- Phuong's Reflections
- Teachers as Changing Agents
- Moral Education
- Sand, Brink and Seeds
- Education for Citizenship
- The principles and practice of teaching and class management
- Second Thoughts about Democratic Classrooms
- The Other Side of Inclusion
- Learning or Unlearning Racism
- The Victimization of LGB Youth
- Multicultural
- Education Toward a Culture of Peace
- Becoming a Professional
- LL's Reflections
- Why Teachers Must Become Change Agents
- Moral Education and the Need for Teacher Preparation
- Sands, bricks, and seeds: School change strategies and readiness for reform
- Educating for Citizenship in Canada
- Class Management from the Side of Teaching
- Democratic Classrooms: Promises and Challenges of Student Voice and Choice
- Learning in an Inclusive Community
- Breaking the Cycle of Racism in the Classroom
- Victimization of LGB
- Equity
- Psychological Needs
- Becoming a Professional
- Mike's Thoughts
- Jeremys stuff
Contemporary notions of citizenship and how we educate for citizenship are taking on new meanings, reflective of these compelling forces of change and the diverse social contexts and cultural traditions in which they are being formulated. (P. 11 of PDF or 129 within document)
I believe that thoughts and beliefs are continually being formulated in regards to continuous social and civil change. I believe that the author makes many good points in regards to citizenship and it’s important. I believe the authors point out the obvious in regards to the population of each country and of the world is continually evolving, it is apparent with their argumentation in regards to citizenship. It appears to me that Goldstein and Selby use many good sources but made a five page essay into 27 pages by over arguing their points. I agree that citizenship is continually evolving as mentioned in this statement. They had gone on to show a few pages into the article that authors like Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau were political movers and shakers of their times but just laid the ground work for today. I believe after reading Locke’s Two treaties of Government, Hobbes’ Leviathan, and Rousseau’s A discourse on inequities, that many of the topics they discuses are still relevant and are still being used today. The reason I believe this is because they discuses issues of the wealthy holding political power over the majority of people, to debating on how civil society should be run, with many groups still using their writings and beliefs as examples. This is exhibited in the American constitution being drawing in part from Locke’s documentation. So in the long run Goldstein and Selby in my opinion attempted to be more fancy then necessary, and over use examples.
Jeremy Lawson
I believe that thoughts and beliefs are continually being formulated in regards to continuous social and civil change. I believe that the author makes many good points in regards to citizenship and it’s important. I believe the authors point out the obvious in regards to the population of each country and of the world is continually evolving, it is apparent with their argumentation in regards to citizenship. It appears to me that Goldstein and Selby use many good sources but made a five page essay into 27 pages by over arguing their points. I agree that citizenship is continually evolving as mentioned in this statement. They had gone on to show a few pages into the article that authors like Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau were political movers and shakers of their times but just laid the ground work for today. I believe after reading Locke’s Two treaties of Government, Hobbes’ Leviathan, and Rousseau’s A discourse on inequities, that many of the topics they discuses are still relevant and are still being used today. The reason I believe this is because they discuses issues of the wealthy holding political power over the majority of people, to debating on how civil society should be run, with many groups still using their writings and beliefs as examples. This is exhibited in the American constitution being drawing in part from Locke’s documentation. So in the long run Goldstein and Selby in my opinion attempted to be more fancy then necessary, and over use examples.
Jeremy Lawson