Democracy and Social Justice: What Can They Be?

Transcription

1 Democracy and Social Justice: What Can They Be? Nicholas M. Michelli Presidential Professor Ph.D. Program in Urban Education The Graduate Center The City University of New York ( Address: ) Centre for Governance and Citizenship The Hong Kong Institute of Education Working Paper Series No. 2011/002 January, 2011 Editor of the CGC Working Paper Series: Dr. Betty Yung

2 Abstract Two essentially contested concepts of great importance to societies, and to education, are democracy and social justice. In this paper, I explore the alternative meanings of the ideas and suggest their role in education and the role of education in fostering the behaviors associated with each. Neither democracy nor social justice can be present without hard work and the lead institution in both should be education. 2

3 1. Setting the Stage In this paper, I will explore the meaning of the concepts of social justice and democracy for education. In another paper for the Institute, I have discussed the purposes of education and presented my views of why we educate in a democratic context. They include: preparing students for socially just democratic participation, providing access to knowledge and the skills needed to think critically, enabling all students to take advantage of life s opportunities, and enabling students to lead rich and rewarding personal lives. Not all would agree that these are the key purposes of education, and all are controversial given the interpretation I provide in that paper. However, to really understand them, and to focus on what probably is the most controversial, preparing students for socially just, democratic participation, we must explore the meanings of the concepts of democracy and social justice and I do mean meanings, plural. Although we ultimately conclude that you cannot have one without the other, there is some utility in considering them separately. I will certainly not repeat all that is in the first paper, but some of it is relevant, especially the controversy surrounding the use of the word democracy in some parts of the United States. It might be useful to read that paper first. One area that was discussed and bears repeating is the work of the British philosopher W. B. Gallie. Gallie developed the concept of essentially contested concepts. In Gallie s analysis, such concepts are inherently subject to multiple interpretations, depending on your values, concerns, experiences, goals, and beliefs (Gallie 1956: 167). Different individuals would, by this definition, have different meanings for such concepts. Consistent with Gallie s work, my contention is that among these concepts are democracy and social justice and, I would add, freedom and education. 2. The Essentially Contested Concepts All of the essentially contested concepts we will work with here have multiple meanings that depend upon one s worldview. George Lakoff, a linguist who studies metaphors, especially political metaphors, has examined how Conservatives and Liberals view the world differently. Often in politics, we see things as right or wrong right if they are our views and wrong if someone disagrees with them. Lakoff helps us understand that there is sometimes legitimacy in the alternative views of these difficult, contested concepts. His work allows understanding the differences in worldview of Conservatives and Liberals and helps understand their positions on various issues, including education, abortion, and welfare (Lakoff 2002). Let s look at some of the concepts that are most often contested that relate to our work in education; they include: democracy, freedom, social justice, nonrepression, nondiscrimination, knowledge, critical thinking, judgments, and citizenship. I 3

4 explored some of these concepts in my first paper, but here are some of the key questions for each: Democracy? Is it a system of government? Or, is it the nature of personal interactions among members of a society? Is democracy about civics participation in the governmental process? Is democracy about civility, treating others with respect and civil, nonviolent behavior? Freedom? Is personal freedom unlimited? If not, what are the limits and who decides them? What happens if individuals overstep the perceived limits of freedom? Does freedom extend to speech, the press, and religion? Social justice? Is it primarily about the distribution of wealth? Is it seeking equity between the rich and the poor, the majority and the minority? Are there other ways to conceive of it? Knowledge? What counts as knowledge? Whose knowledge counts? Is knowledge equally distributed? Who creates knowledge? Critical thinking? Is teaching for critical thinking a matter of teaching skills? What do judgments have to do with critical thinking? Does critical thinking lead to good outcomes? Can critical thinking be taught? Education? Do we always have to answer the other questions before we can define education? Citizenship? Is citizenship a particular legal status or more? Is the behavior of citizens the same as expected of any societal participant? Is any civically committed individual a citizen? Is limiting citizenship a matter of social justice? 1 Of course, in some cases more than one of the questions can be answered in the affirmative. Democracy is a form of government, but is that the most important quality of democracy? What do schools have to do with it? All of the concepts other than democracy and social justice share one commonality understanding and defining each is required if we are to understand democracy and social justice and their relationship to education. So, let us begin with democracy. 1 For an insightful discussion of citizenship in society see Laurance J. Splitter. Identity, Citizenship and Moral Education. (Forthcoming in Educational Philosophy and Theory). 4

