EDD 5229 • Liberal Studies in Knowledge Society • Lecture 8 • Understanding the Curriculum Form • of Liberal Studies: • Conception of Issue Inquiry Approach
What is At Issue? Understanding the Nature of Issue Inquiry • The idea of “Issue” • According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the noun “issue” means “a point or matter in contention between two parties; …a choice between alternatives; a dilemma”. • The phrasal expression “at issue” means “in controversy; taking opposite sides of a case or contrary views of a matter. “To join issue” means “to accept or adopt a disputed point as the basis of argument in a controversy; to proceed to argument with a person on a particular point”. “To make an issue of” means to turn into a subject of contention”.
What is At Issue? Understanding the Nature of Issue Inquiry • The conception of “Issue Inquiry” • It is helpful to make the distinction between the terms “issue”, “question” and “problem” in the teaching of Liberal Studies. For a question, one may search for an answer, while for a problem, one may simply demand a solution; but as for an issue, especially a controversial issue as Bernard Crick specified or even a “reasonable disagreement” as John Rawls stipulated (1993), what one would strive for will be a decision, a reasoned and reasonable decision.
What is At Issue? Understanding the Nature of Issue Inquiry • The conception of “Issue Inquiry” • To inquiry into an issue means to identify the points or matters “at issue”, the parties engaging in the controversial issue, the factual evidences each parties put fort in support of their stances, the values stipulated by the parties concerned to lender normative supports to their stances, the legal and/or institutional grounds underlying the controversy at point, the multi-cultural and comparative relevance involved, and finally to make a reasoned and reasonable decision on the issue under inquiry.
Issue Inquiry Approach in the UK and US • Teaching controversial issues in the UK: • Teaching Controversial Issues as a approach to political education was initated in the 1970s in the UK by Bernard Crick and the working party of the Hansard Society (Crick, 1978; see also Stradling et al., 1984)
Issue Inquiry Approach in the UK and US • Teaching controversial issues in the UK: • The approach has gained its retrieval in Section 10 of “Guidance on the Teaching of Controversial Issues” in Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools: The Final Report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship (The Advisory Group on Citizenship, 1998)
Issue Inquiry Approach in the UK and US • Teaching controversial issues in the UK: • “A controversial issue is an issue about which there is no one fixed or universally held point of view. Such issues are those which commonly divide society and for which significant groups offer conflicting explanation and solution. There may, for example, be conflicting views on such matters as how a problem has arisen and who is to blame; over how the problem may be resolved; over what principles should guide the decisions that can be taken, and so on.” (The Advisory Group on Citizenship, 1998, P. 56)
Issue Inquiry Approach in the UK and US • The Issue-Centered Decision Making Curriculum in Social Studies in the US • Issue inquiry approach has a long tradition in the teaching of Social Studies in the US, for example • Oliver and Shaver’s jurisprudential approach (1966) • James Banks’ decision-making model (1973/1985) • Engle and Ochoa’s citizens’ decision-making approach (1988) • Multicultural education (Banks, 2002, 2007)
Issue Inquiry Approach in the UK and US • The Issue-Centered Decision Making Curriculum in Social Studies in the US • Most recently, Ochoa-Becker specifies the “Issue-Centered Decision Making Curriculum as the curriculum for education for democratic citizenship in the US. She underlines that “The overarching purpose of this Issue-Centered Decision Making Curriculum is to improve the quality of decision making by democracy’s citizens as they respond to issues that require resolution. …The decision making process advanced here is applicable to virtually every domain of our lives.” (Ochoa-Becker, 2007, p. 124)
Decision-Problem Social inquiry Value inquiry Social Knowledge Value Clarification Products of previous inquiries by social scientists Rational Decision Intelligent social action A social studies curriculum focused on social inquiry, valuing, decision-making, and intelligent social action (Source: Banks, 1985)
Decision-Problem What action should we take regarding race relations in our city? Social Inquiry Key Concepts Conflict Culture Discrimination Specialization Power Value Inquiry 1. Recognizing value problems 2. Describing value-relevant behavior 3. Naming values 4. Determining value conflicts 5. Hypothesizing about value sources 6. Naming value alternatives 7. Hypothesizing about consequences 8. Choosing 9 Stating reasons, sources, and consequences of choice Knowledge necessary for naming alternatives and making predictions Value Clarification Making a Decision 1. Identifying Alternatives (Using generalizations related to key concepts to identify alternatives) 2. Predicting Consequences of each alternative (Using generalizations related to key concepts to predict consequences) 3. Ordering Alternatives Which is most consistent with value position identified above? Action
Doubt-concern Problem Formulation Theory-Values Formulation of Hypotheses Definition of Terms - Conceptualization Collection of Data Evaluation and Analysis of Data Testing hypotheses: Deriving generalizations and theories Beginning inquiry new A model of social inquiry
