude toward the ‘other’.  On the one hand, we appreciate, as it were, the other’s otherness; on the other hand, we appreciate the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  This is not to be confused with simple association or membership in a societal group, where individuality dissipates into conformity.  But rather “when shared humanness and individual uniqueness can be emphasized over group membership, this would be much to the good.” (Kohn 1990, p. 149).  Again, here we see the promotion of instilling the concept of unity in diversity.             Systems thinker Fritzof Capra explains that we have based much of our western scientific thought on the “belief that in every complex system the behavior of the whole can be understood entirely from the properties of its parts”.  This Cartesian paradigm, according to Capra, is no longer valid in a post modern and systems-thinking world. On the contrary, “the properties of the parts can be understood only from the organization of the whole.” (Capra 1996, p. 29). In his ground-breaking work The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge illustrates that systems thinking leads to thinking in “wholes” rather than “parts” and that “at the level of essences, the disciplines start to converge. There is a common sensibility uniting the disciplines - the sensibility of being learners in an intrinsically interdependent world.” (Senge 1990, p. 375).  Unless we make such a leap in world view, Senge feels we are living in the ills of and suffering from the pains of our own creation - that “the unhealthiness of our world today is in direct proportion to our inability to see it as a whole.” (Senge 1990, p. 68). He also explores the fine line between “commonality of purpose (shared vision) and alignment (team learning).” which again addresses the issue of unity in diversity.  This contextual thinking process will be discussed further under “Outside In: More Than Global Education” later on in this blog series, but it is included here to further illustrate the need for a shift towards a more systemic, holistic and global approach for understanding the importance of education for transition towards a global society. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Eisenber, Leon (1972). The Human Nature of Human Nature. “Science” magazine, 14 April 1972. Glatthorn, Allan, ed. (1995). Content of the Curriculum, 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Laszlo, Ervin (1989). The Inner Limits of Mankind. London: One World Publishers. Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. Sylwester, Robert (1995). A Celebration of Neurons: An Educator’s Guide to the Human Brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Toffler, Alvin (1970). Future Shock. New York: Bantam Books. Toffler, Alvin (1990). Powershift. New York: Bantam Books.   K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 6 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "The Oneness of Humankind".             The concept of the oneness of humankind undoubtedly “implies an organic change in the structure of present day society, a change such as the world has not yet experienced.” (Effendi 1955, p. 43).  Such an organic change infers a deep change, a mature attitude, a true paradigm shift in understanding, something which must take its time to happen, but nevertheless must happen if we are to truly thrive on living in a global society.  If we continue to think (as some nations insist) that independence and sovereignty is the goal, we cannot enter the reality of interdependence. This was a noble goal for humankind in the past, and probably was one of the major reasons for the expansion of life on the planet. But now there is no more planet on which to expand! We have reached our physical limits. All the signs indicate that we must take the leap to interdependence, since every culture has a piece to offer and no culture or nation will allow for its existence to be supplanted (and they increasingly have the wherewithal to defend it).  Even nationalistic economic sovereignty has succumbed to interdependence and the global system of wealth. (Toffler 1990, p. 56).  But this takes a leap of maturity.  Stephen Covey  indicates that for the individual’s relationship to others, interdependence is “a far more advanced concept” and “a choice only independent people can make.”  (Covey 1989, p. 51) It seems that collectively, it may apply to humankind as well.  In order to make that choice, it requires a paradigm shift in thinking and in values.             In their under-recognized brilliant work on educational reform, Education on the Edge of Possibility, Caine and Caine (1997) discuss the need that children have for the “opportunity to explore ultimate questions and larger purposes.”  (p. 95).  They frame “the purposes of education in terms of what sort of person one needs to be to develop sustainable communities and thrive within the new paradigm” of becoming “the Possible Human”.  In line with the aforementioned premise of our ever-wider sense of being part of a global society and “the development of more complex and integrated people”,  Caine and Caine (p. 97) summarize the attributes of such a people as having: an inner appreciation of interconnectedness a strong identity and sense of being a sufficiently large vision and imagination to see how specifics relate to each other the capacity to flow and deal with paradox and uncertainty a capacity to build community and live in relationship with others Akin to the notion of the Possible Human are Leon Eisenberg’s words concerning the ultimate potential or humankind’s reaching a state of maturity, when he states that one whose “concerns extend beyond family and beyond nation to mankind has become fully human.” (Eisenberg 1972, pp. 123-128)             Taking the next leap toward a global society, and what some would term a “more complex and integrated people” is not a new phenomena, as explained above through the ever-widening social groupings that have distinguished human organization throughout history.  We might even say it is a common trait of human nature and has characterized its survival as a species.  In fact, recent brain research has debunked what is prevalent thinking about the competitive nature of the human race since “much of our brain’s capability is tied up in processing activities that are chiefly social and cooperative.” A reason we tend to disagree is  “probably because the mass media focus on such events as wars, competitive crimes, business acquisitions, and sports victories.  The mass media focus on the dramatically unusual, not on the norm in human behavior...The human race wouldn’t have survived if it were principally and violently competitive.”  (Sylwester 1995, p. 117).              Beyond such a misnomer, what are the further barriers that prevent adopting such a paradigm and why is there pain and resistance? Among systems thinkers, Ervin Laszlo suggests that we search for solutions to the problems facing humankind on what he terms “outer” or “physical” limits of blame such as limited fossil fuels, food production capacity, climatic stability, increased population, and accommodation of urban demographics. Yet, claiming that these are symptoms and not causes, he postulates that “truly decisive limits are inner, not outer” and that “the root causes even of physical and ecological problems are the inner constraints on our vision and values,” the lens through which we see all things, the base against which we compare. He goes on to offer a diagnosis of our “serious case of culture lag” (Laszlo 1989, p. 26) since “modernism has become obsolete” as it “no longer serves the genuine interests of human beings” owing to the fact that we are “badly in need of a global partnership.” (p. 39 and 104). Such a partnership requires more than what we are teaching in schools under the guise of tolerance education or even co-existence among differences. It might be termed, as Laszlo says, “interexistence” (p. 109), which implies a sort of symbiotic relationship among the peoples of the world.  In fact, such a relationship and conscious sense of global community might even lead one to likening all of humankind as one body, with many interconnected and interdependent parts in order to produce the whole - a whole whose potential is synergistically far greater than even the sum of its component parts.             As opposed to the concept-cliché of a world melting pot, more transcendent than the Gaia principal - “the idea that the planet Earth as a whole is a living, self-organizing system” (Capra 1996, p. 100), and even more profound than what some educator pundits of a multicultural curriculum term as the need for education for “cultural pluralism - people living side-by-side from different backgrounds”, (Glatthorn 1995, p. 239) it would foster differentiation along with integration, thereby creating unity with diversity, a sort of “crazy-quilt pattern of evanescent life styles”  (Toffler 1970, p. 302).  On the one hand we have a colorful display of uniqueness while on the other the rich potential far beyond what each of its component parts would ever be capable of alone.  One way this combination of apparent opposites can be achieved is through the development of a sense of empathy in order to understand and feel connected to others. Educator Alfie Kohn uses a strategy that he describes as “a twofold attitude toward the ‘other’.  On the one hand, we appreciate, as it were, the other’s otherness; on the other hand, we appreciate the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  This is not to be confused with simple association or membership in a societal group, where individuality dissipates into conformity.  But rather “when shared humanness and individual uniqueness can be emphasized over group membership, this would be much to the good.” (Kohn 1990, p. 149).  Again, here we see the promotion of instilling the concept of unity in diversity.             Systems thinker Fritzof Capra explains that we have based much of our western scientific thought on the “belief that in every complex system the behavior of the whole can be understood entirely from the properties of its parts”.  This Cartesian paradigm, according to Capra, is no longer valid in a post modern and systems-thinking world. On the contrary, “the properties of the parts can be understood only from the organization of the whole.” (Capra 1996, p. 29). In his ground-breaking work The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge illustrates that systems thinking leads to thinking in “wholes” rather than “parts” and that “at the level of essences, the disciplines start to converge. There is a common sensibility uniting the disciplines - the sensibility of being learners in an intrinsically interdependent world.” (Senge 1990, p. 375).  Unless we make such a leap in world view, Senge feels we are living in the ills of and suffering from the pains of our own creation - that “the unhealthiness of our world today is in direct proportion to our inability to see it as a whole.” (Senge 1990, p. 68). He also explores the fine line between “commonality of purpose (shared vision) and alignment (team learning).” which again addresses the issue of unity in diversity.  This contextual thinking process will be discussed further under “Outside In: More Than Global Education” later on in this blog series, but it is included here to further illustrate the need for a shift towards a more systemic, holistic and global approach for understanding the importance of education for transition towards a global society. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Eisenber, Leon (1972). The Human Nature of Human Nature. “Science” magazine, 14 April 1972. Glatthorn, Allan, ed. (1995). Content of the Curriculum, 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Laszlo, Ervin (1989). The Inner Limits of Mankind. London: One World Publishers. Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. Sylwester, Robert (1995). A Celebration of Neurons: An Educator’s Guide to the Human Brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Toffler, Alvin (1970). Future Shock. New York: Bantam Books. Toffler, Alvin (1990). Powershift. New York: Bantam Books.   Mon, 31 Jan 2011 16:30:14 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocScience-for-21st-Century-Part-6/blog/3287593/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2011-01-31T16:30:14Z ASCD EDge K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 6 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. This post's topic is "The Oneness of Humankind".             The concept of the oneness of humankind undoubtedly “implies an organic change in the structure of present day society, a change such as the world has not yet experienced.” (Effendi 1955, p. 43).  Such an organic change infers a deep change, a mature attitude, a true paradigm shift in understanding, something which must take its time to happen, but nevertheless must happen if we are to truly thrive on living in a global society.  If we continue to think (as some nations insist) that independence and sovereignty is the goal, we cannot enter the reality of interdependence. This was a noble goal for humankind in the past, and probably was one of the major reasons for the expansion of life on the planet. But now there is no more planet on which to expand! We have reached our physical limits. All the signs indicate that we must take the leap to interdependence, since every culture has a piece to offer and no culture or nation will allow for its existence to be supplanted (and they increasingly have the wherewithal to defend it).  Even nationalistic economic sovereignty has succumbed to interdependence and the global system of wealth. (Toffler 1990, p. 56).  But this takes a leap of maturity.  Stephen Covey  indicates that for the individual’s relationship to others, interdependence is “a far more advanced concept” and “a choice only independent people can make.”  (Covey 1989, p. 51) It seems that collectively, it may apply to humankind as well.  In order to make that choice, it requires a paradigm shift in thinking and in values.             In their under-recognized brilliant work on educational reform, Education on the Edge of Possibility, Caine and Caine (1997) discuss the need that children have for the “opportunity to explore ultimate questions and larger purposes.”  (p. 95).  They frame “the purposes of education in terms of what sort of person one needs to be to develop sustainable communities and thrive within the new paradigm” of becoming “the Possible Human”.  In line with the aforementioned premise of our ever-wider sense of being part of a global society and “the development of more complex and integrated people”,  Caine and Caine (p. 97) summarize the attributes of such a people as having: an inner appreciation of interconnectedness a strong identity and sense of being a sufficiently large vision and imagination to see how specifics relate to each other the capacity to flow and deal with paradox and uncertainty a capacity to build community and live in relationship with others Akin to the notion of the Possible Human are Leon Eisenberg’s words concerning the ultimate potential or humankind’s reaching a state of maturity, when he states that one whose “concerns extend beyond family and beyond nation to mankind has become fully human.” (Eisenberg 1972, pp. 123-128)             Taking the next leap toward a global society, and what some would term a “more complex and integrated people” is not a new phenomena, as explained above through the ever-widening social groupings that have distinguished human organization throughout history.  We might even say it is a common trait of human nature and has characterized its survival as a species.  In fact, recent brain research has debunked what is prevalent thinking about the competitive nature of the human race since “much of our brain’s capability is tied up in processing activities that are chiefly social and cooperative.” A reason we tend to disagree is  “probably because the mass media focus on such events as wars, competitive crimes, business acquisitions, and sports victories.  The mass media focus on the dramatically unusual, not on the norm in human behavior...The human race wouldn’t have survived if it were principally and violently competitive.”  (Sylwester 1995, p. 117).              