5 3. Democracy, What Can It Be? Paul Woodruff in his book First Democracy: The Challenge of an Ancient Ideal writes (Woodruff 2005: ix): Democracy is government that tries to bring a specific ideal into practice the ideal of government by and for the people. I call it an ideal because I don t think it has ever been fully reflected in an actual government. Definitions of government are controversial in theory and the prospect of democracy in actuality is dangerous to the special interests that want to take charge of government If it is not controversial, it is not about democracy. As a government, Woodruff claims there has never been a true democracy. In fact, democracy in the United States is correctly called representative democracy because the people speak through representatives elected to deliver their voice. In this sense it is more like Roman democracy than Greek democracy which Woodruff describes. In ancient Greece, at least in Athens, the first 3000 citizens to show up at a specified spot constituted the assembly that passed laws, so it was an ever-changing body. But even in its representative form there is another problem, first identified by Alexis de Tocqueville in his Democracy in America books published early in the 19 th Century. He described the tyranny of the majority, the idea that the majority always gets its way and perhaps the minority never gets its way (De Tocqueville 1972: ). One of my students at East China Normal University cornered me after a seminar there and said, So I guess democracy is a way for the majority to control the minority. He was partially right that can and has happened, as when segregation of schools was common in the American south. That abuse of minorities led to court decisions and civil rights decisions that essentially intervened to protect the minority from the majority. The founders of the American republic did see an important role for the people in governing, and some understood that education was critical if that were to happen. Thomas Jefferson once wrote, A people that wishes to be ignorant and free ask for something that never was and never will be (Coates 1996). And Jefferson went on to be an ardent supporter of education in service of democracy. Let us not forget that Jefferson s conception of democracy did not include social justice as we will define it. At the time, slavery was common, Jefferson owned some; also at that time women and slaves did not have the right to vote. The idea of the role of education in a democracy is also present in the work of John Adams, the second President of the United States, who assured that education would be attended to in the constitution of his home state, Massachusetts. Adams wrote: 5

6 Wisdom and Knowledge, as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislators and magistrates in all future periods of this commonwealth to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all the seminaries of them, especially the university at Cambridge, public schools, and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings, sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people. (McCullough 2001: 223) This is one of our strongest early statements of the connection between democracy and education in the United States. Reflecting on the nature of democracy today, Benjamin Barber, a well-respected political scientist wrote: Democracy is not a natural form of association; it is an extraordinarily rare contrivance of cultivated imagination. Empower the merely ignorant and endow the uneducated with a right to the make collective decisions and what results is not democracy but, at best, mob rule: the government of private prejudice and the tyranny of opinion all those perversions that liberty s enemies like to pretend (and its friends fear) constitute democracy. For true democracy to flourish, however, there must be citizens. Citizens are women and men educated for excellence by which term I mean the knowledge and competence to govern in common their own lives. The democratic faith is rooted in the belief that all humans are capable of such excellence and have not just the right but also the capacity to become citizens. Democratic education mediates the ancient quarrel between the rule of opinion and the rule of excellence by informing opinion and, through universal education in excellence, creating an aristocracy for everyone. (Barber 1992: 5) Barber clearly sees democracy as rare remember Woodruff thought it never existed in its truest form. Notice again though, the extent to which Barber emphasizes education as the vehicle to prepare citizens I would say participants to be active in governing their own lives. My preference for the word participants over citizens 6

