マサチューセッツ州の市民的関与の促進・振興法における「非党派性」規定

抄録

The purpose of this study is to clarify the reason why the mandate to implement the Civics Project, which sometimes receives criticism as partisan educational practice, and the "Non-partisanship" Provision, which defines Civics Project as "non-partisan" can coexist in An Act to Promote and Enhance Civic Engagement in Massachusetts.

Considering the linkage between civic education in the U.S. and partisan ideology, Action Civics is a controversial program as it often leads students to engage in the political process. We researched the different points of view and adjustments concerning the Civics Project in the Massachusetts legislature between the Democratic Party and Republican Party, as well as the proposed reason and expected function of the "Non-partisanship" Provision of the Civics Project (i.e., Action Civics) to clarify above-referenced research question.

The results of this study can be summarized as follows. First, the Democratic Party, as the legislative majority, aimed to promote a "change-oriented" Civics Project, which can engage in the political process. On the other hand, the Republican Party, being the minority, sought to weaken the implementation duty of the Civics Project. In addition, they tried to prioritize civic knowledge by imposing a citizenship test. Therefore, the Provision of the Civics Project included the learning time requirement and Provisions for considering civic knowledge. Both parties eventually reached a consensus by incorporating provisions aligned with their respective objectives.

Second, the "Non-partisanship" Provision consists of promoting consideration of different points of view, promoting engagement in civil discourse with those who hold opposing positions, granting the right not to participate in any particular project, and providing alternative opportunities to students who choose not to participate in a particular project with approval by the principal. Because of the constitution of the Massachusetts legislature and public opinion in the state, liberal values would have an advantage in Massachusetts. According to the article in conservative media, the Republican Governor would have added the "Non-partisanship" Provision because he was concerned about students who had Republican-leaning thoughts. Thus, it is contemplated that the Republican Governor proposed the "Non-partisanship" Provision since conservative values would be ensured in the Civics Project.

Finally, the coexistence of the Civics Project mandate and the "Non-partisanship" Provision can be attributed to several factors. First, Democrats had an overwhelming majority in the Massachusetts legislature. Second, the "Non-partisanship" Provision proposed by Republican Governor does not demolish the mandate to conduct Civics Project, engagement in the political process in the Project, and the "change-oriented" learning approach that the Democratic Party aimed for. Third, the Democrats were able to agree on the principle of the "Non-partisanship" Provision though it was proposed by the Republican Governor. These factors related to the "Non-partisanship" Provision contributed to reaching a political agreement. Additionally, the Provision itself ensures a "non-partisan" enough approach by (fourth) requiring the consideration of pluralistic values in the Civics Project's learning process, (fifth) respecting "student decision-making" in choosing participation and political values, and (sixth) requiring the principal's approval for individual student projects, after they chose not to participate in the particular project.