Beyond such a misnomer, what are the further barriers that prevent adopting such a paradigm and why is there pain and resistance? Among systems thinkers, Ervin Laszlo suggests that we search for solutions to the problems facing humankind on what he terms “outer” or “physical” limits of blame such as limited fossil fuels, food production capacity, climatic stability, increased population, and accommodation of urban demographics. Yet, claiming that these are symptoms and not causes, he postulates that “truly decisive limits are inner, not outer” and that “the root causes even of physical and ecological problems are the inner constraints on our vision and values,” the lens through which we see all things, the base against which we compare. He goes on to offer a diagnosis of our “serious case of culture lag” (Laszlo 1989, p. 26) since “modernism has become obsolete” as it “no longer serves the genuine interests of human beings” owing to the fact that we are “badly in need of a global partnership.” (p. 39 and 104). Such a partnership requires more than what we are teaching in schools under the guise of tolerance education or even co-existence among differences. It might be termed, as Laszlo says, “interexistence” (p. 109), which implies a sort of symbiotic relationship among the peoples of the world.  In fact, such a relationship and conscious sense of global community might even lead one to likening all of humankind as one body, with many interconnected and interdependent parts in order to produce the whole - a whole whose potential is synergistically far greater than even the sum of its component parts.             As opposed to the concept-cliché of a world melting pot, more transcendent than the Gaia principal - “the idea that the planet Earth as a whole is a living, self-organizing system” (Capra 1996, p. 100), and even more profound than what some educator pundits of a multicultural curriculum term as the need for education for “cultural pluralism - people living side-by-side from different backgrounds”, (Glatthorn 1995, p. 239) it would foster differentiation along with integration, thereby creating unity with diversity, a sort of “crazy-quilt pattern of evanescent life styles”  (Toffler 1970, p. 302).  On the one hand we have a colorful display of uniqueness while on the other the rich potential far beyond what each of its component parts would ever be capable of alone.  One way this combination of apparent opposites can be achieved is through the development of a sense of empathy in order to understand and feel connected to others. Educator Alfie Kohn uses a strategy that he describes as “a twofold attitude toward the ‘other’.  On the one hand, we appreciate, as it were, the other’s otherness; on the other hand, we appreciate the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  This is not to be confused with simple association or membership in a societal group, where individuality dissipates into conformity.  But rather “when shared humanness and individual uniqueness can be emphasized over group membership, this would be much to the good.” (Kohn 1990, p. 149).  Again, here we see the promotion of instilling the concept of unity in diversity.             Systems thinker Fritzof Capra explains that we have based much of our western scientific thought on the “belief that in every complex system the behavior of the whole can be understood entirely from the properties of its parts”.  This Cartesian paradigm, according to Capra, is no longer valid in a post modern and systems-thinking world. On the contrary, “the properties of the parts can be understood only from the organization of the whole.” (Capra 1996, p. 29). In his ground-breaking work The Fifth Discipline, Peter Senge illustrates that systems thinking leads to thinking in “wholes” rather than “parts” and that “at the level of essences, the disciplines start to converge. There is a common sensibility uniting the disciplines - the sensibility of being learners in an intrinsically interdependent world.” (Senge 1990, p. 375).  Unless we make such a leap in world view, Senge feels we are living in the ills of and suffering from the pains of our own creation - that “the unhealthiness of our world today is in direct proportion to our inability to see it as a whole.” (Senge 1990, p. 68). He also explores the fine line between “commonality of purpose (shared vision) and alignment (team learning).” which again addresses the issue of unity in diversity.  This contextual thinking process will be discussed further under “Outside In: More Than Global Education” later on in this blog series, but it is included here to further illustrate the need for a shift towards a more systemic, holistic and global approach for understanding the importance of education for transition towards a global society. Caine, Renate Nummela and Geoffrey Caine (1997). Education on the Edge of Possibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Eisenber, Leon (1972). The Human Nature of Human Nature. “Science” magazine, 14 April 1972. Glatthorn, Allan, ed. (1995). Content of the Curriculum, 2nd edition. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Laszlo, Ervin (1989). The Inner Limits of Mankind. London: One World Publishers. Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. Sylwester, Robert (1995). A Celebration of Neurons: An Educator’s Guide to the Human Brain. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Toffler, Alvin (1970). Future Shock. New York: Bantam Books. Toffler, Alvin (1990). Powershift. New York: Bantam Books.   21stcenturylearning, curriculum, socialscience nonadult false K-8 Soc.Science for 21st Century - Part 6 text blog 21stcenturylearning,curriculum,socialscience 419 0 0.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 3287593 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocScience-for-21st-Century-Part-5/blog/2500144/127586.html K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 5 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. Today's topic is "The Need for a Paradigm Shift: The Age of Transition Toward a Global Society". Don't be fooled by the reference date in the following quote. It is quite a currently valid statement by Toffler. “Here lies the great challenge to contemporary social science: creating and transmitting the knowledge for understanding and coping with a future that remains largely unknown.” (Toffler  1974, p. 76)             Our embracing of life in a global society takes courage.  It takes courage because we cannot imagine the outcome and far-reaching ramifications of humankind’s evolution as a unified planetary species because it hasn’t happened yet. When the outcome is uncertain, and we tread the areas of the unknown, there is logically an element of fear. Logically “there is both terror and exhilaration in being on the existential edge.  The shift in our view of the world from a mechanistic to a holistic perspective is like living on that edge.” (Davis 1987, p. 221-222).  We can only respond to its descriptive dimensions based on what is known and visualize our response compared to similar reactions to societal change to ever-enlarging social groupings in the past. We are a product of history while a player of the future at the same time.             One might look at this evolutionary process as natural, “grown from the condition of single families into tribes, then emerged into city-states and nations and now the world has reached the state of what is known as a ‘global village’ where all the nations and the peoples of the world have become highly interdependent.  ....  It is not the invention of anyone or any nation.” (Sefidvash 1998).  Yet all natural evolutionary processes, through selective need, will infer the giving up of something in order to obtain a greater benefit.  This willing sacrifice seems to obey to humankind’s necessary quest for an ever-advancing civilization, whatever the interpretation of the term advancing might be.  In the case of humankind as a species, this involves temporary discomfort as a result of breaking down traditions and structures that were for many ages considered not only adequate but necessary.  For a city-state to be formed, the benefits of union far outweighed the individual needs of the tribes, families and clans.  The nation-state was a necessary outcry for the greater good and economic progress of a group of cities of unified thinking. Each step brought together those who recognized that sacrificing a measure of independence brought forth benefits to all. The same can be said today, but on a global scale.             As a result, we witness what could be termed a “dual phenomenon.  The first signalizes the death-pangs of an order” where social and political structures cannot hold up to the requirements of living in an interdependent age while “the second proclaims the birth-pangs” of a new “embryonic civilization, incomparable and world-embracing...”  It is easy, and ironically more comfortable, to fall into pessimism and only respond to the outcry and fury of increasing social injustice and violence that the media shows us about world affairs, but as educators it seems we have a moral imperative to accept the challenge to empower future generations and realize that our destiny impels us to positive and ever-greater heights.  Looking at these two processes of the breakdown of an old order and the building of a new one, we see “the one is being rolled up, and is crashing in oppression, bloodshed, and ruin.  The other opens up vistas of a justice, a unity, a peace, a culture, such as no age has ever seen.” (Effendi 1661, p. 16).              As far as the socio-political characteristics of its organization are concerned,  this global society is described as “humanity’s coming of age” by Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi. “The emergence of a world community, the consciousness of world citizenship, the founding of a world civilization and culture...should, by their very nature, be regarded, as far as this planetary life is concerned, as the furthermost limits in the organization of human society...” (Effendi 1955, p. 163). As opposed to Kant’s concept of a temporary “federation of peoples”, Shoghi Effendi’s vision embraces the concept of a “world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united,” while at the same time “the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)             In the realm of the transcendent, Robert Muller, ex-Chancellor of the University for Peace in Costa Rica goes so far as to term this next stage as “our entry into a moral global age - the global age of love - and a global spiritual age - the cosmic age.”  (Muller 1993, p. 100).  During his address in Philadelphia, upon receiving the Liberty Medal in 1994, Czech President Vaclav Havel also commented on humankind’s collective “need for transcendence in the postmodern world”.  He describes as far back as 1994 this new age upon which we are embarking as a “multicultural era, a signal that an amalgamation of cultures is taking place....proof that something is happening, something is being born, that we are in a phase when one age is succeeding another, when everything is possible because our civilization does not have its own unified style, its own spirit, its own aesthetic.” (Havel 1994). This may well lead us to contemplate the Greek concept of the paidea or “educational matrix created by the whole of Athenian culture” when we think of ourselves as gathering our “collective wisdom, from the past and from the whole planet.” (Fergusson 1980, p. 306-307). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Davis, Stanley M. (1987). Future Perfect. New York: Addison-Wesley. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Effendi, Shoghi (1961). The Promised Day is Come. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Ferguson, Marilyn (1980). The Aquarian Conspiracy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Havel, Vaclav (1994). The Need for Transcendence in the Postmodern World. Speech delivered in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA on July 4, 1994 after having received the Liberty Medal. Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Sevidvash, Farhang  (1998). The Concept of Globalization. Porto Alegre, Brazil: The Research Center for Global Governance. Toffler, Alvin, ed. (1974). Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of the Future in Education.. New York: Vintage Books. K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 5 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. Today's topic is "The Need for a Paradigm Shift: The Age of Transition Toward a Global Society". Don't be fooled by the reference date in the following quote. It is quite a currently valid statement by Toffler. “Here lies the great challenge to contemporary social science: creating and transmitting the knowledge for understanding and coping with a future that remains largely unknown.” (Toffler  1974, p. 76)             Our embracing of life in a global society takes courage.  It takes courage because we cannot imagine the outcome and far-reaching ramifications of humankind’s evolution as a unified planetary species because it hasn’t happened yet. When the outcome is uncertain, and we tread the areas of the unknown, there is logically an element of fear. Logically “there is both terror and exhilaration in being on the existential edge.  The shift in our view of the world from a mechanistic to a holistic perspective is like living on that edge.” (Davis 1987, p. 221-222).  We can only respond to its descriptive dimensions based on what is known and visualize our response compared to similar reactions to societal change to ever-enlarging social groupings in the past. We are a product of history while a player of the future at the same time.             One might look at this evolutionary process as natural, “grown from the condition of single families into tribes, then emerged into city-states and nations and now the world has reached the state of what is known as a ‘global village’ where all the nations and the peoples of the world have become highly interdependent.  ....  It is not the invention of anyone or any nation.” (Sefidvash 1998).  Yet all natural evolutionary processes, through selective need, will infer the giving up of something in order to obtain a greater benefit.  This willing sacrifice seems to obey to humankind’s necessary quest for an ever-advancing civilization, whatever the interpretation of the term advancing might be.  In the case of humankind as a species, this involves temporary discomfort as a result of breaking down traditions and structures that were for many ages considered not only adequate but necessary.  For a city-state to be formed, the benefits of union far outweighed the individual needs of the tribes, families and clans.  The nation-state was a necessary outcry for the greater good and economic progress of a group of cities of unified thinking. Each step brought together those who recognized that sacrificing a measure of independence brought forth benefits to all. The same can be said today, but on a global scale.             As a result, we witness what could be termed a “dual phenomenon.  The first signalizes the death-pangs of an order” where social and political structures cannot hold up to the requirements of living in an interdependent age while “the second proclaims the birth-pangs” of a new “embryonic civilization, incomparable and world-embracing...”  It is easy, and ironically more comfortable, to fall into pessimism and only respond to the outcry and fury of increasing social injustice and violence that the media shows us about world affairs, but as educators it seems we have a moral imperative to accept the challenge to empower future generations and realize that our destiny impels us to positive and ever-greater heights.  Looking at these two processes of the breakdown of an old order and the building of a new one, we see “the one is being rolled up, and is crashing in oppression, bloodshed, and ruin.  The other opens up vistas of a justice, a unity, a peace, a culture, such as no age has ever seen.” (Effendi 1661, p. 16).              