7 is the fact that citizenship is essentially a legal definition, at least when referring to citizenship in a nation. Citizenship in other organizations, such as schools, is a different matter, but I prefer not to use the term at all when discussing the expectations of participants in a democracy. Individuals can behave in a democratic way without being citizens. So far, however, we have seen democracy conceived of in its role as a form of government. One of our most important philosophers, John Dewey, conceived of it differently. He wrote: A democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living of conjoint communicated experience. The extension in space of the number of individuals who participate in an interest so that each has to refer his own action to that of others, and to consider the action of others to give point and direction to his own, is equivalent to the breaking down of those barriers of class, race, and national territory which kept men [sic!] from perceiving the full import of their activity. (Dewey 1966: 87) Democracy and Education was first published in 1916 and had a significant influence on educators and American philosophers. Interestingly, this was several years before Dewey made his well-known visit to China from examining his philosophy in light of Chinese philosophy. Dewey s statement is, I believe, very important in helping to frame a contemporary meaning of democracy. Dewey argued that democracy is more than a form of government and that primarily it is a mode of associated living of conjoint communicated experience. By mode of associated living of conjoint communicated experience, Dewey meant that democracy constituted a way for individuals to react to each other in society. By saying that an individual must consider the impact of his own action on others and to consider the action others take, he is defining freedom to mean that one can act so long as his actions do not interfere with the freedom of another. Finally, he sees this as breaking down the barriers of class, race, and national territory, by which he meant to include nationalism, thoughts that were very much ahead of his time. This is the conception of democracy that I believe is most importantly the work of schools. Students must learn about their responsibilities to government, but learning how to behave with others is even more important because it can govern their everyday lives. In my first paper for the Institute, I identified what could happen in classrooms that would impact on democratic living. In my first paper, I wrote: Among the goals that we would expect in classrooms organized to promote behaviors expected as the norm in democratic societies are: Treating other students with respect. Of course, it goes without saying that this can happen only when the teacher treats students with respect. 7

8 Listening carefully to other points of view. Careful listening is often a goal in elementary schools, but it is a skill that needs to be developed throughout one s education. Listening carefully is related to treating others with respect it suggests that we take what others say seriously. Responding to differing points of view with reasoned arguments. Learning to give reasons and support for our positions is an important intellectual skill and central to our role in a democratic society. Giving reasons allows for discussion. We have all heard students, and maybe some adults, respond to a challenge about why they claim some belief by saying because. Because is never an adequate response. We need to foster giving reasons and arguing well for our positions in all classrooms. Avoiding anger and violence. One outcome of showing respect, listening carefully, and giving reasons for position is a reduction in dealing with differences through anger or even violence. In effect, this embodies Dewey s ideal of the way we would interact with each other, including treating others with respect, listening carefully and empathetically to what others have to say, disagreeing when appropriate, citing one s reasons for doing so, and avoiding anger and violence in settling differences. These are the essential qualities of a person living in a way that is consistent with and supportive of democracy. 4. Critical Thinking and Democracy Another aspect of the connection between education and democracy is the teaching of critical thinking. Two important sources have guided my conception of critical thinking: John Dewey s How We Think (Dewey 1910) and Matthew Lipman s Critical Thinking: What Can it Be (Lipman 1988). Dewey was a strong proponent of education to promote thinking, and feared a two-track system in which some students would be in elite schools and others in trade schools. He favored schooling that would: prize freedom more than docility; initiative more than automatic skill, insight and understanding more than the capacity to recite lessons or execute tasks under the direction of others. (Dewey 1910: 6-20) In How We Think, which was written for elementary school teachers and published originally in 1910, Dewey reviews the different kinds of thinking as a way of contrasting thinking in general with reflective or critical thinking. He discusses stream of consciousness as the ideas that go through our minds constantly and is automatic and unregulated. He also discusses thinking that is synonymous with believing. When someone says, I think the government system in the United States is better than the system in Canada, they are essentially saying what they believe. He 8