Value Problem Relevant behavior Conflicting values Possible consequences Related values Alternative values Possible consequences Sources Possible consequences Value preference Sources Reasons Operations of Value Inquiry Model, Graphically Illustrated
Policy Issue: Should Vere sentence Billy to hang? Moral-Value Issue Definitional Issue Fact-Explanation Issue Is killing wrong? What does mutiny mean? Would hanging Billy deter mutiny? Newmann’s Approach to the Analysis of Policy Issues
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The teaching framework is made up of the following constituents • Issue analysis: It refers to first of all identifying the social backgrounds from which the issue invokes. Second is to identify the parties engaging in an issue. In public and social issues, they may involve different political parties, interest groups or stake-holders. However, in a controversial social issue, the engaging parties may be numerous in number and their opinions about the issue may vary diversely. Nevertheless, as in most political issues, these diverse stances will subsequently aggregate or even polarize into two opposite camps. Thirdly, it is to how the parties involved aggregate and aligned into opposite camps. Finally, it is to collect the statements and arguments each parties put forth.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The factual inquiry: It refers to analyzing the factual statements put forth by parties engaging in a disputing issue. Usually these factual statements fall into one of the following categories • Descriptive and definitional statements: They provide factual descriptions of the phenomena relating to the issue under study. Accordingly, they define the status quo of the situation. For examples, the air of HK is highly populated; the ozone layer of the earth has been damaged; global warming exists; Queen Pier is part of Hong Kong’s collective memory; Olympic Games is purely an athletic events; Olympic Games is an international political event, etc. In connection to the analysis of this kind of statements, one may reveal the definitional issue involved in the dispute. For example, one may ask are the parties involved share common definition of the situation or are they simply talking across each other?
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The factual inquiry: • Causal statements: They make claims of causal relationship between phenomena relating to the issue in point. For example, polluted air is hazardous to health; damaged ozone layer is hazardous to health; global warming is hazardous to the environment; genetic modified food is hazardous to health; genetic modified food is hazardous to environment; etc. In connection to the analysis of the causal statements invoked in the dispute, one must not accept the causal statements in the face-value and should further interrogate the validity and reliability of the methodology through which the causal statements are substantiated.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The value inquiry: It refers to clarifying and prioritizing the desirable or preferable attributes or standards of worth imputed by engaging parties to the phenomena pertaining to the issue in point. Values can be classified according to many different criteria. The most two common classifications are • Distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic (or instrumental) values: • “An intrinsic value can be defined as something that is valuable for its own sake” (Ellis, p.12) or important in and of itself. • “An extrinsic value is valuable not for its own sake, but because it facilitates getting or accomplishing something that is valuable for its own sake.” (Ellis, p.12) It means the worth or desirability of a thing or person is derived from its instrumentality and efficiency in achieving something more desirable.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The value inquiry: • Distinction between personal moral and social ethical values （唐君毅，1957/2005） • Personal moral values個人道德價值refers to the desirable and preferable standards a person imputes to his/her personal actions, conducts and ways of life. • Social ethical values社會倫理價值refers to the desirable and preferable standards a group of human beings impute to their inter-personal relationships. With regards of the various domains of inter-personal relationships, social ethical values can further be categorized as familial-ethical values, economic-ethical values, political-ethical values, aesthetical-ethical values, scholarly-ethical values, professional-ethical values, etc.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The institutional (or jurisprudential) inquiry: Apart from analyzing the factual and value stances adopted by the engaging parties in controversial issues, in issue inquiry, one must analyze the institutional implications of the actions and strategies waged by the engaging parties. That is to put these social actions in the social-ethical and political-legal context and examine whether their actions and strategies have violated the socially and legally endorsed standards. Furthermore, one may even analyze whether the ends justify the means, which violate legal and/or ethical principles.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The comparative-multicultural inquiry: In order to enlarge one’s perception and understanding of the issue under study, one should extent the inquiry beyond the institutional contexts in which one is familiarized with, to avoid culturally ethnocentric version. Accordingly, comparable issues invoked in other spatial and temporal contexts should also be studied.
