LINCOLN — Nebraska teens, under a 2019 state law, must clear a civics requirement to graduate. Immigrants must pass a test on civics and U.S. history to gain U.S. citizenship.

Now a bipartisan group of Nebraska state senators wants to write into law that new members of the officially nonpartisan Legislature take a 20-question civics test — and publicly post the scores.

A passing grade would not be required, and individual answers would remain confidential. But the “raw scores” would be listed on the Legislature’s official website and also on the lawmaker’s official public biography.

Results would not affect the ability of any lawmaker to hold or continue to serve in a public role, according to Legislative Bill 1066, which should not “be construed to add to or alter the qualifications for office established in the Constitution of Nebraska.”

The introducer of LB 1066, State Sen. John Fredrickson of Omaha, said the effort was inspired by conservative and progressive constituents alike who have questioned the level of understanding and appreciation lawmakers have of U.S. government and responsibility to steward institutions that protect them.

With the country’s 250th birthday approaching, Fredrickson thought it was a good time for the civics test law. The measure is co-sponsored by lawmakers from diverse political backgrounds: State Sens. Stan Clouse of Kearney, Tanya Storer of Whitman and Paul Strommen of Sidney are Republicans; State Sen. Megan Hunt of Omaha is a progressive independent. Fredrickson is a Democrat.

“We have a very serious job,” Fredrickson said of all 49 state senators. “We create, we amend, and we repeal laws. So ensuring that folks who are in that position are continually educating themselves on our responsibility to uphold the Constitution … felt like an important step to take.”

Fredrickson said he has at times heard colleagues say things like, “Well the governor is the boss.” He recalled a couple of recent situations when the Legislature voted to approve a bill then, following the governor’s veto, certain senators flipped their votes and buried the proposal.

One such occasion came last year when, despite three consecutive bipartisan votes to lift a lifetime ban on public food aid for some Nebraskans with past drug felonies, the . The only change was Gov. Jim Pillen’s veto.

That prompted Fredrickson’s debate remark: “We were elected to lead, not to follow, and certainly not to flinch.”

He reminded colleagues that the Legislature is a separate and coequal branch of government to the executive and judicial arms. Such occasions gave rise to his thought: “How do we refresh our memories of the basic principles of how our country works and how our role as legislators should be exercised.”

Storer said she was encouraged to back a bill she believes should get universal support.

She said that while lawmakers come to the Legislature with different experiences, political backgrounds and home districts that represent rural, urban and suburban neighborhoods, a common ground should be a foundational grasp and appreciation of civics and the country’s road to democracy.

“It’s not a partisan issue. It’s an American issue,” she said. “We don’t know where we’re going if we don’t know where we’ve come from, right?”

Admittedly, not everybody loves test-taking, Storer said. She chuckled and said her palms even got a bit sweaty thinking about the process, though not to the point of doubting its value. She said public posting of raw scores might be a deterrent for some, but underscored that a failed grade won’t get anyone removed from office.

“If anything, it would prompt us all to be more intentional about studying civics and basic principles of government,” Storer said.

Fredrickson said he is unaware of any past efforts to require a civics test of Nebraska lawmakers, and believes the law would be a first for a state. A public hearing will be scheduled for LB 1066.

Exam questions could be pulled from the civics portion of the test administered to naturalization candidates by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security or an equivalent designed by the Nebraska Secretary of State or Nebraska Department of Education.

The Clerk of the Legislature would provide the test, within 90 days of a state senator taking office, that would include 20 randomly selected questions about U.S. history and civics. A lawmaker who doesn’t reach a passing score would be invited, not required, to attend a voluntary civic literacy seminar conducted by the Nebraska State Historical Society or Legislative Research Office.

For Nebraska students, answering questions from the civics portion of the federal citizenship and naturalization test is one of three options Nebraska school boards have to fulfill the state legal requirement aimed at ensuring students are prepared “to be competent and responsible citizens who engage in public debate knowledgeably and in a civil manner.” Other suggested options for students include a project on an important American figure or attendance at a public meeting.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nebraska Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Aaron Sanderford for questions: info@nebraskaexaminer.com.

In reality, we know that civics education requires the cultivation of skills, such as problem-solving, media literacy and negotiation.