9 goes on to define reflective thought as Active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends Elsewhere in How We Think, he distinguishes reflective or critical thinking from other forms of thinking because it involves (Dewey 1910: 6-20): 1. a state of doubt, hesitation, perplexity, mental difficulty in which thinking occurs, and 2. an act of searching, hunting, inquiring to find material that will resolve the doubt, settle and dispose of the perplexity. So for Dewey, critical thinking was active thinking designed to solve an uncertainty, something we are not sure about. There are parallels between Dewey s definition and the so-called scientific method. Matthew Lipman, an American philosopher who taught at Columbia University and Montclair State University has developed a conception of critical thinking that builds on Dewey s work. Lipman, writing in 1988, made this connection between democracy and critical thinking: One of the governing ideas in a democracy, an idea that regulates both curriculum development and teacher preparation, is that reasonableness is perhaps the single most important characteristic of the educated person. Democracies are inclined to this view because they have found it difficult to function when their citizens are inclined to be unreasonable. At the same time, many educators have found this view appealing because it is conducive to the development of autonomous, rational beings. According to such educators, educated people are not merely well learned, they think well. (Lipman 1988: 4) 4.1 Defining Critical Thinking There are obvious similarities between Lipman s and Dewey s conceptions of the purposes of education. Lipman provides a useful definition of critical thinking, when he defines critical thinking as skillful, responsible thinking that facilitates good judgment because it: 1. relies upon criteria, 2. is self correcting, and 3. is sensitive to context (Lipman 1988: 4). What is a judgment? The outcome of thinking is a judgment. In the context of this definition, a judgment is a kind of decision, an outcome, or perhaps more 9

10 appropriately a tentative position. In science, we would consider a hypothesis to be a kind of judgment an explanation of some scientific principle. In the arts, a critique is a judgment an assessment of the quality of a work of art. In mathematics, a solution to a problem is a kind of judgment. In history, an explanation is a judgment to make sense out of human events. In sports, a decision to run a particular play in football is a judgment. In politics, a decision to vote for a particular candidate is a judgment. A government s decision to go to war is a judgment. In a classroom, the kind of homework assigned, decisions about pedagogy, a grade for a student are all examples of judgments. In ones personal life, decisions or to marry are judgments. Judgments can be creative as well so that a work or art can be a judgment in this sense. Critical thinking is a way of improving the quality of judgments people make. It should be obvious, however, that it is possible to make a good judgment by this definition of critical thinking and have a bad outcome. A decision that meets all the criteria for a pedagogical choice could lead to a lesson that fails. A candidate we vote for may disappoint us even if it was a good decision to vote for him or her. Sometimes we make a decision about whether or not a judgment was good based on the outcome alone if it was a good outcome, it was a good judgment. That does not give us a basis for making better judgments though, and critical thinking is intended to do just that. For example, we could consider a decision to go to war by examining the criteria used, the context, and the process of self-correction. The three components that help determine if a judgment is a good one can be applied to all the sorts of judgments we have listed. 4.2 Criteria What are criteria? Criteria are particularly important kinds of reasons, and an essential quality of critical thinking is that it requires reasons to support judgments that we make. Criteria are different by field the criteria for judging something legal or not differ from the criteria we use in deciding if a motion picture was a good one or not. Criteria can be standards, laws, rules, regulations, guidelines, directions, principles, or ideals. When a teacher asks a student, Why do you think so? in response to a statement, the teacher is asking for the criteria the student used in arriving at the judgment that the statement represents. Lipman says, Whenever we make a claim or utter an opinion we are very vulnerable unless we can somehow back it up. We should therefore ask ourselves questions such as these: When our opinions come under fire, to what do we appeal? When our claims are contested, what do we invoke? When our assertion are not convincing, what do we cite to strengthen them (Lipman 1988: 4). 10

