ASU Nussbaums Ideas Discussion – Description
reply to a post written by another student. 100-200 words
The best replies are the ones that encourage reflection, for example by saying things like (these are illustrations, not templates!):
I think that you got this particular part of the argument from the readings not fully accurately…
Your post made me rethink the way I understood the reading in that….
I agree with the way that you understand this piece of argument from the reading but I don’t think that it applies to the example you bring up…
I think that the two authors that you mention actually present different arguments….
Replies that engage the argument without circling back to the readings are expected to get 2 points.
Replies that are general and do not add anything meaningful are expected to receive 1 point (things like “I fully agree,” or, “I like what you wrote,” or, “This is exactly what I think.” Of course, each of these can be part of a good reply, but they cannot be the entire reply since they can apply equally to any post and do not demonstrate engagement with the argument).
Nussbaum, Martha C. 1994. “Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism.” Boston Review. October 1, 1994
Nussbaum (1994) challenges the concepts of traditional American patriotism in education – inviting the reader to look through an alternate expanded lens accentuating instead, the concept of thinking of one as a world citizen. Reflecting on the recommendations discussed related to a shift in the inclusion of this concept in the education model Nussbaum (1994) does not ask one to relinquish local identifications and affiliations – rather to see ourselves in relation to others, to expand local loyalties to increase inclusion of greater communities and populations and to learn about others before judging. Nussbaum, M (1995) presents the argument towards “making world citizenship, rather than democratic/national citizenship, education’s central focus”.
When considering what is being taught to students one particular part of Nussbaum’s work stood out as meaningful to me in relationship to the question asked. The writer engages in discussion illustrating the environmental impacts not only within the boundaries of the Unites States – but a cross national consideration is presented.
“The air does not obey national boundaries. This simple fact can be, for children, the beginning of the recognition that, like it or not, we live in a world in which the destinies of nations are closely intertwined with respect to basic goods and survival itself. The pollution of third world nations who are attempting to attain our high standard of living will, in some cases, end up on our air. No matter what account of these matters we will finally adopt, any intelligent deliberation about ecology – as, also about the food supply and population – requires global planning, global knowledge, and the recognition of a shared future” (Nussbaum, M. 1995).
While pride in one’s country is not necessarily something I would argue needs to be a primary teaching priority nor does it fully need to be negated – the concepts instead of world citizenship and a shared future do arguably hold value to the generation of students in the elementary and secondary education system today. Consideration resulting from the climate change priorities that will directly impact their generation drive this decision of shifting our lens to expand, look and learn outside of our own nation(s). Valuing one’s community over other communities enacts a secular view of how our actions relate to others leading me to caution a narrowed view in both, our pride as well as our educational frameworks.
The post ASU Nussbaums Ideas Discussion first appeared on .