Across the United States, leaders worry about the decline of civics education, yet the students who need it most live in a different learning universe. Those of us raised on Schoolhouse Rock learned civics through Saturday morning television cartoons. Generation Alpha and the slightly older Generation Z learn through influencers, social media and curated digital content.

In an era of disinformation, polarization and online outrage, democracy depends not on rote recall but on citizens who think critically, collaborate effectively and disagree civilly.

Our schools need a modern approach to civics education. This century needs Americans who can filter disinformation, engage online without dehumanizing one another and use digital tools to solve problems effectively. The skills have changed, but the goal is the same: cultivating the character required for self-governance. 

In a world where we can say anything instantly, we must teach young people how to respond with moderation, empathy and discretion. The stakes are high, given the potential for enormous reach due to social media and online communication.

The Founders never thought civics education was a spectator sport. Thomas Jefferson argued that self-government required “habit and long training.” Benjamin Franklin warned that the republic would endure only “if you can keep it.” As demonstrated repeatedly in the new Ken Burns film “The American Revolution,” early Americans learned civics by doing it — participating in town halls, volunteering for militias and engaging with public debates — not by memorizing a few facts before a test.

The concept of self-government began with learning how to govern oneself, which required the cultivation of restraint, discipline and reason. In fact, public schools taught students how to debate, deliberate and serve. Civics cultivated character and prepared citizens to shoulder the responsibilities of democracy. The 19th-century McGuffey Readers that taught schoolchildren about individual character might seem antiquated now, but they served a clear purpose by shaping future citizens.

Over time, that vision of civics narrowed. Students learned about democracy and American history, but less about what effective citizenship requires. Teaching the democratic virtues of courage, humility, patience, integrity, respect and resilience got shelved, too.

Taking a multiple-choice test won’t cut it for 21st-century civics. Knowledge about the American system, its history and the founding principles is necessary but not sufficient. Students should learn how to deliberate, disagree respectfully and collaborate. They need to understand how to analyze social media feeds for bias, just as previous generations were taught to scrutinize newsprint. Most importantly, when faced with challenging problems, they must have the skills and confidence to devise reasonable solutions with broad support.

There is reason for hope. Young Americans volunteer and advocate in record numbers, demonstrating that they care deeply about pressing issues. According to Donorbox’s 2025 volunteer statistics, more than half of Generation Z has volunteered at least once in the past year. The challenge is to connect their inclination for engagement with a shared grounding in the vocabulary of rights, responsibilities, and constitutional limits.

A reimagined civics strategy, such as the bipartisan roadmap, can prepare this energized generation for a lifetime of purposeful and effective participation. Created by a diverse group of educators, scholars and practitioners, the framework provides comprehensive resources to guide the creation of new curriculum for civics and history.

In addition to modernizing our approach to civics education, there is also a political problem to confront. Those on the right criticize “action” civics, which uses advocacy or protest to learn about democracy. Those on the left decry “traditionalist” civics, which emphasizes American exceptionalism and blind patriotism. Neither approach is constructive; both are stand-ins for tired ideological battles.

Rethinking civics for the digital age must transcend polarization. It should be neither conservative nor liberal but should cultivate the knowledge, skills and dispositions democracy demands today. Anyone can post a video or write a witty comment, but are students widely taught to do so in a responsible manner that cultivates cooperation, understanding and better solutions?

The answer right now is no.

Linking knowledge to experiential learning is key. Students can do this in a variety of creative ways: creating a podcast about their town’s history, undertaking a local service project benefiting the community, or participating in moderated debates on national issues that respect divergent opinions. An approach that combines traditional learning with nonpartisan, sensible opportunities for community engagement should find support from both political parties.

Civics wasn’t meant to be recited; it was meant to be lived. In an age when participation is easy and responsibility is hard, a civics reboot can prepare the next generation to meet the challenges ahead.

As the United States approaches its 250th birthday, over half of young adults have doubts about the one idea that has defined our nation since its founding – that democracy matters.

This is what happens when schools woefully under-educate our students about our government, our history, our culture. Certainly, the polarization and political violence, inequality and culture wars of the past decade have taken their toll on democracy’s luster, especially on new voters.   

