Skip to main content

Analyze

Fresno CEC Purpose & Mission

wypark89

Our Purpose

One of our greatest responsibilities is to prepare the next generation to meet the challenges they will face in the 21st Century, with a deep commitment to the rights and responsibilities of U.S. citizenship. We have a unique opportunity for a community dialogue about the civic values, knowledge, and skills that K-12 students should learn and practice in our public school system. We will create strong community support for our schools to provide effective civic education for students to be successful in college, career and citizenship.

OUR MISSION

The mission of the Civic Education Center is to restore civility in America by creating opportunities for youth to learn and practice civic values and democratic skills.

About Us – Civic Ed Center

Civic Education Center | Fresno CA | Facebook

Fresno CEC Summer Institute for Secondary Teachers

wypark89

Goals

  • Teach the vision of the Founders and the triumphs and tragedies of our history.
  • Teach civil dialogue on controversial issues and democratic deliberation.
  • Integrate science, technology, literature, media, arts and math with civic projects.
  • To promote teacher understanding of connections with the State Seal of Civic Engagement, Social Emotional Learning, and Ethnic Studies.

Summer Institute – Civic Ed Center

What quotes from this text are exemplary or particularly evocative?

annika

“Environmental justice (EJ) scholars and activists see communities’ ability to participate meaningfully in decisions that affect the local environment, including siting decisions for refineries, power plants, waste dumps, and the like, to be integral to the idea of EJ (Cole and Foster 2001; Schlosberg 2007). For some, this explicitly includes the notion of consent: participatory processes are a means through which community members can give their consent (or not) once they fully understand the scope and consequences of a proposal (Shrader-Frechette 2005, 2007).” (252)

“EJ advocates have called attention to siting practices that target communities of color because of their political margin- alization. In order to challenge the siting of hazardous facilities, commu- nities of color have also had to confront exclusionary decision-making processes characterized by unrepresentative local governments, monolingual proceedings, and reliance on technocratic risk assessments, to name a few (Cole and Foster 2001). As a result, one of the Principles of EJ adopted in 1991 by the People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit calls explicitly for justice in decision-making practices: ‘‘Environmental Justice demands the right to participate as equal partners at every level of decision-making.’’ (254)

“Seeing disclosure as an important element of informed consent provides ethical grounds to excoriate polluting industries for suppressing information, making misleading scientific claims, and intimidating scientists who wish to draw attention to the health risks they pose (see, e.g., Schrader-Frechette 2007, 39-75).” (255)

“Current discussions of procedural justice in the siting of environmentally hazardous facilities are far from na ̈ıve about the limitations of scientific knowledge. EJ advocates have not only criticized industry and government scientists for patently unethical practices like suppressing data (e.g., Shrader-Frechette 2007), they have pointed out the ways that scientific ways of knowing and technocratic modes of decision making can circumscribe community members’ ability to have a say in decisions that will affect their local environments (Guana 1998; Shrader-Frechette 1991); they have also asserted the need for community members’ local knowledge to be recognized as part of just decision-making procedures (Allen 2003; Fischer 2000).” (263)

 

What is the main argument, narrative and effect of this text? What evidence and examples support these?

annika

This text explores some of the current barriers to achieving procedural justice (participation in decision making by those affected by it) based on Science and Technology Studies (STS). Examples of some of these fundamental barriers include (i) lack of disclosure of information from industry, and (ii) lack of information available at the time of decision making (making consent to be subject to environmental hazards difficult or impossible. The author argues for proactive, STS-based knowledge generation to combat this.