Suchergebnisse

TO INVESTIGATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORMAL & SUBSTANTIVE ORIENTATION TOWARDS POLICY DEBATES IN ADOLESCENCE, A SAMPLE OF 60 7TH GRADERS & 58 12TH GRADERS, DIVIDED ABOUT EQUALLY BY SEX, WAS SELECTED FROM STUDENTS AT 2 MADISON, WISC SCHOOLS WHO HAD EXPRESSED INTEREST IN THE STUDY. EACH S WAS INTERVIEWED PRIVATELY TWICE, ONCE ON POVERTY & ONCE ON PRISON REFORM (THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES). INTERVIEWS WERE TAPED & CODED DIRECTLY FROM THE TAPES. A 3RD SESSION WITH EACH S TESTED REASONING ABILITY & POLITICAL AWARENESS. 2 FORMAL CRITERIA--MAJORITISM & INTENSITY--WERE SELECTED FOR SPECIAL ATTENTION; 6 HYPOTHESES ABOUT THE EVOLUTION OF THE CRITERIA WERE TESTED. FORMAL ORIENTATIONS APPEAR TO BE A FUNCTION OF AGE, MATURE COGNITIVE CAPACITIES, POLITICAL INTEREST, & SPECIFIC ISSUE AREA. ABSTRACT POLITICAL REASONING IS VIEWED AS PART OF A NORMAL PSYCHOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTAL PROCESS. THE DISCUSSION DEALS WITH THE RELATION BETWEEN THESE FINDINGS & ISSUES OF DEMOCRATIC THEORY & PRACTICE. 2 TABLES. MODIFIED HA.

Drawing on participant observation and quantitative analysis, this paper investigates the National Conversation on American Pluralism and Identity, a series of local conversation projects organized by the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1995 and 1996. After linking this program to debates about American political culture, the paper analyzes the observational and survey data in light of five hypotheses about the conversations. The conversations reveal fundamental, unresolved dilemmas regarding the compatibility between American identity and ethnic pluralism, although the participants sometimes cope with these dilemmas in culturally creative ways.