But schools invest between five and fifty cents per student in civics education. By comparison, STEM education receives about $50 a student. This tiny investment in civics has yielded proportional returns: As of 2022,  scored proficient in U.S. History, and 22% scored the same in civics. Finally, about turned out to the polls in 2024, 13 points below the next lowest cohort, millennials.

The solution isn’t additional worksheets and pop quizzes. It’s more lived experience. Enter experiential civics.

Imagine if schools saw preparation for citizenship not just as sets of facts to learn and lessons to endure, but as a complex combination of social and psychological muscles to be developed in the classroom and beyond it.

Much in the same way teachers send a history class to the archives, or a science class to the lab, they ought to push emerging adults, who are also new voters, toward experiences that get them excited about their country, its form of government, and, most of all, the people whom the government serves. And those experiences must inspire empathy, curiosity, and teach the social skills needed for citizenship in a large, diverse democratic republic.

In 2019, I cofounded an organization called the , and we operate one such experience. For the past five summers, our organization has been sending recently graduated high school seniors on free exchanges to American hometowns radically different from their own.

We’ve sent students from Dodge City to Palo Alto; Baltimore to Kilgore, Texas; in all, we’ve sent 1,500 students on over 200 exchanges, and almost to a person, they come home raving about the experience. In short, it’s domestic study abroad, and the experience fosters understanding and friendship across social, cultural, and geographic boundaries. 

One of my favorite examples comes from a student we sent from the Bronx to Gloucester, Massachusetts. When I asked what he thought about the small coastal city, he said he couldn’t believe there were people there. He said, “I thought the world was New York, and then some stuff in Connecticut, and then the rest was just trees.”

Many of our students have never seen a mountain or the ocean or cows or a subway. Some say, with a chuckle, they’re surprised to find people not commuting on horses in Texas. And it’s not their fault. Today’s students are too often subjected to the same attitudes, perspectives, and lifestyles over and over in their schools and at home.

We’ve found most students don’t have negative thoughts of where we’ve sent them so much as no thoughts at all. They’ve not run into people who are different enough from them. As a consequence, those cranial muscles that help them navigate nuance, venture out of their comfort zones and connect with people who might disagree with them are unexercised within too many teens.

Another pair of students I met hardly spoke to one another in school and came from different sides of the political spectrum. After a week hosting travelers from across the country in their hometown of Arvada, Colorado, they found themselves up until two in the morning discussing due process and immigration with new friends from Maine and Alaska. And they all walked away from the conversation smiling.

Americans don’t know one another well enough. A by the Public Religion Research Institute found 75% of white Americans don’t have a friend who’s not white, and in 2022, AgriPulse reported 40% of Americans have never even met a farmer. Meanwhile, of new marriages cross the political divide, making a literal union between a Democrat and Republican the taboo relationship of the day.

Relationships that cut across lines of difference, known as bridged social capital, are valuable for the civic well-being of our society. They allow people to see the humanity, dynamism, and honest, unfiltered characteristics of “the other.” And that kind of perspective can defuse the partisan, prejudice-infused rhetoric heard too often in the news, on social media, and in the halls of government.

These social skills and perspectives are critical for an emerging adult, and this moral understanding fuels engaged and empathetic citizenship. Volunteering, productive debate, voting, understanding context, the discernment of reliable information, and an ability to think on multiple sides of an issue, are other critical areas in need of nurturing.

Certainly, any strong civic education starts with a full picture of our nation’s double-voiced history, and a deep examination of the design and inner workings of our government. This is the core of civics. From to to the, organizations doing this kind of work exist and are eager to expand. Reach out.

It’s no wonder too many of today’s high school seniors are at best apathetic about democracy. But anyone can feel the tingle of that highest form of patriotism while standing inside the Lincoln Memorial, or gazing west from the St. Louis Arch or sharing a campfire with new friends in Rocky Mountain National Park. As schools reimagine how to prepare this next generation for engaged citizenship, let’s start by giving students these types of experiences, experiences that inspire civic awe.

If we as a nation want young Americans to believe in democracy, we must let them live it. Let’s make experiential civics as common as algebra, so that this next generation, and every one after it, is ready to carry forward this nation’s promise.

