A Civics Renaissance?

From the Editors | U.S. Civics Education: Real Renaissance or Political Moment? Issue 9 | September 14, 2021

Civics education in the U.S. seems to be getting some long overdue attention. Currently, there are at least 88 bills that have been filed at the state level to enhance civics instruction, as well as a federal bill to provide further funding that is currently languishing in committee. 

Is a long standing civic abscess finally being addressed? This Purple Principle in Print explores this question and some of the many efforts to raise the level of Civics knowledge in these not so United States. 

Americans on Civics: Not Winning Many Gold Medals

Educators we’ve spoken to have confirmed that civics ed, and social studies in general, have taken a back seat to math, science, language arts, and other test-driven subjects in recent decades. Not surprisingly, then, the general lack of civics knowledge among U.S. citizens is woeful.

• According to a report from the Center for American Progress from Summer 2018, only 23% of 8th graders performed at or above proficient on the National Assessment of Educational Progress Exam civics component. Yet only nine states (and D.C.) require yearlong civics education.
• According to a 2016 report from the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, only 26% of Americans could name all three branches of government, down from 38% in 2011, a scant five years before.
• A short, seven-question quiz from Pew in 2018 shows that only about 22% of Americans can answer very basic civics-related questions, such as who casts the deciding vote in a Senate tie.

What Is, and Is Not, Civics? 

Civics is a term often used but with varying interpretations and thus a lack of precision, and some quizzical expressions, around it. 

Brief History of Civics Education

As far back as the founding of the United States, a principal concern was instiling democratic values, such as critical thinking, civility, and toleration in citizens. But public education of all individuals was not conceived of until the 19th century, especially due to the efforts of Horace Mann, as well as the education reformers Henry Barnard and Catherine Beecher during the Common School Movement.

Civics education is, however, largely a 20th century phenomenon. According to Jeffrey Mirel, this 20th century form of civics – to Americanize the children of immigrants – was seen as a beneficial acquisition, rather than a burden. Mirel also notes a stark divide in civics education between the North and South: the South not willing in most cases to adopt the model of Americanization from the North, particularly for Black Americans who were subjected to second-class citizenship in the era of Jim Crow. 

The Cold War saw a shift in emphasis. While there was still a focus on the civic role of everyday Americans, there was an increased focus on the many “-isms” of the day. This meant that more time was spent on learning about ideology, usually through the lens of democracy versus communism, in the form of the US vs. the USSR. But, according to the Wilson Center, not everyone was so fond of the “know your enemy” approach. Disagreement was common when the question pertained to how to teach about the Soviet Union: existential threat, peer competitor, or something else entirely? This was especially pronounced during the era of McCarthy and the (second) Red Scare.  

In the late 1960s and 70s, the assimilationist model of civics education came under attack from various left-leaning groups who saw this as a form of “cultural imperialism.” Evangelicals also joined the fray, lamenting the lack of religious principles (and the teaching of evolution), especially in the 1990s. Thus, civics came under attack from both sides. Unfortunately, in Mirel’s words, “school leaders have ducked controversy by abandoning the American public school’s historic mission to teach students a common culture that citizens may share.” 

One major source of current concern is the relationship of civics education to other educational initiatives under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (and its successor, the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act). According to a report from the Orrin G. Hatch Foundation, social studies generally and civics in particular have been left behind relative to other parts of education, especially STEM. The same report also notes that there is simply a lack of preparation for teachers  to adequately teach civics to America’s students. 

Civics Today

Where Did Civics Go in the First Place? 

There is very little quality tracking data on when and how civics declined in the U.S. But one trend is clear: stagnation since at least 1998, at a low level of proficiency, across the country. There is also a startling trend uncovered by the Annual National Election Survey: over time, more Americans have come to view government as beholden to special interests rather than the good of all. In 2020, 84% of Americans felt that the government was run for these special interests. By contrast, only 29% of Americans felt this way in 1964.  

Would More Civics Ed Create Higher Voter Turnout?

The U.S. consistently has among the lowest voter participation of any industrialized democracy.  But what about at the state level, where civics education requirements vary greatly? Is there a correlation among states with higher or lower voting participation and the extent of civics education? 
The United States Voter Project has data for state election turnout for both primary and general elections (as far back as 1787!). Some states with more substantial civics education (based on AP scores according to the Center for American Progress) include Connecticut, Minnesota, and Virginia. Those whose civic education is lacking (by the same metric) include Mississippi, Florida, and Nevada. Here are their turnouts for the 2018 midterm elections/2020 generals:

The answer is a definitive maybe. A case could be made that civics education correlates with increased voter turnout, but more thorough analysis would be required to make a causal claim. Hopefully, if and when civics education does gain real traction and funding, it will be possible to track the effects of expanded instruction on voter turnout. 

Polarization and Civics

Much contemporary civics education uses a facts-based approach to understanding American government (e.g. three branches of government) which are not subject to much controversy. But when topics such as slavery in the U.S. Founding is discussed, the relevance of these kinds of historical events/interpretations is subject to contemporary polarization. 

Another area where there is some level of disagreement is whether civics should involve hands-on education. Often there are suspicions about which side of the political divide benefits from civic activism; but, there is reason to believe that community service that is not for a particular cause could still be broadly beneficial. 

Highlights & Insights from the Podcast

Civics in the Pipeline

As noted, a number of states are looking to raise their civics game, if each in their own way. Here’s a sampling of those efforts: 

Federal Efforts: Where does funding expansion stand?

The most recent federal effort to expand civics education is a bipartisan bill introduced by Senators Coon (D-CT) and Cornyn (R-TX), called the “Civics Secures Democracy Act.” It has been read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, where it remains. 

According to iCivics, this bill would allocate $585 million each year for five years “to support education in American civics and history.” The bill was also introduced in the U.S. House by Representatives Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Tom Cole (R-OK), and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). 

Section 203 of this bill also includes the entirety of the “USA Civics Act,” a bill introduced in 2019 by Senator John Cornyn (R-TX).  The USA Civics Act was a reauthorization and expansion of a civics grant program representing what would amount to 35% of what the federal government spends on STEM education already. 

Partners in Purple