Suchergebnisse

On disruptive innovation -- On two recent occasions -- On for-profit schools -- On STEM -- On the humanities -- On business majors -- On time and experience -- On online education -- On critical thinking -- On the PhD -- On research -- On academic writing -- On the future -- On talking with students.

Intro -- Contents -- Introduction -- 1. The Revolutionary Commonwealth -- 2. Fragmentation and Contestation -- 3. The Political Transformation of Civil Society -- 4. Forging a Grassroots Public Sphere -- 5. The Elite Public Sphere -- 6. Democrats Strike Back -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Acknowledgments -- Index.

Abstract:This article examines the local roots of the American state to complicate existing historiography. It suggests that, for education and law, the state tapped into local social capital to develop capacity. State and local governments relied on the mobilization of citizens' bodies—civic labor—to provide public goods. In doing so, it suggests that we need to offer a story that captures the myriad ways that Americans engaged in state-building, and how those different forms shaped Americans' relations with state power.

Gordon Wood stoked a strong response from his fellow early American historians in 2015 when, in the pages of theWeekly Standard, he accused the Omohundro Institute of Early American History, publishers of the prestigiousWilliam and Mary Quarterly, of abandoning interest in the development of the United States. "A new generation of historians is no longer interested in how the United States came to be," Wood argued. "That kind of narrative history of the nation, they say, is not only inherently triumphalist but has a teleological bias built into it." Wood blamed the shift away from the nation on historians' interest in such issues as race and gender: "The inequalities of race and gender now permeate much of academic history-writing, so much so that the general reading public that wants to learn about the whole of our nation's past has had to turn to the history books written by nonacademics who have no PhDs and are not involved in the incestuous conversations of the academic scholars." Of theWilliam and Mary Quarterly, Wood concluded, "without some kind of historical GPS, it is in danger of losing its way."

The Common Core does not advance democratic education. Far from it, the opening section of the language standards argues that the goal of public K–12 education is "college and career readiness." Only at the end of their introductory section do the Common Core's authors suggest that K–12 education has any goals beyond the economic: learning to read and write well has "wide applicability outside the classroom and work place," including preparing people for "private deliberation and responsible citizenship in a republic." The democratic purposes of K–12 education are not goals but, in the Common Core's words, a "natural outgrowth" of work force preparation.