As far as the socio-political characteristics of its organization are concerned,  this global society is described as “humanity’s coming of age” by Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi. “The emergence of a world community, the consciousness of world citizenship, the founding of a world civilization and culture...should, by their very nature, be regarded, as far as this planetary life is concerned, as the furthermost limits in the organization of human society...” (Effendi 1955, p. 163). As opposed to Kant’s concept of a temporary “federation of peoples”, Shoghi Effendi’s vision embraces the concept of a “world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united,” while at the same time “the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)             In the realm of the transcendent, Robert Muller, ex-Chancellor of the University for Peace in Costa Rica goes so far as to term this next stage as “our entry into a moral global age - the global age of love - and a global spiritual age - the cosmic age.”  (Muller 1993, p. 100).  During his address in Philadelphia, upon receiving the Liberty Medal in 1994, Czech President Vaclav Havel also commented on humankind’s collective “need for transcendence in the postmodern world”.  He describes as far back as 1994 this new age upon which we are embarking as a “multicultural era, a signal that an amalgamation of cultures is taking place....proof that something is happening, something is being born, that we are in a phase when one age is succeeding another, when everything is possible because our civilization does not have its own unified style, its own spirit, its own aesthetic.” (Havel 1994). This may well lead us to contemplate the Greek concept of the paidea or “educational matrix created by the whole of Athenian culture” when we think of ourselves as gathering our “collective wisdom, from the past and from the whole planet.” (Fergusson 1980, p. 306-307). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Davis, Stanley M. (1987). Future Perfect. New York: Addison-Wesley. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Effendi, Shoghi (1961). The Promised Day is Come. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Ferguson, Marilyn (1980). The Aquarian Conspiracy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Havel, Vaclav (1994). The Need for Transcendence in the Postmodern World. Speech delivered in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA on July 4, 1994 after having received the Liberty Medal. Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Sevidvash, Farhang  (1998). The Concept of Globalization. Porto Alegre, Brazil: The Research Center for Global Governance. Toffler, Alvin, ed. (1974). Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of the Future in Education.. New York: Vintage Books. Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:31:05 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocScience-for-21st-Century-Part-5/blog/2500144/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-07-27T18:31:05Z ASCD EDge K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 5 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. Today's topic is "The Need for a Paradigm Shift: The Age of Transition Toward a Global Society". Don't be fooled by the reference date in the following quote. It is quite a currently valid statement by Toffler. “Here lies the great challenge to contemporary social science: creating and transmitting the knowledge for understanding and coping with a future that remains largely unknown.” (Toffler  1974, p. 76)             Our embracing of life in a global society takes courage.  It takes courage because we cannot imagine the outcome and far-reaching ramifications of humankind’s evolution as a unified planetary species because it hasn’t happened yet. When the outcome is uncertain, and we tread the areas of the unknown, there is logically an element of fear. Logically “there is both terror and exhilaration in being on the existential edge.  The shift in our view of the world from a mechanistic to a holistic perspective is like living on that edge.” (Davis 1987, p. 221-222).  We can only respond to its descriptive dimensions based on what is known and visualize our response compared to similar reactions to societal change to ever-enlarging social groupings in the past. We are a product of history while a player of the future at the same time.             One might look at this evolutionary process as natural, “grown from the condition of single families into tribes, then emerged into city-states and nations and now the world has reached the state of what is known as a ‘global village’ where all the nations and the peoples of the world have become highly interdependent.  ....  It is not the invention of anyone or any nation.” (Sefidvash 1998).  Yet all natural evolutionary processes, through selective need, will infer the giving up of something in order to obtain a greater benefit.  This willing sacrifice seems to obey to humankind’s necessary quest for an ever-advancing civilization, whatever the interpretation of the term advancing might be.  In the case of humankind as a species, this involves temporary discomfort as a result of breaking down traditions and structures that were for many ages considered not only adequate but necessary.  For a city-state to be formed, the benefits of union far outweighed the individual needs of the tribes, families and clans.  The nation-state was a necessary outcry for the greater good and economic progress of a group of cities of unified thinking. Each step brought together those who recognized that sacrificing a measure of independence brought forth benefits to all. The same can be said today, but on a global scale.             As a result, we witness what could be termed a “dual phenomenon.  The first signalizes the death-pangs of an order” where social and political structures cannot hold up to the requirements of living in an interdependent age while “the second proclaims the birth-pangs” of a new “embryonic civilization, incomparable and world-embracing...”  It is easy, and ironically more comfortable, to fall into pessimism and only respond to the outcry and fury of increasing social injustice and violence that the media shows us about world affairs, but as educators it seems we have a moral imperative to accept the challenge to empower future generations and realize that our destiny impels us to positive and ever-greater heights.  Looking at these two processes of the breakdown of an old order and the building of a new one, we see “the one is being rolled up, and is crashing in oppression, bloodshed, and ruin.  The other opens up vistas of a justice, a unity, a peace, a culture, such as no age has ever seen.” (Effendi 1661, p. 16).              As far as the socio-political characteristics of its organization are concerned,  this global society is described as “humanity’s coming of age” by Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi. “The emergence of a world community, the consciousness of world citizenship, the founding of a world civilization and culture...should, by their very nature, be regarded, as far as this planetary life is concerned, as the furthermost limits in the organization of human society...” (Effendi 1955, p. 163). As opposed to Kant’s concept of a temporary “federation of peoples”, Shoghi Effendi’s vision embraces the concept of a “world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united,” while at the same time “the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)             In the realm of the transcendent, Robert Muller, ex-Chancellor of the University for Peace in Costa Rica goes so far as to term this next stage as “our entry into a moral global age - the global age of love - and a global spiritual age - the cosmic age.”  (Muller 1993, p. 100).  During his address in Philadelphia, upon receiving the Liberty Medal in 1994, Czech President Vaclav Havel also commented on humankind’s collective “need for transcendence in the postmodern world”.  He describes as far back as 1994 this new age upon which we are embarking as a “multicultural era, a signal that an amalgamation of cultures is taking place....proof that something is happening, something is being born, that we are in a phase when one age is succeeding another, when everything is possible because our civilization does not have its own unified style, its own spirit, its own aesthetic.” (Havel 1994). This may well lead us to contemplate the Greek concept of the paidea or “educational matrix created by the whole of Athenian culture” when we think of ourselves as gathering our “collective wisdom, from the past and from the whole planet.” (Fergusson 1980, p. 306-307). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Davis, Stanley M. (1987). Future Perfect. New York: Addison-Wesley. Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Effendi, Shoghi (1961). The Promised Day is Come. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. Ferguson, Marilyn (1980). The Aquarian Conspiracy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Havel, Vaclav (1994). The Need for Transcendence in the Postmodern World. Speech delivered in Independence Hall, Philadelphia, PA on July 4, 1994 after having received the Liberty Medal. Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Sevidvash, Farhang  (1998). The Concept of Globalization. Porto Alegre, Brazil: The Research Center for Global Governance. Toffler, Alvin, ed. (1974). Learning for Tomorrow: The Role of the Future in Education.. New York: Vintage Books. 21st century education, curriculum, global educatiomn, social studies nonadult false K-8 Soc.Science for 21st Century-Part 5 text blog 21st century education,curriculum,global educatiomn,social studies 497 0 0.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 2500144 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Soc-Science-for-21st-Century-Part-4/blog/2458349/127586.html Topics to be Discussed             This blog will, to a lesser degree, present the case of the positive eventuality of humankind’s trajectory toward life on this planet as a single human community.  It will explore the conflicts and sacrifices that are characteristic of the metamorphosis of giving birth to such a community through the exploration of concepts such as new world order, age of transition, global society, world citizenship, and unity in diversity among others.  Notwithstanding, the emphasis will be on the creation of a K-8 Social Science Curricular Framework that can contribute towards the preparation and development of our young people to face the challenges of living in and contributing toward such a society.  It will attempt to be sufficiently generic and universal in its scope to be adaptable to a diverse population - from Europe to South America to North America and perhaps, to a lesser degree, the Middle East and Africa.  It will not claim to be applicable to Asia or the Far East, because of my own ignorance on such cultures and lack of time for further research.  Yet this could be the subject of an enriched study once this framework is tested and piloted.  The restriction to the K-8 levels is for the same reasons as well as the desire of the writer to work primarily on the educational foundation of our youngest people, where one-world values, the development of virtues and prejudice prevention can be most effective and long lasting.  This is because the area of social science curricular development connects to many of the so-called “soft” disciplines such as sociology, historical journalism, anthropology, behavior development and management, and perhaps psychology.  Therefore, the influence of external factors, role modeling and ethical lenses through which the content is passed will be efficiently transmitted at the early stages of human development. Expected Outcomes             The writer feels that there needs to be an entirely inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences.  What will be proposed will be an outside-in rather than inside-out approach to its understanding.              Due recognition needs to be made for the credible theory that as biological and social beings we first know or recognize our mother, our family, our extended family, our neighborhood, our community, and so on.  This is mostly as a result of physical limitations to developmental mobility.  Yet, to consider that the capacity of the young child to understand and learn is also limited to that same physical range and progression once formal education begins seems to me to be a misnomer. Advances in communication and media technology have challenged our physical limitations and “natural” developmental processes by thrusting the world upon us, taking “real time” events into the privacy and what was thought to be controllable surroundings such as our living rooms. To ignore the impact upon what is now  “developmentally appropriate” to our children is to be drowned in the sea of denial.  When suggesting that a lesson be included about all peoples of the world being part of one family, I have actually had a 2nd grade teacher claim that it was inappropriate to talk about other countries and peoples since her students were not able to comprehend the notion of world, let alone consider the concept of the oneness of the human race. “Who should claim that the life space of a six-year-old is limited to the local environment when each evening the child may view television accounts of events in progress from anywhere in the world?” (Parker 1991, p. 107).             The curricular framework will be based on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wide loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species will be the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching phenomena.  One way that this may be accomplished is through the modification of the typical strands of the social science curriculum.  Nearly all social science curriculums start with the “strand” or “domain” called history.  As a result, looking back occurs within the lenses of the current societal branch of civilization, with all the premises, biases, traditions and past experiences that necessary accompany it.  If we were to cover much the same content but call the strand humankind, the outcomes, expectations and social and emotional learning that will take place will be decisively different.  Rather than discover how and why we are what we are as citizens of the United States, of Chile, of Mongolia or of France, we would look at humankind’s trajectory and even destiny more wholistically as one race, and identify, through social science analysis, the causes and effects of the diversity that challenges this wholism in order to make the transition toward a true global society.  Although there are other ways to organize a curriculum framework (i.e. thematic, situational, problematic, etc.), I would like to maintain a more traditional strand approach so as to ease adaptability into what are generally accepted existing standards and expand the learning objectives within the curricular framework along these lines.             This blog will also, to a lesser degree, incorporate significant events such as current educational reforms and present specific references to Congress’ No Child Left Behind Act and subsequent educational reforms of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).  It will also address specifically the latest versions of some state standards in the USA and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills curriculum framework, since the "core standards" movement underway nationally in the USA does not include the social sciences (yet). -------------------------------------------------------------- Parker, Walter C. (1991). Renewing the Social Studies Curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Topics to be Discussed             This blog will, to a lesser degree, present the case of the positive eventuality of humankind’s trajectory toward life on this planet as a single human community.  It will explore the conflicts and sacrifices that are characteristic of the metamorphosis of giving birth to such a community through the exploration of concepts such as new world order, age of transition, global society, world citizenship, and unity in diversity among others.  Notwithstanding, the emphasis will be on the creation of a K-8 Social Science Curricular Framework that can contribute towards the preparation and development of our young people to face the challenges of living in and contributing toward such a society.  