The Early Years of American Political Science: Traditionalist Paradigm and its Critics
PDF

Keywords

Political science
traditionalism
government
discipline
Citizenship education

How to Cite

Ahmad, I. (2016). The Early Years of American Political Science: Traditionalist Paradigm and its Critics. Research in Social Sciences and Technology, 1(2). Retrieved from https://ressat.org/index.php/ressat/article/view/17

Abstract

American political science has a checkered history. In the first decade of the twentieth century the discipline of political science was in its nascent stage. Political science professors of that period espoused a worldview that may be called Traditionalism. Traditionalist paradigm was informed by Hegelian philosophy and its main thrust was the study of the state. Traditionalism promoted teaching about the structure and function of government on college campuses and in public schools packaging it as citizenship education. However, political scientists of the mid-1920s and early 1930s found Traditionalism to be an inadequate methodology for explaining the complex political problems of the industrial age. Thus Behavioralism emerged as a new paradigm making Traditionalism obsolete. Behavioralist paradigm also could not explain adequately the causes of the nation-wide social unrest and racial conflicts of the 1970s, and hence it too lost its respectability, especially among women and other disenfranchised political scientists in American academia.  Keywords: Political science, traditionalism, government, academic discipline, citizenship education 
PDF

References

References

Allen, J. (1966). Political science in the teaching of secondary school history. In Political science in the social studies, eds. D. Riddle and R. Cleary, 273-85. Washington, D.C.: National Council for the Social Studies.

APSA Section on Instruction in Political Science (APSA). (1906). What do students know about American government before taking college courses in political science? Proceedings of the American Political Science Association. Baltimore, MD: Waverly Press.

APSA Committee on Instruction (APSA). (1916). The teaching of government. New York, NY: Macmillan.

Anderson, W. (1939). Political science enters the twentieth century. In Political science in American colleges and universities: 1636-1900, ed. A. Haddow. New York, NY: D. Appleton-Century Company.

———. (1989). Public talk and civic action. Social Education 53 (6): 355-6.

Bellah, R., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Tipton, S.M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Bennett, S. E. (1999). The past need not be prologue: Why pessimism about civic education is premature. PS: Political Science and Politics 4: 755-7.

Bensel, R. F. (1990). Yankee Leviathan: The origins of central state authority in America, 1859-1877. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Berelson, B., P. Lazarfeld, and W. McPhee. (1954). Voting: a study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Brintnall, M. (1992). Affirmative action: Women and minorities in the profession. PS: Political Science and Politics 1: 105-9.

Brown, B. (1950). American conservatives: The political thought of Francis Lieber and John Burgess. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Bryce, J. (1888). The American commonwealth. London, UK: Macmillan.

Burgess, J. W. (1882). The study of political science at Columbia College. International Review 12: 346-57.

———. (1891). Political science and comparative constitutional law. Boston, MA: Ginn and Co.

———. (1934). The reminiscences of an American scholar. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Crick, B. (1959). The American science of politics: Its origins and conditions. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Dahl, R. A. (1961). The Behavioral approach in political science: Epitaph for a monument to a successful protest. American Political Science Review 55: 763-72.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An Introduction to the philosophy of education. NY: Free Press.

_______. (1982). Reconstruction as affecting social philosophy. In The middle works, 1859-1920. Vol. 12:

187-201. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Dietz, M. (1998). Context is all: Feminism and theories of citizenship. In Feminism and politics, ed. A. Phillips. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Easton, D. (1991). Political science in the United States. In The development of political science, eds. D. Eason, J. G. Gunnell and L. Graziano. New York, NY: Routledge.

Farr, J. and R. Seidelman, eds. (1993). Discipline and history: Political science in the United States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Ford, H. J. (1905). The scope of political science. Proceedings of the American Political Science Association 2: 198-206.

Goodnow, F. (1900). Politics and administration: A study in government. New York, NY: Macmillan Co.

______. (1904). The work of the American Political Science Association. Proceedings of the American

Political Science Association. Vol. 1. Baltimore, MD: Waverly.

Gunnell, J. G. (1990). In search of the state: Political science as an emerging discipline in the United States. In Discourses on society. Vol. 15. Ed. P. Wagner, B. Whittrock and R. Whitley. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.

