The Epistle of Q — Chapter 105 (c)

AME Conference (cont’d — after a bit of a delay due to the annual Grey Cup trip which included side excursions to Montreal, Ottawa & Kingston)

Thursday afternoon…
The next series of conversations addressed other aspects of the challenges of moral decision-making.

Eric Torres of Harvard has examined the issue of Civics on Social Media: A Framework for Education. His primary concern emerges from the realization that political tolerance is declining especially in the U.S.A. Social media produces selective and distorted exposure wherein moral outrage is very effective at capturing attention. This aids in the creation of barriers to empathy and ultimately erodes democratic institutions. It is too easy to facilitate content sharing without any editorial standards, often without people realizing there are semi-public, semi-permanent records of their speech. He believes it is time to develop new, more in-depth civics courses at the High School level because at the moment most in existence are severely limited and seldom address social media & the related impacts. There is a need for explicit instruction that undertakes skill-building in critical awareness and considers non-partisan frameworks. And how does this fit with moral education/ethical reasoning? In part it will enhance such reasoning as the student comes to better understand the development of political tolerance. By utilizing normative frameworks, the student will face the need to think critically about intolerance. There will doubtless also be a need to reflect upon where respect enters the conversation – where it plays a role. He really does want the school system to focus on the opportunities to demonstrate that social media can be used in a positive way – just be aware that it will take some effort to dig down for it!

Clark Power of Notre Dame brought a different perspective to the conversation. I’ve known Clark for over thirty years and in addition to our understanding of and appreciation for the work of Lawrence Kohlberg, we share a strong passion for sports. He has done extensive research into the worth of team play in the development of a child, and his presentation at AME this year was entitled: A Team for Every Child. It is his contention that one can’t have successful moral education until the student is safe, fairly healthy and alive. Within his work in the Just Community research, teams are created as a response to questions about addressing issues around poverty. We must ask ourselves what’s the moral price for ignoring the poor? Who are our children? If we really are serious about creating the beloved community we must push hard for both justice and kinship – the joining of others beyond simply service. In order to effectively belong we need to create teams – to provide an identity and protection. Teams require face-to-face relationships and thus foster connections (as he reminded us, there is no I in team). And therefore, once in an effective team setting, the structures are better to develop moral education. His research has seen that moral development does happen in school systems, but these are third to religious groups which are second in impact; number one in effectiveness though has been found to be sports teams.

To further his point (i.e. to walk the talk), he has donated considerable time (and money) to the North Lawndale Athletic & Recreation Association in one of Chicago’s toughest neighbourhood. The results are encouraging although slow and not always without some sadness (in one picture he showed of a team he helped sponsor perhaps half-a-dozen years ago, already two members have been murdered). Nevertheless the overall impact has been positive with many students moving on to some form of higher education or work-skills training that is providing them a way out of poverty and into safer environments. It also is slowly making the neighbourhood itself safer. People are making better ethical choices!

And so for me, on this somewhat uplifting note, Thursday concluded…