It will attempt to be sufficiently generic and universal in its scope to be adaptable to a diverse population - from Europe to South America to North America and perhaps, to a lesser degree, the Middle East and Africa.  It will not claim to be applicable to Asia or the Far East, because of my own ignorance on such cultures and lack of time for further research.  Yet this could be the subject of an enriched study once this framework is tested and piloted.  The restriction to the K-8 levels is for the same reasons as well as the desire of the writer to work primarily on the educational foundation of our youngest people, where one-world values, the development of virtues and prejudice prevention can be most effective and long lasting.  This is because the area of social science curricular development connects to many of the so-called “soft” disciplines such as sociology, historical journalism, anthropology, behavior development and management, and perhaps psychology.  Therefore, the influence of external factors, role modeling and ethical lenses through which the content is passed will be efficiently transmitted at the early stages of human development. Expected Outcomes             The writer feels that there needs to be an entirely inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences.  What will be proposed will be an outside-in rather than inside-out approach to its understanding.              Due recognition needs to be made for the credible theory that as biological and social beings we first know or recognize our mother, our family, our extended family, our neighborhood, our community, and so on.  This is mostly as a result of physical limitations to developmental mobility.  Yet, to consider that the capacity of the young child to understand and learn is also limited to that same physical range and progression once formal education begins seems to me to be a misnomer. Advances in communication and media technology have challenged our physical limitations and “natural” developmental processes by thrusting the world upon us, taking “real time” events into the privacy and what was thought to be controllable surroundings such as our living rooms. To ignore the impact upon what is now  “developmentally appropriate” to our children is to be drowned in the sea of denial.  When suggesting that a lesson be included about all peoples of the world being part of one family, I have actually had a 2nd grade teacher claim that it was inappropriate to talk about other countries and peoples since her students were not able to comprehend the notion of world, let alone consider the concept of the oneness of the human race. “Who should claim that the life space of a six-year-old is limited to the local environment when each evening the child may view television accounts of events in progress from anywhere in the world?” (Parker 1991, p. 107).             The curricular framework will be based on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wide loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species will be the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching phenomena.  One way that this may be accomplished is through the modification of the typical strands of the social science curriculum.  Nearly all social science curriculums start with the “strand” or “domain” called history.  As a result, looking back occurs within the lenses of the current societal branch of civilization, with all the premises, biases, traditions and past experiences that necessary accompany it.  If we were to cover much the same content but call the strand humankind, the outcomes, expectations and social and emotional learning that will take place will be decisively different.  Rather than discover how and why we are what we are as citizens of the United States, of Chile, of Mongolia or of France, we would look at humankind’s trajectory and even destiny more wholistically as one race, and identify, through social science analysis, the causes and effects of the diversity that challenges this wholism in order to make the transition toward a true global society.  Although there are other ways to organize a curriculum framework (i.e. thematic, situational, problematic, etc.), I would like to maintain a more traditional strand approach so as to ease adaptability into what are generally accepted existing standards and expand the learning objectives within the curricular framework along these lines.             This blog will also, to a lesser degree, incorporate significant events such as current educational reforms and present specific references to Congress’ No Child Left Behind Act and subsequent educational reforms of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).  It will also address specifically the latest versions of some state standards in the USA and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills curriculum framework, since the "core standards" movement underway nationally in the USA does not include the social sciences (yet). -------------------------------------------------------------- Parker, Walter C. (1991). Renewing the Social Studies Curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:58:14 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Soc-Science-for-21st-Century-Part-4/blog/2458349/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-07-14T15:58:14Z ASCD EDge Topics to be Discussed             This blog will, to a lesser degree, present the case of the positive eventuality of humankind’s trajectory toward life on this planet as a single human community.  It will explore the conflicts and sacrifices that are characteristic of the metamorphosis of giving birth to such a community through the exploration of concepts such as new world order, age of transition, global society, world citizenship, and unity in diversity among others.  Notwithstanding, the emphasis will be on the creation of a K-8 Social Science Curricular Framework that can contribute towards the preparation and development of our young people to face the challenges of living in and contributing toward such a society.  It will attempt to be sufficiently generic and universal in its scope to be adaptable to a diverse population - from Europe to South America to North America and perhaps, to a lesser degree, the Middle East and Africa.  It will not claim to be applicable to Asia or the Far East, because of my own ignorance on such cultures and lack of time for further research.  Yet this could be the subject of an enriched study once this framework is tested and piloted.  The restriction to the K-8 levels is for the same reasons as well as the desire of the writer to work primarily on the educational foundation of our youngest people, where one-world values, the development of virtues and prejudice prevention can be most effective and long lasting.  This is because the area of social science curricular development connects to many of the so-called “soft” disciplines such as sociology, historical journalism, anthropology, behavior development and management, and perhaps psychology.  Therefore, the influence of external factors, role modeling and ethical lenses through which the content is passed will be efficiently transmitted at the early stages of human development. Expected Outcomes             The writer feels that there needs to be an entirely inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences.  What will be proposed will be an outside-in rather than inside-out approach to its understanding.              Due recognition needs to be made for the credible theory that as biological and social beings we first know or recognize our mother, our family, our extended family, our neighborhood, our community, and so on.  This is mostly as a result of physical limitations to developmental mobility.  Yet, to consider that the capacity of the young child to understand and learn is also limited to that same physical range and progression once formal education begins seems to me to be a misnomer. Advances in communication and media technology have challenged our physical limitations and “natural” developmental processes by thrusting the world upon us, taking “real time” events into the privacy and what was thought to be controllable surroundings such as our living rooms. To ignore the impact upon what is now  “developmentally appropriate” to our children is to be drowned in the sea of denial.  When suggesting that a lesson be included about all peoples of the world being part of one family, I have actually had a 2nd grade teacher claim that it was inappropriate to talk about other countries and peoples since her students were not able to comprehend the notion of world, let alone consider the concept of the oneness of the human race. “Who should claim that the life space of a six-year-old is limited to the local environment when each evening the child may view television accounts of events in progress from anywhere in the world?” (Parker 1991, p. 107).             The curricular framework will be based on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wide loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species will be the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching phenomena.  One way that this may be accomplished is through the modification of the typical strands of the social science curriculum.  Nearly all social science curriculums start with the “strand” or “domain” called history.  As a result, looking back occurs within the lenses of the current societal branch of civilization, with all the premises, biases, traditions and past experiences that necessary accompany it.  If we were to cover much the same content but call the strand humankind, the outcomes, expectations and social and emotional learning that will take place will be decisively different.  Rather than discover how and why we are what we are as citizens of the United States, of Chile, of Mongolia or of France, we would look at humankind’s trajectory and even destiny more wholistically as one race, and identify, through social science analysis, the causes and effects of the diversity that challenges this wholism in order to make the transition toward a true global society.  Although there are other ways to organize a curriculum framework (i.e. thematic, situational, problematic, etc.), I would like to maintain a more traditional strand approach so as to ease adaptability into what are generally accepted existing standards and expand the learning objectives within the curricular framework along these lines.             This blog will also, to a lesser degree, incorporate significant events such as current educational reforms and present specific references to Congress’ No Child Left Behind Act and subsequent educational reforms of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).  It will also address specifically the latest versions of some state standards in the USA and the Partnership for 21st Century Skills curriculum framework, since the "core standards" movement underway nationally in the USA does not include the social sciences (yet). -------------------------------------------------------------- Parker, Walter C. (1991). Renewing the Social Studies Curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 21st century curriculum, socialstudies nonadult false K-8 Soc Science for 21st Century-Part 4 text blog 21st century curriculum,socialstudies 493 0 0.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 2458349 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocSci-Curric-for-21st-Cent-Part-3/blog/2385073/127586.html K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 3 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. In this blog, we will explore more definitions that will be used throughout our discussion.             Global Understanding.  The most finely-tuned and holistic definition I have found so far of global understanding which goes beyond the “classical” and in my opinion simplistic interpretation of the “learning about cultures different than our own” is found in a work by Charlotte Anderson entitled Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning: “The realities of a globally interrelated and culturally diverse world of the 21st century require an education for all students that will enable them to see themselves as human beings whose home is planet earth, who are citizens of a multicultural society living in an increasingly interrelated world and who learn, care, think, and act to celebrate life on this planet and to meet the global challenges confronting humankind.” (Anderson 1994, p. 5). A student who has received the above message through a systematic sequence of strategically design learning, caring, thinking, choosing and acting outcomes will surely be better prepared for global understanding.             Unity in Diversity.  In order to better grasp the concept of the unity of the human species as the underlying goal of a global society, it is imperative to distinguish between unity and uniformity.  The oneness of our home planet was perhaps engrained in our consciousness most graphically after the space flights in the early 1960s which “enabled human beings for the first time to actually look at our planet from outer space and perceive it as an integrated whole,” which “was a profound spiritual experience that forever changed their relationship to the Earth.” (Capra 1996, p. 100).  Now, this “discovery of the interdependent wholeness of our planet must be accompanied by the recognition of the interdependent wholeness of humanity.” (Muller 1993, p. 35). While we seem to be struggling between two apparently opposing forces, that which unites and that which divides or differentiates, we have the potential of manifesting “the fullest response to others of which humans are capable,” appreciating, as educator Alfie Kohn proposes in his work The Brighter Side of Human Nature, on the one hand “the other’s otherness” while on the other, “the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  The "Us and Them" syndrome continuous pervades our curricula, and the sooner we eliminate these outworn shibboleths which as Yong Zhao states "merely serve as constantly evolving containers", the better. Therefore, it is the belief of the writer that through a systemic and updated educational process, “[humankind] might then see that the centripetal force of their common universal human nature is far stronger than the centrifugal force of their different ideologies and racial-cultural patterns.” (Lawson 1969, p. 17).  This balancing act is what we shall term achieving unity in diversity.             Wholistic Education (or Holistic Education).  Nearly all of the recent education researchers who delve into the arena of learning and knowledge seem to agree with the need to see learning from a holistic viewpoint, integrating the social and the emotional aspects of a person’s disposition toward learning - their motivation for learning - beyond expecting results solely on intellectual capacity; that “for children to become knowledgeable, they must be ready and motivated to learn, and capable of integrating new information into their lives.” (Elias 1997, p.1)  It is the “integration of intellectual, social and emotional aspects of ... student learning.” (Cove 1996).   Holistic education has been given greater relevance due to the impact on learning of the emotional capacities of individuals.   It has even been considered a form of intelligence which may be a key to the successful development of lifelong learning as researched and documented by Daniel Goleman (Goleman 1997) and numerous brain researchers over the last 20 years who have even gone so far as to elevate emotional intelligence to an essential element for creating meaning and driving attention. (Jensen 1998, p.72). Beyond integrated education which “cuts across subject-matter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study,” (Shoemaker 1989) holistic education addresses the whole learner. ASCD's Whole Child Initiative is the latest iteration of a positive campaign toward consensus about this topic (see http://www.wholechildeducation.org/).            Global Education.  Because the term “global” can mean “comprehensive” (especially when translated into other languages), in the English language it is secondary, according to the Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, to its first definition of “pertaining to or involving the whole world”.  