In recent years, and have made clear that they are . They’re protesting the collective status quo of partisanship, perpetual plutocracy and the unchecked disconnect of our gerontocratic leaders. As they come of age in a moment of extraordinary tension, their patience for traditional civic engagement is coming to an end.

To avoid this we must welcome young people into the socio-political fray by lowering voting ages, redesigning civic education to combat misinformation and radical politics, and extending opportunities for youth to authentically engage at the municipal level.  

It is a fallacy to believe civic consciousness starts at age 18. Regardless of how they communicate it, 14- to 17-year-olds are capable of contributing to elections, as well as to the design of policy and practice. This is particularly true of marginalized youth who offer a unique vantage point on some of our most prominent social issues.

The perspectives of these young people – – are incredibly valuable, particularly at a time when they’re grappling with an onslaught of threats to their , futures – each of which carry tangible ramifications. 

It’s these perspectives that must be nurtured to ensure the longevity of our civic system, and secure the future of equitable and empathetic social progress. And there’s plenty of evidence that proves we’d be right to trust the younger generation’s voices.

In in Iowa. YPAR trains young people to use research methods to inform and influence local policy). In Des Moines, in the midst of a national racial reckoning, a cohort of students saw an opportunity to leverage the that school resource officers (SROs) are more likely to charge students of color with crimes, and threaten their well-being and academic performance. The cohort successfully recommended the school board remove SROs from schools and reallocate those monies to fund counselors. The following year, in the number of students of color referred to the juvenile justice system. 

Along with other across the state, some making it to the House floor, this participatory audit in Iowa displayed the penchant young people have for social analysis and policy, and how their perspectives can be used to effectively influence local policies.

Don’t mistake these Iowan kids as exceptions. What the YPAR audit captured was the capacity and civic agency of the typical “kid.” It reflects the developmental science that tells us to develop social and ethical perspectives that can solve societal issues within ethical and moral parameters. 

It’s the science, research, and results from similar and that have inspired and bolstered my trust in young people — and why I believe we must redefine civics education and develop opportunities for civic participation for young people beginning at age 14. It is also why I am a strong proponent of lowering the voting age for municipal elections to 16 () – which is on voter turnout, engagement and sustained civic involvement.

This is why the election and climate protests on campuses in recent years have felt different. It’s this shift in tone that signals that our .

If this is the case, a great deal is at risk. Without legitimate outlets for civic engagement that are , authentically practiced with , or validated through like YPAR, young people may well resort to and alternatives for affecting change. With our democracy already in a fragile state, it is a necessity to reconsider what civic engagement looks like, and who has access to it.

As this young demographic quickly becomes , it seems accepting them into the civic discourse is the only recourse we have left.�� 

Redesigning civic education, developing participatory programs, and lowering voting ages is particularly complicated in the current political climate. 

We must avoid dumping kids into a pool of supercharged partisan rhetoric and vitriol. We need to teach pragmatism and civility. We need safe conditions for kids to consider hard data that reflects lived truths and promotes the taking of accountability and responsibility. We need discourse and dialogue. But, above all, we, the adults, must simply hear them. 

Large cultural shifts don’t take place in the vacuum of policy houses or nonprofits. They take place in the collective consciousness, and it requires humility, empathy, acceptance and courage from us all. Let’s trust the kids to help get us there. 

These findings should serve as a wake-up call for parents and educators across the country.

High schools today rightly emphasize preparing students for college and careers. But if that is all we aim for, we risk graduating young adults who are equipped to earn a living yet ill equipped to live together in a free and pluralistic society. To safeguard our democratic inheritance, students must also learn how to listen closely and disagree well. Civil discussion must hold as much importance in the school day as math, reading and history. The health of our republic depends on it.

Public education in the United States was to cultivate citizens who could read, reason, vote and make informed decisions. In the 20th century, however, the focus of K-12 education shifted towards practical skills and workforce readiness. The civic mission of schools waned. 

Of course, schools must serve multiple purposes. They are charged with job preparation, socialization, character development, emotional resilience and teaching basic life skills, all of which are essential elements of a free and flourishing society. But as civil habits continue to erode in our polarized, outraged public square, a renewed investment in respectful discourse is more urgent than ever. 

