Transitional Justice and the Reform of History Education

Where does history education fit into transitional justice andhow can it contribute to the goals of transitional justice?The contemporary understanding of transitional justice has broadenedto encompass more than just prosecutions, reparations, preventingimpunity, and building rule of law. Transitional justice goalsnow extend to truth telling, restoring the dignity and preservingthe memory of victims, building peace, creating respect forhuman rights and democracy, and to reconciliation. Tools forachieving these goals now include truth commissions and commemorations.But this list has not until now included how the historicalnarrative of the group(s) involved in conflict must change asa part of transition; and education, while often invoked whenthe topic of ‘never again’ is raised, has been largelyabsent from the transitional justice discourse. Neither thelarger education system nor the teaching of history –both what is taught and how – has been considered by theinstitutions transitional justice has aimed to reform. Thisarticle considers why history education matters, what conditionscomplicate its reform and what recommendations can begin tobe offered with regard to the relationship between history educationand transitional justice.     

Parent-adolescent congruence for adolescent substance use

Parental reports of adolescent substance use were compared to the adolescents' self-reports using identical scales. Congruence was defined as exact agreement on whether adolescents were current users, ex-users, or never-users. Both parents were found to be less accurate in predicting their adolescents' alcohol use compared to cigarette or marijuana use. Single mothers were significantly less likely to be congruent than were mothers from two-parent households. Mother and father congruence on all substances was unrelated to the adolescent's sex, race, or after school employment. For both parents, congruence for adolescent marijuana use was significantly related to the age and GPA of the adolescent. Congruence may also reflect important properties of family functioning, as significant relations were found between both adolescent and parent ratings of family cohesion and parent-adolescent congruence on perceptions of marijuana use.This research was supported by Grant DA03706 from the National Institute of Drug Abuse (Hyman Hops, Principal Investigator).Jennifer Langhinrichsen is a doctoral candidate in psychology interested in adolescent and family interactions. The other authors are psychologists or data analysts working on family influences on substance use and mental health.     

First-Year College Student Affect and Alcohol Use: Paradoxical Within- and Between-Person Associations

Based on 10 weekly telephone interviews with first-year college students (N=202; 63% women; M=18.8 years, SD=.4), within- and between-person associations of positive and negative affect with alcohol use were examined. Multi-level models confirmed hypothesized within-person associations between weekly positive affect and alcohol use: Higher positive affect weeks had greater alcohol consumption, more drinking and heavy drinking days in the same week, and less plans to drink the following week. However, between-person, average positive affect did not predict individual differences in alcohol use. The negative affect—alcohol use association was complex: Within-person, higher negative affect was associated with less drinking days but between-person, with more drinking days; lability in negative affect was associated with greater average alcohol use and more drinking and heavy drinking days. Health promotion efforts for late adolescent and emerging adult students are advised to recognize these paradoxical effects (e.g., promoting dry celebratory campus-events, strategies to manage negative mood swings).

Public Opinion on U.S. Federal and Intergovernmental Issues in 2006: Continuity and Change

A 2006 trend survey found that Americans most often select localgovernment as giving them the most for their money, followedby the federal and state governments. African Americans aremost supportive of the federal government as giving them themost for their money; Hispanics are most supportive of localgovernment. As in many previous years, the local property taxwas viewed as the worst tax, followed by the federal incometax, state sales tax, and state income tax. Americans displayedreduced trust and confidence in the federal government; however,trust in all three spheres of government—federal, state,and local—dropped between 2004 and 2006, possibly reflectiveof the poor response of all governments to Hurricane Katrina.Analysis of surveys since 1972 reveals that there has been along-term decline in the public's support for the federal governmentand a corresponding increase in support of state and especiallylocal governments.     

Issues of Federalism in Response to Terrorism

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, provoked, among other reactions, considerable commentary about the future of American federalism, particularly predictions of administrative centralization. To assess the potential impact of terrorism on U.S. intergovernmental relations and the ways the federal system should respond, members of the American Political Science Association's Section on Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations were surveyed in late 2001. Generally, these federalism scholars believe the September 11 terrorism will have little effect on intergovernmental relations or on the U.S. Supreme Court's state–friendly jurisprudence, and the surge in public trust and confidence in the federal government will be short–lived. The scholars tend to support a highly federalized response to terrorism, but with intergovernmental cooperation. Partisan differences among the scholars on policy options, however, mirror the party differences in Congress and the resurgence of "politics as usual" less than a year after September 11, 2001.     

Public Opinion on Federalism in the United States and Canada in 2002: The Aftermath of Terrorism

This research reports on a public-opinion survey on intergovernmentaland border issues in Canada and the United States conductedin mid-April 2002. In the United States, there was an upsurgein public support for the federal government in 2002 over 2001,and a slight decline in public evaluations of state and localgovernments. Increased support for the federal government wasespecially notable among whites, Republicans, and respondentswith post-undergraduate education-groups that previously registeredlow support for the federal government. Canadians reported lesssatisfaction with all governments in their federal system, lowersupport for their federal government, and much more regionaland partisan division over intergovernmental issues. On internationalborder issues, Americans and Canadians generally agreed thata common border-security policy would be a good idea, thoughCanadians were slightly more likely than Americans to preferease of cross-border trade over improved border security.