The latter being considered, when we refer to global education in these discussions, we are referring to that process which “develops the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are the basis for decision making and participation in a world characterized by cultural pluralism, interconnectedness” and international economic dependencies. (Merryfield 1995) Oftentimes referred to as a global multicultural curriculum because “it is intended to deliver the knowledge, skills and attitudes to empower students to active citizenship of their own community, their nation and the world,” and “it is in its very essence an active curriculum,” which should have action outcomes imbedded into its assessment strategies. (Lynch 1989 p. 50). As opposed to “world studies” which tends to be viewed as an additional subject area within the curriculum, in its broadest sense, “global education is also seen as a whole curriculum strategy, permeating and adding to the existing parameters, not only of individual subjects but in a holistic way across all the school-organized learning experience of the student.” (Lynch, P. xvi) More definitions will be forthcoming in the next part of the blog. Anderson, Charlotte C. (1994). Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Cove, Patrick G. and Anne Goodsell Love (1996). Enhancing Student Learning: Intellectual, Social and Emotional Learning. ERIC Digest ED400741. Elias, Marice and others (1997). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning: Guidelines for Educators. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Goleman, Daniel (1997). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Jensen, Eric (1998). Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Lynch, James (1989). Multicultural Education in a Global Society. London: The Falmer Press. Merryfield, Merry (1995). Teacher Education in Global and International Education. Washington, DC: ERIC ED384601 Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Seminars. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education. Shoemaker, Betty Jean Eklund (1989). Integrative Education: A Curriculum for the Twenty-First Century. OSSC Bulletin 33,2. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council, ERIC Digest ED 311602 89. Zhao, Yong (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. p. 171-173. K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 3 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. In this blog, we will explore more definitions that will be used throughout our discussion.             Global Understanding.  The most finely-tuned and holistic definition I have found so far of global understanding which goes beyond the “classical” and in my opinion simplistic interpretation of the “learning about cultures different than our own” is found in a work by Charlotte Anderson entitled Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning: “The realities of a globally interrelated and culturally diverse world of the 21st century require an education for all students that will enable them to see themselves as human beings whose home is planet earth, who are citizens of a multicultural society living in an increasingly interrelated world and who learn, care, think, and act to celebrate life on this planet and to meet the global challenges confronting humankind.” (Anderson 1994, p. 5). A student who has received the above message through a systematic sequence of strategically design learning, caring, thinking, choosing and acting outcomes will surely be better prepared for global understanding.             Unity in Diversity.  In order to better grasp the concept of the unity of the human species as the underlying goal of a global society, it is imperative to distinguish between unity and uniformity.  The oneness of our home planet was perhaps engrained in our consciousness most graphically after the space flights in the early 1960s which “enabled human beings for the first time to actually look at our planet from outer space and perceive it as an integrated whole,” which “was a profound spiritual experience that forever changed their relationship to the Earth.” (Capra 1996, p. 100).  Now, this “discovery of the interdependent wholeness of our planet must be accompanied by the recognition of the interdependent wholeness of humanity.” (Muller 1993, p. 35). While we seem to be struggling between two apparently opposing forces, that which unites and that which divides or differentiates, we have the potential of manifesting “the fullest response to others of which humans are capable,” appreciating, as educator Alfie Kohn proposes in his work The Brighter Side of Human Nature, on the one hand “the other’s otherness” while on the other, “the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  The "Us and Them" syndrome continuous pervades our curricula, and the sooner we eliminate these outworn shibboleths which as Yong Zhao states "merely serve as constantly evolving containers", the better. Therefore, it is the belief of the writer that through a systemic and updated educational process, “[humankind] might then see that the centripetal force of their common universal human nature is far stronger than the centrifugal force of their different ideologies and racial-cultural patterns.” (Lawson 1969, p. 17).  This balancing act is what we shall term achieving unity in diversity.             Wholistic Education (or Holistic Education).  Nearly all of the recent education researchers who delve into the arena of learning and knowledge seem to agree with the need to see learning from a holistic viewpoint, integrating the social and the emotional aspects of a person’s disposition toward learning - their motivation for learning - beyond expecting results solely on intellectual capacity; that “for children to become knowledgeable, they must be ready and motivated to learn, and capable of integrating new information into their lives.” (Elias 1997, p.1)  It is the “integration of intellectual, social and emotional aspects of ... student learning.” (Cove 1996).   Holistic education has been given greater relevance due to the impact on learning of the emotional capacities of individuals.   It has even been considered a form of intelligence which may be a key to the successful development of lifelong learning as researched and documented by Daniel Goleman (Goleman 1997) and numerous brain researchers over the last 20 years who have even gone so far as to elevate emotional intelligence to an essential element for creating meaning and driving attention. (Jensen 1998, p.72). Beyond integrated education which “cuts across subject-matter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study,” (Shoemaker 1989) holistic education addresses the whole learner. ASCD's Whole Child Initiative is the latest iteration of a positive campaign toward consensus about this topic (see http://www.wholechildeducation.org/).            Global Education.  Because the term “global” can mean “comprehensive” (especially when translated into other languages), in the English language it is secondary, according to the Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, to its first definition of “pertaining to or involving the whole world”.  The latter being considered, when we refer to global education in these discussions, we are referring to that process which “develops the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are the basis for decision making and participation in a world characterized by cultural pluralism, interconnectedness” and international economic dependencies. (Merryfield 1995) Oftentimes referred to as a global multicultural curriculum because “it is intended to deliver the knowledge, skills and attitudes to empower students to active citizenship of their own community, their nation and the world,” and “it is in its very essence an active curriculum,” which should have action outcomes imbedded into its assessment strategies. (Lynch 1989 p. 50). As opposed to “world studies” which tends to be viewed as an additional subject area within the curriculum, in its broadest sense, “global education is also seen as a whole curriculum strategy, permeating and adding to the existing parameters, not only of individual subjects but in a holistic way across all the school-organized learning experience of the student.” (Lynch, P. xvi) More definitions will be forthcoming in the next part of the blog. Anderson, Charlotte C. (1994). Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Cove, Patrick G. and Anne Goodsell Love (1996). Enhancing Student Learning: Intellectual, Social and Emotional Learning. ERIC Digest ED400741. Elias, Marice and others (1997). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning: Guidelines for Educators. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Goleman, Daniel (1997). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Jensen, Eric (1998). Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Lynch, James (1989). Multicultural Education in a Global Society. London: The Falmer Press. Merryfield, Merry (1995). Teacher Education in Global and International Education. Washington, DC: ERIC ED384601 Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Seminars. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education. Shoemaker, Betty Jean Eklund (1989). Integrative Education: A Curriculum for the Twenty-First Century. OSSC Bulletin 33,2. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council, ERIC Digest ED 311602 89. Zhao, Yong (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. p. 171-173. Tue, 08 Jun 2010 22:55:08 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocSci-Curric-for-21st-Cent-Part-3/blog/2385073/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-06-08T22:55:08Z My Blog Banner ASCD EDge K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 3 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. In this blog, we will explore more definitions that will be used throughout our discussion.             Global Understanding.  The most finely-tuned and holistic definition I have found so far of global understanding which goes beyond the “classical” and in my opinion simplistic interpretation of the “learning about cultures different than our own” is found in a work by Charlotte Anderson entitled Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning: “The realities of a globally interrelated and culturally diverse world of the 21st century require an education for all students that will enable them to see themselves as human beings whose home is planet earth, who are citizens of a multicultural society living in an increasingly interrelated world and who learn, care, think, and act to celebrate life on this planet and to meet the global challenges confronting humankind.” (Anderson 1994, p. 5). A student who has received the above message through a systematic sequence of strategically design learning, caring, thinking, choosing and acting outcomes will surely be better prepared for global understanding.             Unity in Diversity.  In order to better grasp the concept of the unity of the human species as the underlying goal of a global society, it is imperative to distinguish between unity and uniformity.  The oneness of our home planet was perhaps engrained in our consciousness most graphically after the space flights in the early 1960s which “enabled human beings for the first time to actually look at our planet from outer space and perceive it as an integrated whole,” which “was a profound spiritual experience that forever changed their relationship to the Earth.” (Capra 1996, p. 100).  Now, this “discovery of the interdependent wholeness of our planet must be accompanied by the recognition of the interdependent wholeness of humanity.” (Muller 1993, p. 35). While we seem to be struggling between two apparently opposing forces, that which unites and that which divides or differentiates, we have the potential of manifesting “the fullest response to others of which humans are capable,” appreciating, as educator Alfie Kohn proposes in his work The Brighter Side of Human Nature, on the one hand “the other’s otherness” while on the other, “the humanness that we have in common.” (Kohn 1990, p. 99).  The "Us and Them" syndrome continuous pervades our curricula, and the sooner we eliminate these outworn shibboleths which as Yong Zhao states "merely serve as constantly evolving containers", the better. Therefore, it is the belief of the writer that through a systemic and updated educational process, “[humankind] might then see that the centripetal force of their common universal human nature is far stronger than the centrifugal force of their different ideologies and racial-cultural patterns.” (Lawson 1969, p. 17).  This balancing act is what we shall term achieving unity in diversity.             Wholistic Education (or Holistic Education).  Nearly all of the recent education researchers who delve into the arena of learning and knowledge seem to agree with the need to see learning from a holistic viewpoint, integrating the social and the emotional aspects of a person’s disposition toward learning - their motivation for learning - beyond expecting results solely on intellectual capacity; that “for children to become knowledgeable, they must be ready and motivated to learn, and capable of integrating new information into their lives.” (Elias 1997, p.1)  It is the “integration of intellectual, social and emotional aspects of ... student learning.” (Cove 1996).   Holistic education has been given greater relevance due to the impact on learning of the emotional capacities of individuals.   It has even been considered a form of intelligence which may be a key to the successful development of lifelong learning as researched and documented by Daniel Goleman (Goleman 1997) and numerous brain researchers over the last 20 years who have even gone so far as to elevate emotional intelligence to an essential element for creating meaning and driving attention. (Jensen 1998, p.72). Beyond integrated education which “cuts across subject-matter lines, bringing together various aspects of the curriculum into meaningful association to focus upon broad areas of study,” (Shoemaker 1989) holistic education addresses the whole learner. ASCD's Whole Child Initiative is the latest iteration of a positive campaign toward consensus about this topic (see http://www.wholechildeducation.org/).            Global Education.  Because the term “global” can mean “comprehensive” (especially when translated into other languages), in the English language it is secondary, according to the Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, to its first definition of “pertaining to or involving the whole world”.  The latter being considered, when we refer to global education in these discussions, we are referring to that process which “develops the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are the basis for decision making and participation in a world characterized by cultural pluralism, interconnectedness” and international economic dependencies. (Merryfield 1995) Oftentimes referred to as a global multicultural curriculum because “it is intended to deliver the knowledge, skills and attitudes to empower students to active citizenship of their own community, their nation and the world,” and “it is in its very essence an active curriculum,” which should have action outcomes imbedded into its assessment strategies. (Lynch 1989 p. 50). As opposed to “world studies” which tends to be viewed as an additional subject area within the curriculum, in its broadest sense, “global education is also seen as a whole curriculum strategy, permeating and adding to the existing parameters, not only of individual subjects but in a holistic way across all the school-organized learning experience of the student.” (Lynch, P. xvi) More definitions will be forthcoming in the next part of the blog. Anderson, Charlotte C. (1994). Global Understandings: A Framework for Teaching and Learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Capra, Fritzof (1996). The Web of Life. New York: Bantam-Doubleday. Cove, Patrick G. and Anne Goodsell Love (1996). Enhancing Student Learning: Intellectual, Social and Emotional Learning. ERIC Digest ED400741. Elias, Marice and others (1997). Promoting Social and Emotional Learning: Guidelines for Educators. