One of the highlights of my job as a social studies curriculum manager is going to schools in D.C. and seeing teachers and students doing their work firsthand in the classroom. Just last week I had the pleasure of judging students in the Soapbox competition of the Mikva Challenge. Students in the required 12th grade social studies course D.C. Government and History had each chosen a topic related to making change in D.C. They researched the problem and generated solutions. They then crafted a 2-3 minute speech at the end of which they issued a call for action.
As I sat front row and listened to the students inform and try to persuade me on everything from the need for better oversight for Metro (I agree!), more bike lanes and different traffic rules to protect bikers and revitalization and development in southeast, I was enthralled and excited. These students were doing the exact thing we want all of our young citizens to do. They were educating themselves and others on important social, political, economic, and geographic issues. And they were suggesting ways to bring about the change they wanted to see.
But… that is where I faltered in my unabashed excitement for their soapbox speeches. Sure, several students spoke very specifically about whom to contact to petition for healthier lunches in DCPS schools. They even went so far as to mention the date of the next board meeting. Others rightfully understood the difference between seeking change through D.C. Council and Congress. As this a course in DC government –the first thing they learn is who has what power. (And you’d better believe some students had opinions about how this should change too.)
But what about the student who so eloquently spoke about the confusion outsiders have when they learn that he is from D.C. and go on to lambast him for all the troubles that “Washington” causes the rest of the country. He asked us to be ambassadors for our city and to promote its beauty and uniqueness to outsiders. Taking informed action? Hmmm… And what about the young woman who explained the stress that seniors feel making so many life-altering decisions in such a short span of time, She recommended to her classmates to take a step back, practice mindfulness, and seek support from people and places who can help.
I was stuck on how to evaluate them for their taking informed action. Then I remembered the C3 could help. As I looked at Dimension 4, Communicating Results and Taking Informed Action, I re-read the standard through a new lens. The C3 does not call for students to take physical, political action after every new thing they learn. Instead, it very eloquently submits informed action in three different aspect;
4.6 asks students to consider the problem in context and analyze its root causes. This is what the student who spoke about student stress levels did. She unpacked the root causes of the problem and in doing so, found entry points for students to make change.
4.7 asks students to identify and assess different strategies for creating change as the student who problematized our approach to homelessness did. She suggested the best entry point was to evaluate our own behavior and assumptions toward the homeless and consider supporting organizations that work with the homeless, a far better strategy in her opinion than asking for new laws to provide more money for shelters.
4.8 pushes students to take the informed action we are familiar with but to do so in the correct context, whether it is in the home, class, school, community, country or world. Identifying the correct leverage point is a vital civic literacy because you don’t need to march on Washington to get your classmates to recycle more.
All in all, I listened to over 30 students that day and 15 more the next day get on their soapbox and deliver their finest. The courage it takes to take a stand on something is a characteristic that all citizens should develop and I am heartened that this disposition is starting right here in our classrooms.