Today, most government and civics courses the structural elements of our democracy: branches of government, constitutional texts, founding documents and voting rules. Participating in the democratic process no doubt depends on fluency in these operations. However, these courses too often neglect the skills that allow students to take part meaningfully in public life. They may graduate knowing how government works, yet remain unprepared to listen actively, concede a point or manage disagreement in good faith. 

There are practical steps teachers can take to help students become better conversationalists and more thoughtful citizens. 

A first step is to promote student autonomy and empowerment by inviting them into the classroom as decision makers. A recent study in the Journal of School Health that students who are given the chance to make decisions regarding their learning and schoolwork are “more engaged in school, less disruptive in class, and report a stronger sense of belonging and connectedness to their school and peers. 

For example, students can be invited to establish ground rules for discussion. These should be created collaboratively with students so they reflect shared ownership and mutual respect. Potential rules might include not interrupting others, using credible evidence to support ideas, and agreeing to revisit the norms regularly. When students help craft the rules, they are more likely to follow them and feel invested in the community they help shape.

This is a foundational principle of democracy. People are far more likely to obey laws and uphold community standards when they themselves had a hand in creating them. They are more in a participatory government, where they feel they have an influence on the selection of public projects. The same is true in the classroom. 

Another crucial step is teaching students how to listen actively. Real dialogue cannot exist without real listening. Educators can model and encourage skills such as paragraphing and asking clarifying questions. One method known as requires students to restate a peer’s point before offering their own response. This approach enforces careful listening and often leads students to temper the intensity of their rebuttals, building empathy in the process. 

Teachers might also try an activity called in which students move to different sides of the room based on their views, then switch sides and defend the other position. This physical movement keeps students engaged, while the act of arguing the opposing view builds intellectual humility.

Incorporating open-ended questions into lessons is another powerful strategy that by reducing their fear of failure and judgement. It reframes the objective of the lesson from being “right” to being “thoughtful.” Additionally, students can benefit from being asked not only what they believe, but why someone might see things differently. While this kind of exercise is common in English classes, it is often overlooked in science and math. Yet even in quantitative subjects, students can wrestle with big ideas. They can discuss how scientific knowledge evolves, learning that many once-settled theories were later revised or overturned. This fosters a deeper understanding of uncertainty and change.  

Ethical questions also offer rich ground for discussion. Should extinct species be brought back through genetic engineering? What scientific risks are worth taking, whether in medicine, energy or artificial intelligence? These are not just scientific inquiries but moral ones, and students learn not just answers, but critical civility skills when they are asked to weigh competing values with care.

Perhaps most important of all, teachers must model intellectual humility. At the end of the day, students mirror the behavior of their teachers, just as they do with their parents or siblings. A 2024 Developmental Psychology paper when teachers exhibit intellectual humility, it boosts students’ motivation and engagement in learning. When teachers admit uncertainty, change their minds, or acknowledge complexity, they send a powerful message that true strength lies not in always being right, but in being willing to learn. 

Of course, many teachers already incorporate these strategies in their classrooms. The challenge now is to move beyond scattered examples and toward a cultural shift in which civil discourse becomes a consistent, integrated part of every student’s education. 

A growing trust deficit in public education suggests falling confidence from parents. In 1975, of Americans expressed trust in K-12 schools. By 2022, the number had dropped to just 28%. Public schools have found themselves embroiled in the culture war, often accused of partisanship, a perception that has eroded trust.

Restoring trust will not come from dictating what students should think, but from teaching them how to think with clarity and compassion. A renewed emphasis on civil discourse is not about avoiding conflict; it is about learning how to handle it with integrity and care. 

Civility is not weakness or passive submission. It is not silence or surrender. It is an active choice to engage, converse, listen, debate, persuade and allow oneself to be challenged. It reflects a deep desire not only to understand our neighbors but to stand up for them when it matters most.

It’s time for K-12 education to embrace this essential work. Our young men, and our democracy, depend on it.

While a majority agree on democracy’s importance, many feel unsure how to effectively participate in it or preserve it. For some, the frustration has taken a concerning turn: 11% said political violence is sometimes necessary to achieve progress. 

And while the poll’s creators expected to find significant variance based on race, gender and location — rural versus urban, for example — other factors, including socioeconomic status and access to civics education, played a major role in shaping young peoples’ beliefs. 