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Goleman, Daniel (1997). Emotional Intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. Jensen, Eric (1998). Teaching With the Brain in Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) Lynch, James (1989). Multicultural Education in a Global Society. London: The Falmer Press. Merryfield, Merry (1995). Teacher Education in Global and International Education. Washington, DC: ERIC ED384601 Muller, Robert (1993). New Genesis: Shaping Global Spirituality. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. Seminars. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education. Shoemaker, Betty Jean Eklund (1989). Integrative Education: A Curriculum for the Twenty-First Century. OSSC Bulletin 33,2. Eugene, OR: Oregon School Study Council, ERIC Digest ED 311602 89. Zhao, Yong (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. p. 171-173. 21st century, 21st century learning, alfie kohn, charlotte anderson, diversity, global education, my blog banner, yong zhao nonadult false K-8 SocSci Curric for 21st Cent-Part 3 text blog 21st century,21st century learning,alfie kohn,charlotte anderson,diversity,global education,my blog banner,yong zhao 693 10 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 My Blog Banner 1 2385073 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocSt-Curric-for-21stCent-Part-2/blog/2351437/127586.html    A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 2 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. As indicated in my previous post, the topic of thinking about instruction of social studies on a global scale may incite a negative reaction on the part of some. Case in point is the recent news of the Texas School Board and their debate about changes in the social studies curriculum in their schools. As reported by the ASCD Smart Brief of May 24, 2010, the NPR and API article of May 21, 2010 states that the school board "required students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty." This would appear to be a reaction out of "fear of losing USA values" if the social sciences are taught from a global perspective. I would propose that the "sovereignty" that might be sacrificed is analogous to state sovereignty that was partially ceded when the United States formed a nation. In order to further this blog, there are some definitions that need to be identified. Here are some initial phrases.               Global Society. For the purposes of this paper, the term “global society” goes beyond the scholarly interpretation of an “idealistic cosmopolitan and universal society that includes all the peoples living on earth,” (Bushrui, p. 52)[1] and therefore restricted to the study of international relations or world politics.  It even supersedes Immanuel Kant’s belief in a global society where “the peoples of the earth have ... entered in varying degrees into a universal community, and it has developed to the point where a violation of rights in one part of the world is felt everywhere.” (Bushrui, p. 53) It is a much higher and even spiritual or metaphysical concept than such an ethico-juridico-civil understanding. The definition perhaps comes closest to what Robert Muller terms a “profound biological transformation of humanity...a planetary species with a global brain and nervous system and the beginnings of a global heart.” (Muller 1991, p.4)[2]             Age of Transition. We live in turbulent times. There seems to be more questions than answers at each break of the news when one chaotic event outstrips the other in its limits of absurdity.  As we embark upon the next phase of humankind’s evolution on the planet, we are taking the leap from independence to interdependence, analogous collectively to a “higher value” of existence of personal transformation as Steven Covey puts it (Covey 1989, p. 9)[3].  Glorious as its eventuality may be, there is a sense of  “helplessness as we enter this age of interdependence” (Senge 1990, p. 69)[4] that can only be alleviated if we understand the process of change as a metamorphosis rather than destruction.  In the context of our collective social reality, the age of transition might best be described as the period of gestation before giving birth to a “shared humanness” or the “enlargement of social consciousness and rational cooperation” (Kohn 1990, p. 149)[5].               New World Order.   Building on his concept of global society, Kant’s theory of world order is not merely ethical, but quite institutional-based. Thus, he spoke of a “federation of peoples (Voerbund)” when necessary to avert external aggressions. (Bushrui 1993, p. 52). He describes it as a “union of states, in order to maintain peace,...a voluntary combination of different states that would be dissoluble at any time.” (Hutchins 1952)[6]. However, for the purposes of this paper, we shall refer to a definition of a much higher magnitude, that of early twentieth century Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi.  He envisions this new world order as the eventual establishment of  “a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united, and in which the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)[7]               World Citizenship. Succinctly speaking, world citizenship can be thought of as what Adler, in his well known work The Great Ideas: a Syntopticon of Great Books of the Western World, terms as “the political brotherhood of man”. (Adler 1952, Ch. 11, Sec. 8)[8] In more elaborate terms, the same rights and responsibilities accorded to the citizen of any nation-state will also characterize one who is a citizen of the world. We might therefore build upon Aristotle’s conceptual equality of the virtue of the “good man” and the “good citizen” and consider that the “welfare of the state is not the ultimate end of man” since there are “higher goods which command human loyalty” - a loyalty first to humankind: a true world citizen. (Adler 1952, Book 2, pp. 224-225).  In a statement presented to the Commission on Sustainable Development for the United Nations Summit on Social and Economic Development, the Bahá’í International Community explains that “world citizenship begins with an acceptance of the oneness of the human family and the interconnectedness of the nations of ‘the earth, our home.’  ... While it encourages a sane and legitimate patriotism, it also insists upon a wider loyalty, a love of humanity as a whole.” (Bahá’í 1993)[9]. More definitions will be forthcoming in Part 3 [1] Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. [2] Muller, Robert (1991). The Birth of a Global Civilization. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. [3] Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. [4] Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. [5] Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) [6] Hutchins, Robert Maynard, editor (1952). Great Books of the Western World, Book 42, Immanuel Kant, section 61. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [7] Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. [8] Adler, Mortimer J. (1952). The Great Ideas: A Syntopicon of Great Books of the Western World. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. [9] Bahá’í International Community (1993). World Citizenship: A Global Ethic for Sustainable Development. New York: Bahá’í International Community.      A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 2 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. As indicated in my previous post, the topic of thinking about instruction of social studies on a global scale may incite a negative reaction on the part of some. Case in point is the recent news of the Texas School Board and their debate about changes in the social studies curriculum in their schools. As reported by the ASCD Smart Brief of May 24, 2010, the NPR and API article of May 21, 2010 states that the school board "required students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty." This would appear to be a reaction out of "fear of losing USA values" if the social sciences are taught from a global perspective. I would propose that the "sovereignty" that might be sacrificed is analogous to state sovereignty that was partially ceded when the United States formed a nation. In order to further this blog, there are some definitions that need to be identified. Here are some initial phrases.               Global Society. For the purposes of this paper, the term “global society” goes beyond the scholarly interpretation of an “idealistic cosmopolitan and universal society that includes all the peoples living on earth,” (Bushrui, p. 52)[1] and therefore restricted to the study of international relations or world politics.  It even supersedes Immanuel Kant’s belief in a global society where “the peoples of the earth have ... entered in varying degrees into a universal community, and it has developed to the point where a violation of rights in one part of the world is felt everywhere.” (Bushrui, p. 53) It is a much higher and even spiritual or metaphysical concept than such an ethico-juridico-civil understanding. The definition perhaps comes closest to what Robert Muller terms a “profound biological transformation of humanity...a planetary species with a global brain and nervous system and the beginnings of a global heart.” (Muller 1991, p.4)[2]             Age of Transition. We live in turbulent times. There seems to be more questions than answers at each break of the news when one chaotic event outstrips the other in its limits of absurdity.  As we embark upon the next phase of humankind’s evolution on the planet, we are taking the leap from independence to interdependence, analogous collectively to a “higher value” of existence of personal transformation as Steven Covey puts it (Covey 1989, p. 9)[3].  Glorious as its eventuality may be, there is a sense of  “helplessness as we enter this age of interdependence” (Senge 1990, p. 69)[4] that can only be alleviated if we understand the process of change as a metamorphosis rather than destruction.  In the context of our collective social reality, the age of transition might best be described as the period of gestation before giving birth to a “shared humanness” or the “enlargement of social consciousness and rational cooperation” (Kohn 1990, p. 149)[5].               New World Order.   Building on his concept of global society, Kant’s theory of world order is not merely ethical, but quite institutional-based. Thus, he spoke of a “federation of peoples (Voerbund)” when necessary to avert external aggressions. (Bushrui 1993, p. 52). He describes it as a “union of states, in order to maintain peace,...a voluntary combination of different states that would be dissoluble at any time.” (Hutchins 1952)[6]. However, for the purposes of this paper, we shall refer to a definition of a much higher magnitude, that of early twentieth century Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi.  He envisions this new world order as the eventual establishment of  “a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united, and in which the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)[7]               World Citizenship. Succinctly speaking, world citizenship can be thought of as what Adler, in his well known work The Great Ideas: a Syntopticon of Great Books of the Western World, terms as “the political brotherhood of man”. (Adler 1952, Ch. 11, Sec. 8)[8] In more elaborate terms, the same rights and responsibilities accorded to the citizen of any nation-state will also characterize one who is a citizen of the world. We might therefore build upon Aristotle’s conceptual equality of the virtue of the “good man” and the “good citizen” and consider that the “welfare of the state is not the ultimate end of man” since there are “higher goods which command human loyalty” - a loyalty first to humankind: a true world citizen. (Adler 1952, Book 2, pp. 224-225).  In a statement presented to the Commission on Sustainable Development for the United Nations Summit on Social and Economic Development, the Bahá’í International Community explains that “world citizenship begins with an acceptance of the oneness of the human family and the interconnectedness of the nations of ‘the earth, our home.’  ... While it encourages a sane and legitimate patriotism, it also insists upon a wider loyalty, a love of humanity as a whole.” (Bahá’í 1993)[9]. More definitions will be forthcoming in Part 3 [1] Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. [2] Muller, Robert (1991). The Birth of a Global Civilization. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. [3] Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. [4] Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. [5] Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) [6] Hutchins, Robert Maynard, editor (1952). Great Books of the Western World, Book 42, Immanuel Kant, section 61. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [7] Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. [8] Adler, Mortimer J. (1952). The Great Ideas: A Syntopicon of Great Books of the Western World. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. [9] Bahá’í International Community (1993). World Citizenship: A Global Ethic for Sustainable Development. New York: Bahá’í International Community.   Mon, 24 May 2010 19:00:04 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-SocSt-Curric-for-21stCent-Part-2/blog/2351437/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-05-24T19:00:04Z My Blog Banner ASCD EDge    A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 2 This is a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution becoming one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet. As indicated in my previous post, the topic of thinking about instruction of social studies on a global scale may incite a negative reaction on the part of some. Case in point is the recent news of the Texas School Board and their debate about changes in the social studies curriculum in their schools. As reported by the ASCD Smart Brief of May 24, 2010, the NPR and API article of May 21, 2010 states that the school board "required students to evaluate efforts by global organizations such as the United Nations to undermine U.S. sovereignty." This would appear to be a reaction out of "fear of losing USA values" if the social sciences are taught from a global perspective. I would propose that the "sovereignty" that might be sacrificed is analogous to state sovereignty that was partially ceded when the United States formed a nation. In order to further this blog, there are some definitions that need to be identified. Here are some initial phrases.               Global Society. For the purposes of this paper, the term “global society” goes beyond the scholarly interpretation of an “idealistic cosmopolitan and universal society that includes all the peoples living on earth,” (Bushrui, p. 52)[1] and therefore restricted to the study of international relations or world politics.  It even supersedes Immanuel Kant’s belief in a global society where “the peoples of the earth have ... entered in varying degrees into a universal community, and it has developed to the point where a violation of rights in one part of the world is felt everywhere.” (Bushrui, p. 53) It is a much higher and even spiritual or metaphysical concept than such an ethico-juridico-civil understanding. The definition perhaps comes closest to what Robert Muller terms a “profound biological transformation of humanity...a planetary species with a global brain and nervous system and the beginnings of a global heart.” (Muller 1991, p.4)[2]             Age of Transition. We live in turbulent times. There seems to be more questions than answers at each break of the news when one chaotic event outstrips the other in its limits of absurdity.  As we embark upon the next phase of humankind’s evolution on the planet, we are taking the leap from independence to interdependence, analogous collectively to a “higher value” of existence of personal transformation as Steven Covey puts it (Covey 1989, p. 9)[3].  Glorious as its eventuality may be, there is a sense of  “helplessness as we enter this age of interdependence” (Senge 1990, p. 69)[4] that can only be alleviated if we understand the process of change as a metamorphosis rather than destruction.  