Daughters of the American Revolution is a non-profit, non-political genealogical society, founded in 1890 and headquartered in Washington, D.C., that is dedicated to promoting patriotism, preserving American history, and securing America’s future through better education for children. Since 1934, it has sponsored the DAR Good Citizens Award and Scholarship Contest “to encourage and reward the qualities of good citizenship”. Those qualities include dependability, service, leadership, and patriotism at home, in schools, and in communities.
Good citizenship includes:
having respect for others and their property
knowing your rights and respecting the rights of others
being informed on the issues of the day
learning the facts of history, both good and bad
having compassion and empathy for others
taking responsibility for your own actions
being tolerant and accepting of others’ beliefs and attitudes
recognizing and respecting the truth and speaking truth to power
Americans have accepted and praised those goals, even though there have been periods when those lofty ideals have been challenged. That is, until the dawn of the 21st century. The rise of the Tea Party, supported by political activist David Koch’s Americans for Prosperity, has diminished traditional visions of citizenship and replaced them with an appeal to oppose them and anything else that President Barack Obama supported.
Libertarians, who traditionally embraced individual responsibility, promoted private charity, defended civil liberties, and tolerated diverse lifestyles, began focusing more on tearing down the structures of government. They had always opposed government bureaucracy and taxes, but they expanded that opposition to government agencies themselves, and attacked government’s support of the less-fortunate.
The Free State Project followed, urging people to move to New Hampshire and create a society where “the maximum role of civil government is the protection of individuals’ life, liberty, and property” — something in keeping with the original libertarian outlook. It was not intended to leave anyone behind; rather, it was to create a sort of utopia where people would help each other so they would not need a lot of government support.
Along came Donald Trump with his reality-show mentality, where the only important thing was winning — however it was achieved. His movement upended all traditional forms of respect, tolerance, and empathy. From the beginning, he corrupted Ronald Reagan’s slogan of “Make America Great Again” to instead serve as a loyalty test serving himself. Outrageous claims about illegal aliens invading the country to rape and pillage and steal Americans’ jobs were part of Trump’s campaign of intolerance to anyone who questioned his genius. He discredited members of the military, those with disabilities, and a growing list of “losers” that should be mocked or eliminated from society.
As his MAGA movement grew, disdain for the traditional traits of a good citizen were replaced with a corrupt version of what a “patriot” is. To Trump a patriot would not question his motives or actions and would even embrace his excesses. Concern for others was replaced by a quest for power for themselves.
So here we are today, where the concepts of good citizenship, held in esteem for decades, and still promoted in the concepts of social and emotional learning, are deemed to be an evil that must be fought.
Today, the House Education Committee will hear testimony on House Bill 1473, sponsored by Bristol Representative John Sellers, that would prohibit the teaching of a curriculum that includes social emotional learning in public schools.
What is so objectionable? Social and emotional learning is “any evidence-based or non-evidence-based programming that promotes school and/or civic engagement and/or builds an equitable learning framework that creates or uses evidence-based benchmarks, standards, surveys, activities, learning indicators, programs, policies, processes, professional development, or assessments that address non-cognitive social factors including but not limited to, self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, responsible decision making, and/or other attributes, dispositions, social skills, attitudes, behaviors, beliefs, feelings, emotions, mindsets, metacognitive learning skills, motivation, grit, self-regulation, tenacity, perseverance, resilience, and/or intrapersonal resources…” and the list goes on.
Sellers and others who have devoted several months of research into the genesis of social and emotional learning have raised legitimate concerns about how the data collected through student surveys and interactions is protected in this age when data harvesting is big business and hackers are able to seize control of computer servers, as the Newfound Area School District recently experienced. Minutes of the discussions taking place within the Department of Education have shown some members advocating for a requirement that parents be kept in the dark about aspect of their children’s education, and that data that is not accessible to other school officials be forwarded to the education department in Concord.
Whether those discussions made their way into SEL policy is unclear. Educators in the Newfound Area School District say they do not share personal student data with the state, and they do keep parents informed every step of the way.
What is clear is that Sellers’ bill goes too far, removing every aspect of SEL from public schools. It would prevent educators from teaching effectively. Without addressing students’ needs, teaching them civic engagement, social awareness, and responsible decision-making, they would accomplish little or nothing. Those are things teachers always have employed; it’s just that the use of modern benchmarks, surveys, and learning indicators are making them much more effective in addressing shortcomings in their teaching style or the student’s ability to learn.
Had he filed legislation to address the legitimate concerns — to ensure that students’ personal information is protected and ensuring that parents are not left out of the process — Sellers would be doing a valuable service to his constituents. Unfortunately, the bill as crafted is simply too broad. HB 1473 is likely to go nowhere because no one would support undermining education to that extent. At least, one can hope that the General Court values real education over political hysteria.
Café Chatter
On Weakening Or Strengthening Support: Thank you for the excellent insight into a very important bill that had its start right here!
— Susan Duncan