For example, those who received less support for their civic development “are less committed to a democracy that they may not feel prepared to participate in or feel they are a part of,” the report notes. 

“They’re not completely disaffected,” said research specialist Deborah Apau of Gen Z. “The problem is that while they do believe in democracy, they don’t feel that democracy as they experience it today is delivering for them. It’s that disconnection that’s really causing the issue.”

The poll was conducted between Nov. 14-26, 2024, just after a historically contentious presidential election in which the youth vote . The results were released earlier this month by the Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University and Protect Democracy, a nonprofit “dedicated to defeating the authoritarian threat, building more resilient democratic institutions, and protecting our freedom.” The polling firm Ipsos collected the data.

The findings might help explain Donald Trump’s popularity among young voters in his third run: nearly half under 30 supported the Republican nominee, , a survey of more than 120,000 voters. While he had massive appeal for young white men, he also fared well with young Latino men, who split their vote between Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris.��

The CIRCLE and Protect Democracy poll, which measured Gen Z’s beliefs and perspectives on democracy, civil rights and political violence, along with their support for bipartisan cooperation and feelings toward opposing political groups, revealed that young people crave bipartisanship and compromise.

Nearly 4 out of 5 say leaders of opposing parties should work together and 65% believe people with deeply opposing political views can find common ground. Likewise, only 17% agree that those who hold political opinions different from their own are “wrong.” 

Nearly three quarters of its 1,286 respondents said elected leaders should not be able to go above the law. The poll’s findings are landing at a time when many see the country as on the verge of a constitutional crisis, with Trump and at least one federal court judge finding grounds last week .

In an effort to engage young people, the organizations recommend they be brought into the democratic process, that the nation invest in civic learning, and that those wishing for Gen Z to boost their participation acknowledge their diversity and create opportunities for collaboration and collective action that leverages their strengths.

The poll notes that young people’s lives were shaped by economic instability, history-making political shifts, a proliferation of school shootings, the rise of social media and COVID. A full 81% of respondents acknowledged the value and meaning of free and fair elections.

The survey found, too, that 63% had a “passive appreciation” of democracy, meaning they trust government institutions, have a high regard for democratic principles, and reject authoritarianism and political violence. But, the study’s authors note, their satisfaction and trust may be leading to complacency as this group generally does not take political action outside of voting.

Thirty-one percent had a “dismissive detachment” from democracy: They didn’t express through the survey that they value core democratic principles and processes. They have low confidence in the system as it is working now and demonstrate higher support for authoritarian governance compared to their peers in other categories. 

Pollsters note this group has “the lowest levels of media literacy, suggesting that they are often consuming political information without the ability or willingness to confirm its source, truthfulness, or intent.” They also reported little confidence in their ability to be effective political actors.

Seven percent of Gen Z participants had a “hostile dissatisfaction” with democracy. While they value its core principles, they are “highly displeased” with it as they are experiencing it today, authors note. 

Despite — or perhaps because of — their frustration, they are the most politically active within this age group and express the highest support for political violence. The report notes, too, they are highly polarized “and their frustrations with the current system run so deep that they are more willing to consider extreme measures to achieve political goals.”

They are by far the most likely to participate in other forms of civic action like volunteering or taking on leadership roles and are willing to fight for the democracy they want. The report notes they score highest of all in media literacy, “which suggests they may be more informed about the state of democracy than some of their peers.” 

They are also more ideologically liberal than those in the other two groups and are more likely to be queer compared to the passive appreciation cohort.

“As knowledgeable actors with a respect for democratic values and a willingness to actively participate through both traditional and non-traditional forms of civic action, these youth who feel a hostile dissatisfaction with our democracy are also a powerful force for reshaping it,” the report observes. 

Sara Suzuki, senior researcher at CIRCLE, was surprised by the size of the first group defined by its “passive appreciation.” While she’s concerned about their relative inaction, she sees opportunity for them “to do something about the problems they see instead of sort of letting it happen.”

Apau, of Protect Democracy, said even the group that supports violence as a means of change still believes in democratic ideals — including its ability to function well.  

“They feel they’ve exhausted their options in terms of participating in things like voting and protests and they’re not able to secure the responses that they want,” she said.