In the context of our collective social reality, the age of transition might best be described as the period of gestation before giving birth to a “shared humanness” or the “enlargement of social consciousness and rational cooperation” (Kohn 1990, p. 149)[5].               New World Order.   Building on his concept of global society, Kant’s theory of world order is not merely ethical, but quite institutional-based. Thus, he spoke of a “federation of peoples (Voerbund)” when necessary to avert external aggressions. (Bushrui 1993, p. 52). He describes it as a “union of states, in order to maintain peace,...a voluntary combination of different states that would be dissoluble at any time.” (Hutchins 1952)[6]. However, for the purposes of this paper, we shall refer to a definition of a much higher magnitude, that of early twentieth century Oxford scholar Shoghi Effendi.  He envisions this new world order as the eventual establishment of  “a world commonwealth in which all nations, races, creeds and classes are closely and permanently united, and in which the autonomy of its state members and the personal freedom and initiative of the individuals that compose them are definitely and completely safeguarded.” (Effendi 1955, p. 203)[7]               World Citizenship. Succinctly speaking, world citizenship can be thought of as what Adler, in his well known work The Great Ideas: a Syntopticon of Great Books of the Western World, terms as “the political brotherhood of man”. (Adler 1952, Ch. 11, Sec. 8)[8] In more elaborate terms, the same rights and responsibilities accorded to the citizen of any nation-state will also characterize one who is a citizen of the world. We might therefore build upon Aristotle’s conceptual equality of the virtue of the “good man” and the “good citizen” and consider that the “welfare of the state is not the ultimate end of man” since there are “higher goods which command human loyalty” - a loyalty first to humankind: a true world citizen. (Adler 1952, Book 2, pp. 224-225).  In a statement presented to the Commission on Sustainable Development for the United Nations Summit on Social and Economic Development, the Bahá’í International Community explains that “world citizenship begins with an acceptance of the oneness of the human family and the interconnectedness of the nations of ‘the earth, our home.’  ... While it encourages a sane and legitimate patriotism, it also insists upon a wider loyalty, a love of humanity as a whole.” (Bahá’í 1993)[9]. More definitions will be forthcoming in Part 3 [1] Bushrui, Suheil, Iraj Ayman and Ervin Laszlo, Ed. (1993). Transition to a Global Society. Oxford: One World Publishers. [2] Muller, Robert (1991). The Birth of a Global Civilization. Anacortes, WA: World Happiness and Cooperation. [3] Covey, Stephen (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York: Simon and Schuster. [4] Senge, Peter (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday Currency. [5] Kohn, Alfie (1990). The Brighter Side of Human Nature. New York: BasicBooks (Division of HarperCollins) [6] Hutchins, Robert Maynard, editor (1952). Great Books of the Western World, Book 42, Immanuel Kant, section 61. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [7] Effendi, Shoghi (1955). The World Order of Bahá’u’lláh. Wilmette: National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States. [8] Adler, Mortimer J. (1952). The Great Ideas: A Syntopicon of Great Books of the Western World. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. [9] Bahá’í International Community (1993). World Citizenship: A Global Ethic for Sustainable Development. New York: Bahá’í International Community.   21stcentury, curriculum, my blog banner, socialscience nonadult false K-8 SocSt Curric for 21stCent Part 2 text blog 21stcentury,curriculum,my blog banner,socialscience 1617 10 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 My Blog Banner 1 2351437 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Sciences-for-the-21st-Century-Part-1/blog/2329731/127586.html   A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 1   As indicated in previous blog posts, I will be begin a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution towards one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet.   INTRODUCTION   Perhaps these blogs will incite a negative response from certain educators, educational associations and most likely legislators and political factions.  This can be assumed by taking a simple look at the premise upon which the social sciences are built in the United States, perhaps expounded so definitively by this statement made by Michael Hartoonian, member of the Curriculum Standards Task Force of the National Council for the Social Studies: The world is diverse, ethically challenged, yet globally interdependent, and the task of ‘bringing the blessing of the American dream to all’ calls for citizens with a new sense of purpose.  Given the realities of today’s world and the desire of U.S. citizens to carry the ideals of our republic into the future, it is necessary that we create a new vision for our work as social studies educators. (National Council for the Social Studies 1994, preface)               Meritorious as the opening statements and further curricular content may be, nevertheless, the underlying purpose and fundamental impulse for the study of the social sciences in the United States appears to be the fruition of the work of a global manifest destiny which was the basis for the forming of the nation.  Some of the possible negative responses to the idea of a “transition toward a global society” may also stem from a built up educational inertia by what has been called the “deep structure of American schools” (Tye 1992, p. 10) and resistance by some who may feel alarmed by the term “global” thinking, that any such efforts are a threat to national unity and security.  An extensive analysis of such criticism is found in Steven L. Lamy’s Global Education: A Conflict of Images, published as part of ASCD’s Yearbook on Global Education: From Action to Thought (ASCD 1991).  Yet, I wish to make clear from the beginning that there are no intentions of eliminating or even minimizing the social and community-building benefits of instilling healthy patriotism.  The intention is rather to educate for an empathic understanding of a primarily wider loyalty to humankind and the common good, and secondarily to create a respect for and appreciation of how each of the distinguishing peoples of the world fit into the mosaic whole.  To more fully comprehend the concepts that will be developed in this series of blogs, it is felt necessary to first give a brief description (in Part 2 of the blog series) of key words and terminologies for a true understanding of which will later be more apparent as they are referred to in a broader context.   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tye, Barbara (1991). Curriculum Considerations in Global Studies, printed in the ASCD 1991 Yearbook: Global Education from Thought to Action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.   A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 1   As indicated in previous blog posts, I will be begin a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution towards one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet.   INTRODUCTION   Perhaps these blogs will incite a negative response from certain educators, educational associations and most likely legislators and political factions.  This can be assumed by taking a simple look at the premise upon which the social sciences are built in the United States, perhaps expounded so definitively by this statement made by Michael Hartoonian, member of the Curriculum Standards Task Force of the National Council for the Social Studies: The world is diverse, ethically challenged, yet globally interdependent, and the task of ‘bringing the blessing of the American dream to all’ calls for citizens with a new sense of purpose.  Given the realities of today’s world and the desire of U.S. citizens to carry the ideals of our republic into the future, it is necessary that we create a new vision for our work as social studies educators. (National Council for the Social Studies 1994, preface)               Meritorious as the opening statements and further curricular content may be, nevertheless, the underlying purpose and fundamental impulse for the study of the social sciences in the United States appears to be the fruition of the work of a global manifest destiny which was the basis for the forming of the nation.  Some of the possible negative responses to the idea of a “transition toward a global society” may also stem from a built up educational inertia by what has been called the “deep structure of American schools” (Tye 1992, p. 10) and resistance by some who may feel alarmed by the term “global” thinking, that any such efforts are a threat to national unity and security.  An extensive analysis of such criticism is found in Steven L. Lamy’s Global Education: A Conflict of Images, published as part of ASCD’s Yearbook on Global Education: From Action to Thought (ASCD 1991).  Yet, I wish to make clear from the beginning that there are no intentions of eliminating or even minimizing the social and community-building benefits of instilling healthy patriotism.  The intention is rather to educate for an empathic understanding of a primarily wider loyalty to humankind and the common good, and secondarily to create a respect for and appreciation of how each of the distinguishing peoples of the world fit into the mosaic whole.  To more fully comprehend the concepts that will be developed in this series of blogs, it is felt necessary to first give a brief description (in Part 2 of the blog series) of key words and terminologies for a true understanding of which will later be more apparent as they are referred to in a broader context.   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tye, Barbara (1991). Curriculum Considerations in Global Studies, printed in the ASCD 1991 Yearbook: Global Education from Thought to Action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Fri, 07 May 2010 19:04:17 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Sciences-for-the-21st-Century-Part-1/blog/2329731/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-05-07T19:04:17Z My Blog Banner ASCD EDge   A K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century - Part 1   As indicated in previous blog posts, I will be begin a series of posts on the topic of how we might re-think the social sciences as we move tumultuously toward humankind's evolution towards one common family on this interconnected and interdependent planet.   INTRODUCTION   Perhaps these blogs will incite a negative response from certain educators, educational associations and most likely legislators and political factions.  This can be assumed by taking a simple look at the premise upon which the social sciences are built in the United States, perhaps expounded so definitively by this statement made by Michael Hartoonian, member of the Curriculum Standards Task Force of the National Council for the Social Studies: The world is diverse, ethically challenged, yet globally interdependent, and the task of ‘bringing the blessing of the American dream to all’ calls for citizens with a new sense of purpose.  Given the realities of today’s world and the desire of U.S. citizens to carry the ideals of our republic into the future, it is necessary that we create a new vision for our work as social studies educators. (National Council for the Social Studies 1994, preface)               Meritorious as the opening statements and further curricular content may be, nevertheless, the underlying purpose and fundamental impulse for the study of the social sciences in the United States appears to be the fruition of the work of a global manifest destiny which was the basis for the forming of the nation.  Some of the possible negative responses to the idea of a “transition toward a global society” may also stem from a built up educational inertia by what has been called the “deep structure of American schools” (Tye 1992, p. 10) and resistance by some who may feel alarmed by the term “global” thinking, that any such efforts are a threat to national unity and security.  An extensive analysis of such criticism is found in Steven L. Lamy’s Global Education: A Conflict of Images, published as part of ASCD’s Yearbook on Global Education: From Action to Thought (ASCD 1991).  Yet, I wish to make clear from the beginning that there are no intentions of eliminating or even minimizing the social and community-building benefits of instilling healthy patriotism.  The intention is rather to educate for an empathic understanding of a primarily wider loyalty to humankind and the common good, and secondarily to create a respect for and appreciation of how each of the distinguishing peoples of the world fit into the mosaic whole.  To more fully comprehend the concepts that will be developed in this series of blogs, it is felt necessary to first give a brief description (in Part 2 of the blog series) of key words and terminologies for a true understanding of which will later be more apparent as they are referred to in a broader context.   ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tye, Barbara (1991). Curriculum Considerations in Global Studies, printed in the ASCD 1991 Yearbook: Global Education from Thought to Action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 21stcenturyeducation, my blog banner, socialscience nonadult false K-8 Social Sciences for the 21st Century-Part 1 text blog 21stcenturyeducation,my blog banner,socialscience 788 10 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 My Blog Banner 2 2329731 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_Weekly-updates-coming-soon/blog/2326640/127586.html I will be adding posts to this blog that will gradually unfold the concept of a K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century. Keep up to date by clicking on the RSS feed to be notified when there is a new post. To all who have followed so far, thanks for your encouragement! Rob Siegel I will be adding posts to this blog that will gradually unfold the concept of a K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century. Keep up to date by clicking on the RSS feed to be notified when there is a new post. To all who have followed so far, thanks for your encouragement! Rob Siegel Wed, 05 May 2010 21:05:20 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_Weekly-updates-coming-soon/blog/2326640/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-05-05T21:05:20Z ASCD EDge I will be adding posts to this blog that will gradually unfold the concept of a K-8 Social Science Curriculum for the 21st Century. Keep up to date by clicking on the RSS feed to be notified when there is a new post. To all who have followed so far, thanks for your encouragement! Rob Siegel nonadult false Weekly updates coming soon! text blog 542 1 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 2326640 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Science-for-the-21st-Century/blog/2077228/127586.html   Are you ready to think fresh about how we might conceptualize teaching Social Science to our students that will help them live, work, play and thrive in the 21st century? Get ready for a ride. This series of presentations was made to the Social Science Content and Assessment Panel for the state of Oregon a few years ago, and it surely rocked the boat. Let's remember that we need to provide students with tools for THEM to live in a global society and not just what we learned when we went to school.  Most social science curriculum these days cover 90-95% of past concepts and projects 5-10% for future problem-solving. Isn't there something wrong here? Buckle your seat belts.                 After two world wars, and the creation of the United Nations Organization, there have been many attempts at laying down the contractual framework for what appears to be a painfully emerging global society. By bringing together political, scientific, and socio-economic representatives from around the world to consult on increasingly relevant and urgent issues to the earth’s population (e.g. Rio Earth Summit, Socio-Economic Sustainability Conference in Copenhagen, Women’s Conference in Beijing, to name a few), a heightened awareness of our interdependence has become a platform from which to attempt to solve today’s complex problems. Yet, with all the reactive energies expended out of need, little has been done to proactively consider how we must prepare future generations for living, working, and thriving in an inexorably evolving global society - a future condition in which they are the protagonists.                 