11 Some judgments are widely known and accepted as fact, but even such widely held judgments can change if the criteria change. In fact, in large measure what we call knowledge is a collection of judgments tentative positions or conclusions. For example, most of us learned that Pluto is a planet. However, in 2006, the members of the discipline of astronomy decided that the criteria for judging what is or is not a planet must change to account for some discrepancies, in this case other bodies in the solar system that were very much like Pluto. And so, the commonly held conclusion that Pluto is a planet is no longer true. New criteria demand a different judgment. There are many other examples where judgments change because criteria change. For example, it was once thought that memorizing long poems or texts was sound educational practice because it exercised the mind. We now believe that understanding the meaning of texts is more important than memorizing them. In medicine, treatments for diseases change with new knowledge and new criteria. So one thing we can say about critical thinking is that it helps us understand the nature of knowledge. Critical thinking, we argue, leads to new knowledge Sensitivity to Context Another quality of critical thinking is that it is sensitive to context. What does it mean to be sensitive to context? For one thing, as we have already illustrated, criteria that are appropriate for one circumstance may not be appropriate to another, so context is important. The criteria that govern your behavior at work may be different than the criteria that govern your behavior at home or while on vacation. You may be trying to lose weight, and have a strict criterion for the amount you consume. Your judgment to eat more while on vacation illustrates a change in context. 4.4 Self-Correction We need to introduce the concept of community of inquiry and why we want to have such environments in our classrooms. How does self-correction occur in a community of inquiry? The third part of a definition of critical thinking that leads to good judgment is that it is subject to self-correction in a community of inquiry. A community of inquiry is a setting, usually a classroom, where discussion and interaction is expected, where students listen to each other and respond to each other s thoughts, often leading to new ideas validated by the inquiry. This quality of critical thinking, self-correction, involves thinking about our thinking. It is sometimes called metacognition. Lipman argues, as do I, that one way to accomplish this is to make the classroom a community of inquiry, that is, a place where students are expected to explain their judgments, and a climate exists where others can question the criteria and methods that led to the judgment. For example, if a student says I think the war in Iraq is a mistake, that judgment is a fruitful statement for discussion. The teacher 11

12 in a community of inquiry would help students ask about the criteria the person making the judgment used. The teacher would also make such questioning the norm, and not something that is taken personally. Science is an example of a community of inquiry in the sense that a scientist is expected to make his or her judgment or hypothesis public through publishing it. What follows is careful review and questioning by members of the scientific community. The outcome of a community of inquiry is a better judgment because the criteria and thinking are subject to correction. The goal is to help all students open their thinking to inquiry, and to learn to engage in self-correction by reviewing their thinking carefully. All good thinking is subject to reconsideration; in fact, one of the important qualities of critical thinking is that we don t jump to conclusions too quickly we suspend judgment until we are satisfied that we have considered the appropriate information, and even then judgments are only tentative resting places, not final conclusions. A community of inquiry is a community in which judgments are discussed and considered, and every classroom should be a community of inquiry. A community of inquiry is a discussion group that focuses on improving the thinking of the group. Students in a community of inquiry learn to question each other s reasons for judgments the criteria they use as reasons for their thinking. Discussion of this sort is very important in a democracy, and using communities of inquiry can promote the kind of thinking that will lead to more reasonableness, and may in fact be seen as representing an emergent democracy. In describing decisionmaking in a democracy, Lipset wrote, Decision-making in democracies is a process of reaching agreement in group situations through discussion, debate, and analysis. Decision making should be more than the aggregation of performed opinions. Opinions must be confronted with each other in the public sphere, and all participants in this public discourse should truly listen to each other s argument. To make proper democratic discussions, no group should be excluded. (Lipman 1988: 23) 4.5 What About Critical Thinking Skills? There are many skills involved in the kind of critical thinking we describe. We find many examples in which critical thinking is defined as a set of skills and strategies, such as comparing and contrasting, questioning, recognizing consequences, classification, listening, supporting one s arguments, and providing evidence. Skills are important, but they are sometimes taught in isolation without their connection to a broader idea of critical thinking made clear (See De Bono 2009). All of these components require strong background knowledge and understanding of the content 12