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • Formulations of judgments • Judgment refers to “the mental or intellectual process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing.” (Connolly et al., 2000, p. 1)
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • Formulations of judgments • According to the issue-inquiry approach explicated about, judgments can be classified into four kinds. • Comparison among factual judgments of empirical causes or contributing factors. • Comparison among Value judgments of intrinsic, extrinsic, personal and/or social values and set up one value priority list. • Comparison among institutional judgments of legal, political, economical and/or cultural imperatives within a society • Comparison among institutional judgments of legal, political, economical and/or cultural imperatives among societies
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The constituents • The decision making: Having formulated one’s matrix of judgments on factual, value, institutional and comparative bases, one can then try to formulate one’s stance on the disputing issue and make one’s own decision on the issue. One may formulate one’s decision into a priori decomposition of a ‘decision tree, which usually consists of: (Connolly, et al. 2000, p. 4) • “What are my possible courses of action? (Alternatives) • What are the events that might follow form those actions? (Outcomes) • What is the likelihood of each event? • What is the value of each event to me?”
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The ideal typical model of decision making: A priori decomposition of decision tree
A Teaching Frameworks of Issue Inquiry Approach for Liberal Studies • The ideal typical model of decision making: A priori decomposition of decision tree
Controversial Issue Value Bases Factual Bases Institutional Bases Comparative Multicultural Bases Judgment Decision
Issue Analysis 1. Studying the background of the issue 2. Identifying the disputing parties involved 3. Analyzing the alignment of parties into opposite camps 4. Identifying the statements and arguments from each camps Factual Inquiry 1. Descriptive & definitional statements analysis 2. Causal statements analysis Value Inquiry 1. Identify the values attributed by parties in dispute 2. Analyze the foundations of the values 3. Priority analyze the conflicting values Comparative Multicultural Inquiry 1. Identify comparable issues in other societies 2. Identify comparable issue in other points in time 3. Analyze the commonalities and differences among cases Institutional Inquiry 1. Identify the institutions in which the issue invoked 2. Identify the institutional practice or values being endorsed or violated Making a Decision 1. Identifying Alternatives 2. Assessing anticipated effects of each alternative 3. Predicting unanticipated consequences of each alternatives4. Prioritizing alternatives 5. Making choice
Publications of Paparazzi Photographs should be Penalized • Incidents: • Case 1: Publication of changing-room photos of Gillian Chung (鍾欣桐) by Easy Finder (一本便利) on 23 Aug., 2006
Publications of Paparazzi Photographs should be Penalized • Incidents: • Case 1: Publication of changing-room photos of Gillian Chung (鍾欣桐) by Easy Finder (一本便利) on 23 Aug., 2006 • Case 2: Douglas and Others v Hello! (English High Court, 2001) • Case 3: Campbell v Mirror Group Newspaper (UK, 2004) • Case 4: Von Hannover v Germany (European Court of Human Rights, 2004)
Case 2: Douglas and Others v Hello! (English High Court, 2001) • The Event： • On 18 November 2000, the famous film stars Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones married and held a reception at the Plaza Hotel, New York. • Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones decided to release one official wedding photograph to all media outlets on the day of the wedding and to sell the exclusive rights to a selection of other official wedding photographs for later publication. • A bidding war to obtain this exclusive rights of publication was wage between the publishers of the rival British magazines Hello! and OK!. Subsequently, Douglas and Zeta-Jones signed a contract for £1 million with OK!.
Case 2: Douglas and Others v Hello! (English High Court, 2001) • The Event：(continued) • However, a paparazzo had managed to penetrate the security and took some photos of the wedding. These unauthorised photographs were immediately bought by Hello! for £125,000. • After a series of within-days lawsuits, both OK! and Hallo! Had their editions of the wedding photos published on the same date. • The Lawsuit: • Douglas and Zeta-Jones sue Hello! for liability citing stress, loss of income, and damage to their professional careers because of the poor quality of the images.
Case 2: Douglas and Others v Hello! (English High Court, 2001) • The Ruling: • In 2003, Justice Lindsay of the English High Court ruled that there have been a breach of a confidence and detriment of all three parties, namely Michael Douglas, Catherine Zeta-Jones, and OK! • By confidence, Justice Lindsay ruled that the information in question, Douglases’wedding as “trade secret” and the photos as “commodity” and “valuable trade asset” • The ruling implies the distinction between the law of confidentiality (data protection) and law of privacy • The ruling also implies the distinction between civil right and property right
Case 3: Campbell v Mirror Group Newspaper (UK, 2004) • The Event: • Naomi Campbell is an internationally-known celebrity model. Campbell had, in the past, publicly asserted that she did not take drugs. The Mirror newspaper obtained information that Campbell was attending meetings of Narcotics Anonymous to treat a drug addiction. The Mirror published an article revealing that Campbell was a drug addict and praising her for seeking treatment. The article was accompanied by photographs of Campbell depicting her in a public street leaving an Narcotics Anonymous meeting. The photographs were taken by means a telephoto lens while the freelance photographer was concealed in a parked car.