Mediaboss Marketing

Since Election Day we in New England have been asking ourselves over and over, how could this have happened? We are still stunned. We ask ourselves, how could someone who repeatedly spouted so many lies and so many ignorantly formulated ideas have received so many votes? Granted, he did not receive the majority of the popular vote and he was elected by a fluke of the Electoral College, but Trump did receive a lot of votes.

Who voted for him? What do we know? According to Edison Research, which studied this question for CNN, ABC, CBS and AP, the breakdown of the Trump voters was as follows: 53 percent of male voters, 42 percent of female voters, 58 percent of white voters, 29 percent of Hispanic voters, and 8 percent of African-American voters. The Chronicle of Higher Education cited that 67 percent of white voters without a college education voted for Trump, and college-educated white voters were split roughly 50 to 50 percent.

From these studies we learn two important things: 1) the largest voting bloc, by far, for Trump was composed of white voters without college education, 67 percent. But 2) Trump also managed to get about 50 percent of the college-educated voters. The first point is not surprising, but the second point at least to us Yankees seems surprising. Do these two points present a paradox? If Trumps largest group of supporters was non-college educated, this would lead one to expect that his support among the higher educated would be far from a 50-50 split.

Unless.

Unless the sort of education our citizens are getting doesnt have much impact on their understanding of government, history and civics. And (bingo!) that is exactly what any number of studies have been showing us for the last 20 years. The amount of time spent on social studies, civics and history is now down to about 7.5 percent of high school students time, according to a recent study cited in The Atlantic (Bring Back Social Studies, Sept. 23, 2013). All the way back in 1999, the American Bar Association published a paper, titled Civic Education, presented by Charles N. Quigley at a conference in Washington, D.C., in which Quigley shared his serious concern at the sorry state of civic education in our high schools and colleges. It has gotten a lot worse since 1999, especially thanks to the ever-increasing focus on the magic pill of STEM education that is, science, technology, engineering and math.

If the history of the 20th century has taught us anything at all, it ought to have taught us that countries with citizens highly proficient in science, technology, engineering and math can also be the countries with the absolutely worst records for human well-being and human rights: the recent pasts of Germany, Russia and China come to mind.

In order to progress in science and technology, no country needs to educate nearly every student to become the next Albert Einstein or Steve Jobs. In fact, neither of those two did very well in school or college. A very small number of people who are truly gifted in science, math and engineering can have a gigantic impact on those fields that will propel millions and millions of people upward toward a massive improvement in their lives.

However, if those millions and millions of people are almost totally ignorant of history and civics, they can, quite easily and quickly, dig a massive hole for themselves by blithely and ignorantly lending their support to governments and policies that destroy their best interests both at home and in misguided foreign wars abroad. History has shown this again and again.

Nothing is more important to the well-being of a democratic society than an educated citizenry. In fact, this is origin of the term liberal arts education. The term has nothing to do with modern liberal politics or liberalism (a common misunderstanding). Liberal arts comes from the Latin artes liberales, meaning knowledge (artes) that is fitting and needed for a free person (liber/liberalis) who has the right to vote. The term was used in the Roman republic and was brought back into use in Renaissance Europe, with the rediscovery of hundreds of Latin and Greek texts.

Our high schools and even our colleges are failing to provide the education that is most critical for our society: namely, an education that means every graduate that is, every voter understands our system of government, our history and our civic duties as responsible, informed citizens. Only nine states require passing a civics test to graduate high school. According to a 2012 study on this issue in colleges, undertaken by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, civics education in only 21 colleges scored an A. Of the Ivy League, Columbia, Dartmouth and Cornell scored a B, Princeton and Penn scored a C, Harvard and Yale got D, and Brown got an F.

It is long overdue that we stop thinking of education as primarily a way to try to get everybody on the way to becoming a scientist, engineer or mathematician. It is time to face facts: We dont need millions and millions of STEM whiz kids, but we need very much millions and millions of citizens who understand where we have come from, where we can choose to go, and how we can get there as a country composed of a wide diversity of citizens working for the common good and the welfare of the world.

Perhaps the most important lesson of the 2016 election is that its time to bring civics and history back front and center in our countrys education systems. And most importantly, we need to teach the new skill of information literacy, so our citizens will recognize fake news and propaganda so we are not led down the garden path, accepting a manufactured consent to things that are not at all in our best interests.

John Nassivera is a former professor who retains an affiliation with Columbia Universitys Society of Fellows in the Humanities. He lives in Vermont and part-time in Mexico.

Read the rest here:
Education and democracy - Rutland Herald