Apau said it’s important to understand Gen Z and give them the tools they need, “so they’re resourced, they have the knowledge they need to move throughout the world later in life and in adulthood — and understand how systems work.”

The recent turbulence in government — including of federal agencies, with immediate public impact and shifts in longstanding policies — offers a crucial opportunity. Rather than disengage in frustration, teachers and education leaders should seize this moment to deepen civic literacy, ensure that communities understand how government functions and empower citizens to be active participants in self-governance. With headlines dominated by government upheaval, now is the time to turn confusion into curiosity and curiosity into community involvement. The more people understand the roles of the three branches of government, the function of federal and state agencies and their own rights, the better equipped they are to engage as citizens.

Civics education is most effective when state and local officials, both elected and appointed, are open to input, feedback and participation by constituents, allowing students to see firsthand how citizen engagement leads to real outcomes. Nationally, state and local governments employed approximately, an increase from 19.2 million in 2022. This demonstrates that the vast majority of government operations occur at the state and local levels, not in Washington, D.C. The teachers in public schools, the sanitation workers who keep streets clean, the public health officials who guide communities through crises all are part of local governance. When young people see how these systems work, they realize government is not an abstract institution; it’s the infrastructure of daily life.

, the education nonprofit organization I lead, has long worked to engage students in community-based civic learning. Through research and projects that address real issues, students interact with elected officials and government agencies at the city and state levels, building critical problem-solving skills while making a tangible impact. For example, a group of high school students from Urban Assembly Institute for Math and Science for Young Women in Brooklyn, New York, used community-based civics to . They launched a project to improve police-student relationships through open dialogue and policy recommendations, demonstrating how civic learning can lead to real change. More than just casting a ballot, participating in self-government involves talking to neighbors about issues, organizing with peers and attending school board or town council meetings. The confidence students gain in these settings gets put to use in job interviews, workplace conversations and, ultimately, in boardrooms.

These actions also cultivate skills that translate across all areas of life, from public speaking to teamwork and collaboration. They are the foundation of an engaged society and a functioning democracy.

The stakes of neglecting a robust civics education are high, risking a more polarized society if people are unable to learn how to communicate across lines of difference, listen deeply, persuade effectively and reach consensus on solutions. The consequences also include erosion of everyday skills that Americans need to function in the workplace and, more globally, in the marketplace. These abilities ought not to be mere add-ons to secondary school curriculums. 

As the nation navigates these uncertain times, civic literacy must become mainstream and hands-on — something that is as fundamental to education as learning in a science lab. American democracy is a tapestry woven from generations of participation and action. This is a moment to add to it, not let it unravel. The next generation of leaders needs the tools and skills to repair that fraying fabric. That means schools, policymakers and communities must prioritize experiential learning, ensuring that students engage in civic participation before they reach voting age. 

Educators have long understood that the best way to prepare students for careers in science and medicine is through labs and hands-on experiments, not just by reading a textbook. The same is true for civics. If this country wants an engaged, informed citizenry, schools and government alike must provide young people (and adults) with opportunities to practice democracy in real time. Now is not the time to tune out. It’s time to lean in, learn more and take action.

The recent turbulence in government — including of federal agencies, with immediate public impact and shifts in longstanding policies — offers a crucial opportunity. Rather than disengage in frustration, teachers and education leaders should seize this moment to deepen civic literacy, ensure that communities understand how government functions and empower citizens to be active participants in self-governance. With headlines dominated by government upheaval, now is the time to turn confusion into curiosity and curiosity into community involvement. The more people understand the roles of the three branches of government, the function of federal and state agencies and their own rights, the better equipped they are to engage as citizens

Civics education is most effective when state and local officials, both elected and appointed, are open to input, feedback and participation by constituents, allowing students to see firsthand how citizen engagement leads to real outcomes. Nationally, state and local governments employed approximately, an increase from 19.2 million in 2022. This demonstrates that the vast majority of government operations occur at the state and local levels, not in Washington, D.C. The teachers in public schools, the sanitation workers who keep streets clean, the public health officials who guide communities through crises all are part of local governance. When young people see how these systems work, they realize government is not an abstract institution; it’s the infrastructure of daily life.

