Matching Items (3)
Description
Given the importance of free speech and free expression for the learning and development of American citizens, it is important to analyze how our universities promote these principles within the classroom. In particular, it is crucial we understand how comfortable students feel sharing their views on the toughest and most controversial issues. The rise in free speech incidents over the past 20 years on college campuses has led us to question the state of free speech and free expression on university campuses and, more importantly, within the classroom. Research on this topic has taken a broad approach in attempting to understand student attitudes towards free speech, but there has been little research done on the state of campus expression within the ASU classroom.
This study utilized a modified survey instrument known as the Campus Expression Survey, a tool created by Heterodox Academy to gauge student perceptions of free speech and free expression within classroom environments. With a sample size of 366 ASU students across all four metropolitan campuses, students were asked a series of questions that included how comfortable they would be sharing their views on a controversial political issue as well as what consequences one might expect from other students and faculty members as a result of sharing one's views. Students were also asked about their ideological perceptions of their peers, faculty, and administrators.
Analysis of the responses found four primary conclusions. First, politically-oriented majors are significantly more comfortable expressing their views on both controversial and non-controversial issues. Furthermore, students are found to be significantly more comfortable when they believe other students and faculty members share their political beliefs. Third, students are more hesitant to speak up because of the perceived repercussions from their classmates rather than their professors. Lastly, students that identify as Republican, Independent, conservative, or moderate are far more likely to feel uncomfortable sharing their views than students that identify as Democrat or liberal.
This study utilized a modified survey instrument known as the Campus Expression Survey, a tool created by Heterodox Academy to gauge student perceptions of free speech and free expression within classroom environments. With a sample size of 366 ASU students across all four metropolitan campuses, students were asked a series of questions that included how comfortable they would be sharing their views on a controversial political issue as well as what consequences one might expect from other students and faculty members as a result of sharing one's views. Students were also asked about their ideological perceptions of their peers, faculty, and administrators.
Analysis of the responses found four primary conclusions. First, politically-oriented majors are significantly more comfortable expressing their views on both controversial and non-controversial issues. Furthermore, students are found to be significantly more comfortable when they believe other students and faculty members share their political beliefs. Third, students are more hesitant to speak up because of the perceived repercussions from their classmates rather than their professors. Lastly, students that identify as Republican, Independent, conservative, or moderate are far more likely to feel uncomfortable sharing their views than students that identify as Democrat or liberal.
ContributorsHeywood, Justin Richard (Co-author, Co-author) / German, Zachary (Thesis director) / Voboril, Jakub (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of Civic & Economic Thought and Leadership (Contributor) / Thunderbird School of Global Management (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
In recent years, it has become evident that American civic literacy is in a sharp decline. Many scholars agree that young adults are becoming increasingly less engaged in activities involving the application of civics and that this may hinder the democratic process. This thesis will focus on how historical perspectives can improve contemporary application of civics in order to solve the civic literacy crisis. The report will evaluate different approaches to improving civic engagement in order to gauge their effectiveness and the potential for their use in the United States. In analyzing the decline, we will look at work from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) like A Crisis in Civic Education and A Crucible Moment. Subsequently, we will provide a review of Megan McClure’s Tackling the American Civics Education Crisis and Robert D. Putnam’s Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. We will present historical perspectives from the 19th and 20th century such as Thomas Jefferson, Alexis De Tocqueville and John Dewey in order to apply them to contemporary solutions for the decline. The contemporary perspectives of Harvard scholar Danielle Allen and various professors in the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership (SCETL) at Arizona State University will be analyzed and critiqued. The results of our research prove that historical perspectives, when applied to contemporary solutions, are an effective way to bout the civic engagement crisis in the United States. This information can be used to alter the curriculum in the classroom to encourage and prepare students to become civically literate and engaged in order to protect the democratic process.
Keywords: civic decline, civic literacy, civic engagement, contemporary, historical
Keywords: civic decline, civic literacy, civic engagement, contemporary, historical
ContributorsBoering, Avery Loren (Co-author) / Giambanco, Niccolo (Co-author) / Seagrave, Adam (Thesis director) / Voboril, Jakub (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05
Description
In recent years, it has become evident that American civic literacy is in a sharp decline. Many scholars agree that young adults are becoming increasingly less engaged in activities involving the application of civics and that this may hinder the democratic process. This thesis will focus on how historical perspectives can improve contemporary application of civics in order to solve the civic literacy crisis. The report will evaluate different approaches to improving civic engagement in order to gauge their effectiveness and the potential for their use in the United States. In analyzing the decline, we will look at work from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) like A Crisis in Civic Education and A Crucible Moment. Subsequently, we will provide a review of Megan McClure’s Tackling the American Civics Education Crisis and Robert D. Putnam’s Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. We will present historical perspectives from the 19th and 20th century such as Thomas Jefferson, Alexis De Tocqueville and John Dewey in order to apply them to contemporary solutions for the decline. The contemporary perspectives of Harvard scholar Danielle Allen and various professors in the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership (SCETL) at Arizona State University will be analyzed and critiqued. The results of our research prove that historical perspectives, when applied to contemporary solutions, are an effective way to bout the civic engagement crisis in the United States. This information can be used to alter the curriculum in the classroom to encourage and prepare students to become civically literate and engaged in order to protect the democratic process.
ContributorsGiambanco, Niccolo Giuseppe Salvatore (Co-author) / Boering, Avery (Co-author) / Seagrave, Adam (Thesis director) / Voboril, Jakub (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Department of English (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2020-05