13 under consideration, the skills identified here, and the disposition to think critically about important content. 4.6 Why Is Critical Thinking Important? Critical thinking, when it is conceived of as leading to good judgment, can be applied to all aspects of life. It is the process members of a discipline English, mathematics, science, the arts etc. use to validate the judgments that govern their work. As teachers we can use critical thinking to help students understand the content we teach them. As teachers committed to promoting democracy and social justice, we can help students make good judgments as they carry out their civic responsibilities and lead their lives. As teachers we can make content more meaningful by having students think critically about what they are learning. As good teachers, we can use critical thinking to reflect on our practice and make our teaching better. Very few classrooms reach the level of being a community of inquiry and we believe that is an important goal. One of the qualities in a democracy is that reason prevails. Decisions are made based on an analysis of the situation, including any applicable laws or rules. When the judgment is reached, the person making the judgment can provide the criteria used, show how they are relevant to the context and invite other perspectives. It also has a great deal to do with how we treat each other, including the presence of respect and care, and the expectations that public officials including police officers will treat individuals with respect and care as well. V. Social Justice: What Can It Be? Social justice as a concept may be more difficult to define than democracy, and the key is defining it for the group that is using the concept. Remember the questions I posed for the concept: Social justice? Is it primarily about the distribution of wealth? Is it seeking equity between the rich and the poor, the majority and the minority? Are there other ways to conceive of it? I can remember when I first took a central office position at The City University of New York. Before The New York Times and other newspapers interviewed me, representatives of CUNY s public relations office did a mock interview both to prepare me for the interviews and to listen to what I had to say in the context of CUNY s public positions. I talked about my ideas regarding education and the centrality of democracy and social justice. When I finished they said, We will get back to you. They did, and they asked me not to use the words social justice! I asked, Can I talk about equal opportunity, poverty, and discrimination? They said yes, and I said, OK then I don t have to use the words social justice, but why shouldn t I? They said that social justice means too many things to use the phrase 13

14 without common meaning, and they were concerned that wealthy individuals, including our own Board of Trustees, would perceive it as taking away their wealth and giving it to others. That isn t of course, what I meant. There are some definitions of social justice that involve distribution of wealth distributive justice largely in the works of John Rawls (Rawls 1971). That may be a long-term solution but I am persuaded that there are other conceptions that can provide justice. In her definitions of democracy, Amy Guttmann uses the words nondiscrimination and nonrepression. These two concepts taken together are, from my perspective, a good basis for a definition of social justice. The idea is that we must lead our lives and examine our actions through the lenses of nondiscrimination and nonrepression of others. When we see evidence that these qualities are lacking, we are obligated so speak up and take action. This is true even if we cannot prove unequivocally that the condition is the result of discrimination and repression. Here is one example. According to Gary Orflield, the graduation rates for whites in New York City are about 75%, that is, 75 of 100 entering kindergarten students will graduate. The rate for African American and Latino students is around 33% (Orflield 2004: 5). Sixty-seven percent will not graduate and will be more likely to be incarcerated, have poor health, and be on welfare. A reasonable person, I believe, would conclude that these students are being discriminated against and repressed, and that the presence of conditions that lead to a failure to graduate represents a matter of social justice. This conclusion that the graduation rate is a result of discrimination and repression and is a social justice issues requires me to speak out on the issue and provokes counter claims made by public officials that the graduation rate is higher. Work to examine the various ways the graduation rate is calculated to give the false impression of a higher rate, especially when schools are a political issue and local officials are trying to show progress, is under study by one of my Ph.D. students now (Henry, forthcoming). One tactic we have used, given the likelihood of poor health for non-graduates, is to try to redefine the school-leaving problem as a public health issue, one more likely to get attention. With the debate in the United States about the cost and provision of health care, the cost of prison, and rising public assistance, it seems that more investment in education in an appropriate way that raises the graduation rate would be a good investment (Ruglis 2009). Yet another way to conceptualize social justice is in the work of Marilyn Cochran Smith who uses the concept of access to life s chances. How many children do not have access to careers that would be at the top of the economy because they do not have the information they need to pursue such a career, have never met anyone holding such positions (such as those in medicine, law, or education) and cannot even imagine the possibility. These children are denied access to life s chances, and it is a matter of social justice. Maxine Greene, one of our important contemporary philosophers, writes, We cannot become what we cannot imagine (Greene 2001: 47). This raises the question of the importance of fostering imagination 14