———. (1991). The historiography of American political science. In The development of political science: A comparative survey, ed. J. Gunnell and L. Graziano, New York: Routledge.

Haas, J. (1979). Where we were and where we are going. Social Education, 70(4): 147-154.

Haddow, A. (1939). Political science in American colleges and universities, 1636-1900. New York, NY: D. Appleton-Century Company.

Hegel, G. (1949). Hegel’s philosophy of right. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Hobbes, T. (1968). Leviathan. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Hoxie, R. G. (1955). A history of the faculty of political science: Columbia University. New York: Columbia University Press.

Leonard, S. (1995). The pedagogical purposes of a political science. In Political science in history: Research programs and political traditions, eds. J. Farr, J. Dryzek, and S. Leonard. New York: Cambridge University Press.

———. (1999). Pure Futility and Waste: Academic political science and citizenship education. PS: Political Science and Politics 4: 749-54.

Lieber, F. (1853). On civil liberty and self-government. Philadelphia, PA: J. B. Lippincott.

Lieber, F., ed. (1858). Inaugural address in Columbia College. Addresses of the newly-appointed professors of Columbia College. New York: Wynkoop, Hallenbeck, and Thomas.

———. (1881). Miscellaneous writings. Philadelphia, PA: J. B. Lippincott.

Manicas, P. T. (1987). A history and philosophy of the social sciences. New York: Basil Blackwell.

Mann, S. (1996). Political scientists examine civics standards: An introduction. PS: Political Science and Politics 29 (1): 47-9.

Merriam, C. E. (1925). New aspects of politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

———. (1934). Citizenship education in the United States. New York: Scribner’s Sons.

Noddings, N. (1991). The gender issue. Educational Leadership 49 (4): 65-70.

Okin, S. M. (1998). Gender, the public, and the private. In Feminism and Politics, ed. A. Phillips, 116-41. Oxford University Press.

Ostrom, E. (1996). Citizenship education for the next century: A task force to initiate professional activity. PS: Political Science and Politics 29 (4): 755-7.

Mehlinger, H. and Patrick, J. (1971). American political behavior. NY: Ginn and Company.

Padover, S. (1942). Wilson’s ideals. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Public Affairs.

———.(1976). Political socialization and political education in schools. In Handbook of political socialization, ed. S. Renshon. New York: Free Press.

Patrick, J. J. and J. D. Hoge. (1991). Teaching government, civics, and law. In Handbook of research on social studies teaching and learning, ed. J. P. Shaver, 436. New York: Macmillan International.

Quillen, I. J. (1966). Government-oriented courses in the secondary school curriculum. In Political science in the social studies, thirty-sixth yearbook, ed. R. Cleary and D. Riddle, 254-72. Washington, D.C.: National Council for the Social Studies.

Reinharz, S. (1993). A contextual chronology of women’s sociological work, 2d ed. Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University Women’s Studies Program, Working Papers Series, September.

Ross, D. (1991). The origins of American social science. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schaper, W. A. (1906). What do students know about American government before taking college courses in political science? Journal of Pedagogy 18: 265-88.

Somit, A. and J. Tanenhaus. (1967). The development of American political science: From Burgess to Behavioralism. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tickner, J. A. (1992). Gender in international relations. New York: Columbia University Press.

Tilly, C. (1975). Formation of national states in Western Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Tocqueville, A. [1831] (1945). Democracy in America. New York: Albert A. Knopf.

Tryon, R. M. (1935). The social sciences as school subjects. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Waldo, D. (1975). Political science: Tradition, discipline, profession, science, enterprise. In The handbook of political science. Vol. 1. Ed. F. I. Greenstein and N. S. Polsby. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

White, L. D. (1993). Political science, mid-century. In Discipline and history: Political science in the United States, ed. J. Farr and R. Seidelman, 223-8. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Willoughby, W. W. (1904). The political science association. Political Science Quarterly, 19: 107-11.

Wilson, W. (1985). Congressional government: A Study in American politics. Dover Publications.

______. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly 2: 197-222.

______. (1889). The state: Elements of historical and practical politics. Boston: Heath and Co.

______. Congressional Government

Woolsey, D. (1877). Political science: Or, the state theoretically and practically considered. New York: Scribner, Armstrong.