For twenty-five years, the author has lived, worked and raised a family outside of the United States and participated in numerous international conferences and conventions in Central and South America, Europe and the Middle East.  During that time, experience as an international educator and administrator led to an awareness of the need for foundational social and emotional skills and capacities in order to truly capture the spirit of living and learning in a world community.  In attempting to analyze where to begin, traditional educational curriculum frameworks seemed to be lacking both the focus and the tools in order to meet such needs, yet the area of the social sciences seemed to be a good place to start. This led to the informational research undertaken for the current work as well as by simulation through the creation of a private educational facility which had as one of its core principles, the oneness of humankind.                 After five years, the findings and implications far surpassed the intended original outcomes. In order to educate for transition toward a global society, there appears to be the need for an entirely new and inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences - an approach which the writer has termed outside-in.  The curriculum framework and proposed K-8 scope and sequence is based, therefore, on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wider loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species becomes the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching and colorful phenomena.  Perhaps a good example to succinctly explain this in practical terms within the context of the culture of the United States, would be to claim that black history is part of our history, not theirs, and that we are only now talking and learning about what we have been deprived over the last century.                 The implications of the application of such an educational concept are many, the greatest of which is the way in which the young generation of a particular societal culture views itself within the context of its global neighborhood.  The spectrum of decision-making is broadened and the playing field is the earth itself.  As we live and serve under such a paradigm, we truly become active parts of a whole the outcome of which essentially benefits us all, with far greater significance than any one of us could accomplish alone.       Are you ready to think fresh about how we might conceptualize teaching Social Science to our students that will help them live, work, play and thrive in the 21st century? Get ready for a ride. This series of presentations was made to the Social Science Content and Assessment Panel for the state of Oregon a few years ago, and it surely rocked the boat. Let's remember that we need to provide students with tools for THEM to live in a global society and not just what we learned when we went to school.  Most social science curriculum these days cover 90-95% of past concepts and projects 5-10% for future problem-solving. Isn't there something wrong here? Buckle your seat belts.                 After two world wars, and the creation of the United Nations Organization, there have been many attempts at laying down the contractual framework for what appears to be a painfully emerging global society. By bringing together political, scientific, and socio-economic representatives from around the world to consult on increasingly relevant and urgent issues to the earth’s population (e.g. Rio Earth Summit, Socio-Economic Sustainability Conference in Copenhagen, Women’s Conference in Beijing, to name a few), a heightened awareness of our interdependence has become a platform from which to attempt to solve today’s complex problems. Yet, with all the reactive energies expended out of need, little has been done to proactively consider how we must prepare future generations for living, working, and thriving in an inexorably evolving global society - a future condition in which they are the protagonists.                 For twenty-five years, the author has lived, worked and raised a family outside of the United States and participated in numerous international conferences and conventions in Central and South America, Europe and the Middle East.  During that time, experience as an international educator and administrator led to an awareness of the need for foundational social and emotional skills and capacities in order to truly capture the spirit of living and learning in a world community.  In attempting to analyze where to begin, traditional educational curriculum frameworks seemed to be lacking both the focus and the tools in order to meet such needs, yet the area of the social sciences seemed to be a good place to start. This led to the informational research undertaken for the current work as well as by simulation through the creation of a private educational facility which had as one of its core principles, the oneness of humankind.                 After five years, the findings and implications far surpassed the intended original outcomes. In order to educate for transition toward a global society, there appears to be the need for an entirely new and inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences - an approach which the writer has termed outside-in.  The curriculum framework and proposed K-8 scope and sequence is based, therefore, on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wider loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species becomes the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching and colorful phenomena.  Perhaps a good example to succinctly explain this in practical terms within the context of the culture of the United States, would be to claim that black history is part of our history, not theirs, and that we are only now talking and learning about what we have been deprived over the last century.                 The implications of the application of such an educational concept are many, the greatest of which is the way in which the young generation of a particular societal culture views itself within the context of its global neighborhood.  The spectrum of decision-making is broadened and the playing field is the earth itself.  As we live and serve under such a paradigm, we truly become active parts of a whole the outcome of which essentially benefits us all, with far greater significance than any one of us could accomplish alone.     Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:03:15 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_K-8-Social-Science-for-the-21st-Century/blog/2077228/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-03-11T19:03:15Z ASCD EDge   Are you ready to think fresh about how we might conceptualize teaching Social Science to our students that will help them live, work, play and thrive in the 21st century? Get ready for a ride. This series of presentations was made to the Social Science Content and Assessment Panel for the state of Oregon a few years ago, and it surely rocked the boat. Let's remember that we need to provide students with tools for THEM to live in a global society and not just what we learned when we went to school.  Most social science curriculum these days cover 90-95% of past concepts and projects 5-10% for future problem-solving. Isn't there something wrong here? Buckle your seat belts.                 After two world wars, and the creation of the United Nations Organization, there have been many attempts at laying down the contractual framework for what appears to be a painfully emerging global society. By bringing together political, scientific, and socio-economic representatives from around the world to consult on increasingly relevant and urgent issues to the earth’s population (e.g. Rio Earth Summit, Socio-Economic Sustainability Conference in Copenhagen, Women’s Conference in Beijing, to name a few), a heightened awareness of our interdependence has become a platform from which to attempt to solve today’s complex problems. Yet, with all the reactive energies expended out of need, little has been done to proactively consider how we must prepare future generations for living, working, and thriving in an inexorably evolving global society - a future condition in which they are the protagonists.                 For twenty-five years, the author has lived, worked and raised a family outside of the United States and participated in numerous international conferences and conventions in Central and South America, Europe and the Middle East.  During that time, experience as an international educator and administrator led to an awareness of the need for foundational social and emotional skills and capacities in order to truly capture the spirit of living and learning in a world community.  In attempting to analyze where to begin, traditional educational curriculum frameworks seemed to be lacking both the focus and the tools in order to meet such needs, yet the area of the social sciences seemed to be a good place to start. This led to the informational research undertaken for the current work as well as by simulation through the creation of a private educational facility which had as one of its core principles, the oneness of humankind.                 After five years, the findings and implications far surpassed the intended original outcomes. In order to educate for transition toward a global society, there appears to be the need for an entirely new and inverse approach towards developing a curriculum for the social sciences - an approach which the writer has termed outside-in.  The curriculum framework and proposed K-8 scope and sequence is based, therefore, on the premise that first and foremost we are all human beings, and that a wider loyalty exists to our species as a result of that predominant commonality.  In other words, the unity of the species becomes the foundation for the study of the social sciences, the oneness of humankind becomes a given, and the diversity of its component parts are accidental and secondary but at the same time an enriching and colorful phenomena.  Perhaps a good example to succinctly explain this in practical terms within the context of the culture of the United States, would be to claim that black history is part of our history, not theirs, and that we are only now talking and learning about what we have been deprived over the last century.                 The implications of the application of such an educational concept are many, the greatest of which is the way in which the young generation of a particular societal culture views itself within the context of its global neighborhood.  The spectrum of decision-making is broadened and the playing field is the earth itself.  As we live and serve under such a paradigm, we truly become active parts of a whole the outcome of which essentially benefits us all, with far greater significance than any one of us could accomplish alone.     21st century education, blogs, curriculum, global education, multicultural education, social science, world citizen nonadult false K-8 Social Science for the 21st Century text blog 21st century education,blogs,curriculum,global education,multicultural education,social science,world citizen 708 10 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 1 1 2077228 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565 http://edge.ascd.org/_21st-Century-Education/blog/1771954/127586.html There is a great deal of talk today about the skills necessary for preparing our students to live and thrive in the 21st Century. However, most of this has to do with academic, learning, technology and environmental skills such as within the Framework for 21st Century Skills from the "Partnership for 21st Century Skills".  Has anyone considered one of the most obvious?  Consider how the world has become like one country in many ways (economically, ecologically and even educationally). What has happened to the evolution of the social science curriculum to help prepare students to live in the inexorably evolving global society? What does education to promote the oneness of the human race look like? What methods will be included in true multicultural education? How can we really assess "Global Awareness" to the degree that it leads to the elimination of prejudices and not just informational or academic rhetoric? I have begun to research this, and anyone interested in helping me can get an idea from my website: http:www.21stCenturyEducation.org Click on the "Presentations" where an ASCD presentation was made at their international conference in Australia. Download the presentation and please send me your comments. Thanks, Robert Siegel (ASCD member for 18 years, starting when living in Chile)   There is a great deal of talk today about the skills necessary for preparing our students to live and thrive in the 21st Century. However, most of this has to do with academic, learning, technology and environmental skills such as within the Framework for 21st Century Skills from the "Partnership for 21st Century Skills".  Has anyone considered one of the most obvious?  Consider how the world has become like one country in many ways (economically, ecologically and even educationally). What has happened to the evolution of the social science curriculum to help prepare students to live in the inexorably evolving global society? What does education to promote the oneness of the human race look like? What methods will be included in true multicultural education? How can we really assess "Global Awareness" to the degree that it leads to the elimination of prejudices and not just informational or academic rhetoric? I have begun to research this, and anyone interested in helping me can get an idea from my website: http:www.21stCenturyEducation.org Click on the "Presentations" where an ASCD presentation was made at their international conference in Australia. Download the presentation and please send me your comments. Thanks, Robert Siegel (ASCD member for 18 years, starting when living in Chile)   Tue, 26 Jan 2010 20:31:13 GMT http://edge.ascd.org/_21st-Century-Education/blog/1771954/127586.html Robert_Siegel 2010-01-26T20:31:13Z ASCD EDge There is a great deal of talk today about the skills necessary for preparing our students to live and thrive in the 21st Century. However, most of this has to do with academic, learning, technology and environmental skills such as within the Framework for 21st Century Skills from the "Partnership for 21st Century Skills".  Has anyone considered one of the most obvious?  Consider how the world has become like one country in many ways (economically, ecologically and even educationally). What has happened to the evolution of the social science curriculum to help prepare students to live in the inexorably evolving global society? What does education to promote the oneness of the human race look like? What methods will be included in true multicultural education? How can we really assess "Global Awareness" to the degree that it leads to the elimination of prejudices and not just informational or academic rhetoric? I have begun to research this, and anyone interested in helping me can get an idea from my website: http:www.21stCenturyEducation.org Click on the "Presentations" where an ASCD presentation was made at their international conference in Australia. Download the presentation and please send me your comments. Thanks, Robert Siegel (ASCD member for 18 years, starting when living in Chile)   21st century, 21st century skills, global education, world citizen nonadult false 21st Century Education text blog 21st century,21st century skills,global education,world citizen 624 11 5.0 http://edge.ascd.org/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=19675235&as=127586 http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/127586/photos/PHOTO_9536044_127586_19675235_ap_160X120.jpg false United States OR Philomath 0 0 1771954 19675235 ASCD EDge Member 565