15 in education as one of the important purposes we must pursue, albeit as a minimal condition only, since imagination alone does not make things happen. These are just a few ways to define social justice, but we must define it. The concept is often misused. One of my favorite anecdotes on this issue is from American History. The Radio Priest, as Father Charles Coughlin was known in the 1920s and 1930s, had a huge audience on his radio broadcasts (See the Social Security Online History). His positions were blatantly pro-nazi, anti-semitic, and racist. And his newsletter, published monthly, was called, Social Justice and that was his slogan. If the positions he represented can be called social justice, we must carefully define what we mean and not just use the terms. Of course this definitional work is needed to understand democracy as well. Now that does not mean that any definition agreed to would work. If a group deliberated and decided that it was appropriate to call racist positions that embrace social justice, then something is wrong. I would fall back on critical thinking and ask how the judgment was made. What criteria were used (I would use nondiscrimination and nonrepression), what is the context, and has the judgment been determined in a community of inquiry? 6. Conclusion Education has a significant role to play in shaping students understanding of what it means to live in a democracy and to develop their sense of social justice. This is not to say our schools are the only institutions so charged. Religious institutions clearly have a role in social justice as well. We cannot afford, if we want a democratic and socially just population, to sit back and assume that it will happen. It is a set of beliefs and actions that must be redeveloped with each new generation, but it is the schools that must take the lead. 15

16 References: Barber, B. (1992) An Aristocracy for Everyone. New York: Valentine Books. Coates, E. R. Sr. (1996) Favorite Jefferson Quotes, Part 5: Republican Policy. Available online at: [Retrieved on: 20 July, 2010]. De Bono, E. (2009) De Bono Consulting. Available online at: [Retrieved on: 20 July, 2010]. De Tocqueville, A. (1972) Democracy in America, Vol. I. New York: Vantage Books. Dewey, J. (1910) How We Think. New York: D.C. Heath and Company. Dewey, J. (1966) Democracy and Education. New York: The Free Press. Gallie, W. B. (1956) Essentially Contested Concepts, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol. 56, pp Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Aristotelian Society. Greene, M. (2001) Variations on a Blue Guitar: The Lincoln Center Institute Lectures on Aesthetic Education. New York: Teachers College Press. Henry, S. (Forthcoming) Constructing the Graduation Rate, Ph.D. Thesis in Progress. New York: The Graduate School of The City University of New York. Lakoff, G. (2002) Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lipman, M. (1988) Critical Thinking, What Can it Be? Upper Montclair, NJ: The Institute for Critical Thinking, Montclair State University. McCullogh, J. (2001) John Adams. New York: Vantage Press. Michelli, N. M. (Forthcoming 2011) Education in a Democracy: Why, How and What?. Hong Kong: Centre for Governance and Citizenship, The Hong Kong Institute of Education. Orflield, G. (2004) Losing Our Future: How Minority Children are Being Left Behind by the Graduation Rate Crisis. Cambridge: The Civil Rights Project (Now at UCLA). 16

17 Rawls, J. (1971) A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University. Ruglis, J. (2009) Death of a Dropout: Retheorizing School Dropout and Schooling as a Social Determinant of Health. New York: The Graduate School of The City University of New York (Forthcoming from Teachers College Press). Social Security Online History Father Charles E. Coughlin. Available online at: [Retrieved on July 31, 2010]. Splitter, L. (Forthcoming) Identity, Citizenship and Moral Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory. Woodruff, P. (2005) First Democracy: The Challenge of an Ancient Idea. New York: Oxford University Press. 17