Suchergebnisse

INDIVIDUALISTIC INTERPRETATIONS OF EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY ARE CONTRASTED WITH A CLASS INTERPRETATION. THE STANDARD INTERPRETATION, WHICH IS INDIVIDUALISTIC, INVOLVES RADICAL EQUALIZATION OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES, & OF SOCIALIZATION PATTERNS. AN ALTERNATIVE DEFINITION IS FORMULATED IN TERMS OF INTERCLASS MOBILITY FREQUENCIES. PATTERNS OF INTERCLASS MOBILITY ARE COMPARED FOR 9 COUNTRIES, REVEALING THAT WC PEOPLE ARE LIKELIER TO BECOME LC THAN ARE MC PEOPLE TO BECOME WC; CONVERSELY, HIGHER CLASS MEMBERS HAVE GREATER UPWARD MOBILITY CHANCES. THIS PATTERN (REDISTRIBUTIVE MOBILITY) ALLOWING A MODEST RANGE OF UPWARD MOBILITY, TO THE WC, IS CONTRASTED WITH OTHER PATTERNS: (1) UPGRADING & DOWNGRADING, IN WHICH ALL CLASSES MOVE IN THE SAME DIRECTIONS, (2) POLARIZATION, IN WHICH MOBILITY EXAGGERATES CLASS SEGREGATION, & (3) REVOLUTIONARY MOBILITY, IN WHICH CLASS RANKS ARE REVERSED. THE GREAT PROBLEM WITH REVOLUTIONARY MOBILITY IS ITS TENDENCY TO PRODUCE CLASS CONFLICT WHEN MC PERSONS TRY TO AVOID DOWNWARD MOBILITY. THE BUSINESS CYCLE IS INTERPRETED AS PRODUCING ALTERNATING UPGRADING & DOWNGRADING, EACH IN TURN PRODUCING A COUNTERTREND. 4 TABLES. MODIFIED HA.

MAJOR EDUCATIONAL TASKS ASSUMED BY US PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAVE LED TO SHIFTING SC RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON 3 HISTORICAL PHASES MARKED BY DISTINCTIVE MODES OF EDUCATIONAL CHANGE. FROM 1787-1857 (PHASE I), THE EMPHASIS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION MOVED FROM RELIGIOUS RECTITUDE TO DEVELOPMENT OF GENTILITY & THE EVENTUAL ESTABLISHMENT OF CLASS STRUCTURES. WITH THE EMERGENCE OF THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOC, PHASE 2 (1857-1945) MARKED A SHIFT IN THE CRITERIA OF SS DUE TO CHANGES IN SOCIAL STRUCTURE BROUGHT WITH THE MOBILITY OF THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. THE SCHOOL NO LONGER STRATIFIED AGRARIAN AMERICA; IT ATTEMPTED TO BRIDGE AN INCREASINGLY HETEROGENEOUS NATION. CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS STAGE WAS A MINIMIZING OF MOBILITY & ASSIMILATION PROBLEMS THROUGH FORMING PUBLIC CONSENSUS AROUND NORMS OF A DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL EQUALITY, VOCATIONAL SUCCESS, & PERSONAL SOCIABILITY. PHASE 3 (1945-) WITH ASSIMILATION OF THE MOST DEPRIVED SUBGROUPS INTO THE MAINSTREAM, APPROACHES EDUCATIONAL REVOLUTION. THE CONTEMPORARY SCHOOL IS MULTIDOCTRINAL, MULTIFUNCTIONAL, & STRESSES BELIEF IN HUMAN POTENTIAL. BY REMOVING TRADITIONAL RESTRICTIONS EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FREE THE STUDENT TO DEVELOP HIS OWN UNIQUE LIFE WITHOUT ENFORCING NORMS OF BEHAVIOR & ACCEPTANCE. EMPHASIS IS ON GREATER DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION & POLITICAL ACTIVITY WITHIN THE SCHOOLS IN THE CONTEXT OF COMMUNITY, STATE, & NATION. THROUGH AN INCREASING ADOPTION OF EGALITARIAN EDUCATIONAL DOCTRINE, US SCHOOLS HAVE MOVED TO GREATER SHIFTS IN SM. 2 FIGURES. T. BABITSKY.

This article identifies four fundamental modes of thought employed in the cognition of policy problems. These modes of thought are moral, cause-effect, sociocentric, and imaginative. Nine variants of these four forms are described and investigated among a small sample of adolescents. The maturation of these forms of thought appears limited during adolescence, and change is not well predicted by the respondent's level of politicization. The article concludes with some speculations about the structure of socialization theory as it relates to the development of fundamental forms of political thinking.

"Myself, I get confused. The President tells ya that he don't want no war, it's peace. You pick up a paper, they're bombing children. And television, the guys being interviewed, talking about peace, and the picture shows where the women and children are being bombed and slaughtered and murdered. How long if I think that way and I have had a bad feeling, how long will other people that their mentality's not strong enough, to separate the cause of it? Fear. What's gonna happen to our kids, our grandchildren?"Lotta them are afraid of their jobs, losing their jobs. Because the government's maybe got some contract with some company. For example, we got one fellow here works with the government, with this here carbonic gas or whatever it is. If he opens his mouth up too much, he can lose his job. And the senators or congressmen, they personally don't take interest in their own country, right here, what's going on."The colored. We had a tavern on 61st and State, three and a half years, Negro neighborhood. I tell you I never was insulted no place by not a Negro person over there. They respected me highly. It took a white fella to come in and insult me because I wouldn't serve him beer, he was too drunk. And if it wasn't for these poor Negro fellas, I'd a probably killed this man. (Laughs) Because he called me a dirty name."

The process of inquiry occasionally exhibits a dialectical pattern in which a series of assertions is advanced and then attacked. A third phase, which consists of an attempt to salvage the first set of assertions, often ensues. The study of American community power has followed this sequence almost classically, and today we find ourselves in the third phase of the dialectic. The first period marked the contemporary emergence of community power as a distinct field of study, mainly through the investigations of Hunter, Mills and their followers. These observers contended that communities were controlled by "elites," usually economic, who imposed their will, often covertly, on non-elites. The second phase was marked by the challenge of another group of observers, the "pluralists." Pluralists contended that the methods and premises of the "elitists" predisposed them to conclusions about community power which were unjustified. Elitists commonly reached their conclusions either by investigating the reputations for power of various members of the community or merely by assuming that all who possessed certain presumed sources of power were in fact powerful. The pluralists claimed that reputations did not guarantee control and demanded evidence that community decisions on political issues, major and minor, were controlled by a reputed elite. The pluralists, after studying community decisions on a variety of subjects, concluded that shifting coalitions of participants drawn from all areas of community life actually controlled local politics. Rarely could a single elite be discovered imposing itself in each area of decision, policy, and conflict.Many observers felt that the pluralists had won the day. Their methodology studied actual behavior, stressed operational definitions, and turned up evidence. Most important, it seemed to produce reliable conclusions which met the canons of science. Recently, however, new considerations have been introduced which intend to prop up the elitist Humpty Dumpty on a more substantial wall of theory than the one from which it had previously tumbled. The beginnings of a new position on community power appear in the work of those responsible for the third phase, the "neo-elitists," as I shall call them. That position forms the subject of this analysis.