Civics must not further polarize America

Many claim that civic education is the solution to an increasingly polarized America. So why do the headlines suggest just the opposite? The contest over AP African American Studies that pits Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis against Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker is only the latest battle in the renewed culture war over history and civics that began with the New York Times’s 1619 Project in 2019 and has continued with fights over critical race theory and culturally responsive teaching.

Even civics reform efforts that claim to be bipartisan, such as the Educating for American Democracy project, generate significant backlash. We need civics to reduce, certainly not exacerbate, our divisions — but where can we start?

In the first place, civics advocates need to have frank conversations with parents and the broader public about what we mean by civics. A recent poll sponsored by my organization, the Jack Miller Center, found widespread agreement among parents that particular content knowledge should have priority. Fully 89 percent said that it was very important that students have a basic understanding of the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and the responsibilities of citizenship before they graduate from high school, including 80 percent of Democrats and more than 73 percent across all racial groups.

The priorities of fellow civics professionals and teachers, however, often differ from what parents expect. The CivXNow Coalition, perhaps the largest coalition of organizations committed to civic education, currently advocates for $1 billion in federal funding for civic education. CivXNow defines a successful civic education by what students do, not what they know. Key goals include making students more likely to vote, discuss politics at home, volunteer, and communicate with elected representatives.

These goals are good — and arguably necessary — but they are incomplete. They are specific on skills and actions but vague on civic knowledge. The result is the appearance, if not the reality, of a partisan agenda intent on fostering political change through student action, rather than preparation for active citizenship grounded in the American tradition of self-government.

This emphasis on skills and actions is echoed by what America’s schools are teaching in the classroom right now. A recent RAND survey of U.S. public school teachers found that only 23 percent of teachers identified promoting knowledge of social, political and civic institutions as among the top three aims of civic education, with mostly skills and actions ranking higher — including critical thinking (68 percent), students’ participation in their community (35 percent) and even promoting respect for and safeguard of the environment (27 percent).

The result is a growing dissonance between parents and professionals over the meaning of civic education. When asked which aspects of civic education should be emphasized, our poll found 70 percent of parents said “teaching students the principles underlying American politics,” as opposed to 23 percent of those who favored “teaching students how to actively promote change in government.” Notably, majorities of all racial groups said teaching principles should have priority, despite the contention by many that “action civics,” an approach that favors students as “changemakers,” is more responsive to people of color.

Glossing over the gap between parents and professionals on civics content undermines the civic mission of our schools. Indeed, our study found that parents have little trust that schools will provide unbiased civic instruction. Seventy-one percent of parents think that their children are not getting an honest picture of our nation’s history in school. Forty-eight percent think that public schools are promoting a politically liberal agenda (more than 40 percent across all racial groups), compared to 14 percent who say schools promote a politically conservative agenda.

Partisans sometimes try to drive a wedge between parents and schools for political gain. We must resist the temptation to turn classrooms into political battlegrounds. Doing so is corrosive to learning and can turn students to cynicism, expressed as either activism or apathy. But leaders should take note: If civics is going to reduce polarization, state officials and civics professionals must promote instruction that our nation’s parents can get behind.

Thomas Kelly is vice president of Civics Initiatives at the Jack Miller Center, a nationwide network of scholars and civics teachers dedicated to passing on the American political tradition.