2017 Volume 84 Issue 2 Pages 180-191
Using France as an example, this paper proposes a model for the cultivation of political literacy. In this paper, “political literacy” is defined as encompassing “political knowledge” as well as the values, based upon which individuals make judgments that lead to actual political action. In France, a dialectical method that includes writing and discussion is used as a means of reaching consensus. Students first define the terms under discussion (such as “racism”) based on numerous examples from history, then compare differing viewpoints, and address and resolve their contradictions. French students are consciously educated to master this style of reasoning in various subjects from elementary school through the end of secondary education. While it appears to be simply “a style” of reasoning, this style socializes students to think, represent, overcome contradictions, and ultimately act upon correcting political errors according to the logic of this style.
Drawing from the author's research of French schools, this paper elucidates the process by which students acquire political literacy. History education provides the grounds for argument, while citizenship education provides the concepts required for the above-described “style of reasoning.” Together with the emotions cultivated in French-language and literature education, these are then integrated to form the political literacy acquisition process.
In conclusion, the way in which the French model addresses the following three issues in political education is presented: (1) How can students' political initiative be cultivated while maintaining a value-neutral education? (2) How can students be prepared for actual political action? (3) Is it possible to provide a uniform political education for students from diverse socio-economic and cultural backgrounds?
In both the structure of French-style essays (dissertation) as well as French-style discussions, one finds an emphasis on a similar set of procedures. By using these agreed-upon procedures, it becomes possible to engage in dialogue and for consensus to be reached between people who have diverse cultural backgrounds, values, and aims. At the same time, the basic style of reasoning also serves as an important means by which individuals can think freely in a multi-dimensional fashion.
Cultivating a student's political initiative while maintaining political neutrality is seen as difficult because there are many cases in which the former goal conflicts with the latter means of teaching. However, the French method of respecting the means while not paying attention to the goals of individuals skillfully avoids the difficulty surrounding this goal/means conflict in political education. In France, the aim of discussions is not to persuade or defeat one's opponent, but to create a common culture (culture commune) for each individual discussion via the process of defining the words in question.
In Japan, an American style of reasoning, such as American-style essays and debates, has been used as a model for political education. By presenting the French model in comparison to that of the US, it becomes possible to relativize the latter and show the validity of the alternative model. This would certainly provide an opportunity to build our own style of reasoning as the means of reaching consensus, as well as expressing thoughts in both political education and the actual field of politics.