, the education nonprofit organization I lead, has long worked to engage students in community-based civic learning. Through research and projects that address real issues, students interact with elected officials and government agencies at the city and state levels, building critical problem-solving skills while making a tangible impact. For example, a group of high school students from Urban Assembly Institute for Math and Science for Young Women in Brooklyn, New York, used community-based civics to . They launched a project to improve police-student relationships through open dialogue and policy recommendations, demonstrating how civic learning can lead to real change. More than just casting a ballot, participating in self-government involves talking to neighbors about issues, organizing with peers and attending school board or town council meetings. The confidence students gain in these settings gets put to use in job interviews, workplace conversations and, ultimately, in boardrooms.

These actions also cultivate skills that translate across all areas of life, from public speaking to teamwork and collaboration. They are the foundation of an engaged society and a functioning democracy.

The stakes of neglecting a robust civics education are high, risking a more polarized society if people are unable to learn how to communicate across lines of difference, listen deeply, persuade effectively and reach consensus on solutions. The consequences also include erosion of everyday skills that Americans need to function in the workplace and, more globally, in the marketplace. These abilities ought not to be mere add-ons to secondary school curriculums. 

As the nation navigates these uncertain times, civic literacy must become mainstream and hands-on — something that is as fundamental to education as learning in a science lab. American democracy is a tapestry woven from generations of participation and action. This is a moment to add to it, not let it unravel. The next generation of leaders needs the tools and skills to repair that fraying fabric. That means schools, policymakers and communities must prioritize experiential learning, ensuring that students engage in civic participation before they reach voting age. 

Educators have long understood that the best way to prepare students for careers in science and medicine is through labs and hands-on experiments, not just by reading a textbook. The same is true for civics. If this country wants an engaged, informed citizenry, schools and government alike must provide young people (and adults) with opportunities to practice democracy in real time. Now is not the time to tune out. It’s time to lean in, learn more and take action.

Students attending South Dakota public universities may soon face a civics proficiency requirement to graduate.

Students will take three credits worth of civics education — either new classes created to meet the requirement or a general education class already in place that meets the standard. Students will not have to take more credits to graduate, said Shuree Mortenson, spokeswoman for the system.

“The student will be able to select from a list of courses that have been deemed as fulfilling that civics proficiency,” Mortenson said.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

The South Dakota Board of Regents held its first reading of the general education during its Thursday meeting at Black Hills State University in Spearfish. The policy will have its second reading in April and could become effective for new and transfer students in fall 2025, if approved.

“This requirement reflects our commitment to fostering informed and responsible citizens ready to meet the challenges of today’s society,” Executive Director Nathan Lukkes said in a news release.

The change comes amid a renewed focus on in the state. The South Dakota Department of Education will implement in 2025. The Legislature approved nearly $1 million this year to create a at Black Hills State to help prepare civics programming and curriculum statewide.

House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, an advocate for more civics education, said he’s hopeful and enthusiastic about the regents’ change.

“The next generation in our universities will be leading our country one day,” he said. “Whatever major they have, they need to be able to take the reins of government.”

Civics proficiency will be defined as a student’s understanding of civic knowledge, values and skills, “enabling them to actively participate in civic life as informed and responsible citizens.”

The Board of Regents said key learning outcomes for the new requirement include:

• Civic knowledge: understanding the American political system, including foundational concepts such as the Constitutional framework, participatory democracy and the evolution of institutions.
• Civic values: articulating “core principles” of democracy, justice and equality, and applying them to modern and historic situations.
• Civic skills: communicating viewpoints on political issues, engaging in civil discourse and analyzing the impact of participation on democratic processes.

“The pendulum is moving in the right direction,” Odenbach said. “We’ll keep an eye on it. We’ll see if it’s enough.”

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Seth Tupper for questions: info@southdakotasearchlight.com.

While Americans of voting age struggle to navigate the political landscape, educators, parents and community leaders must also attend to the needs of the next generation. Today’s K-12 students will be tomorrow’s voters, legislators and civic leaders, and teachers play an essential role in helping them develop the knowledge, skills and attitudes they will need to fulfill their civic responsibilities.

The role of social studies teachers in fostering civic learning is obvious, but educators in all subjects can contribute to building a more informed and responsible citizenry. Science teachers, for instance, can help students about climate change, vaccines, even Vitamin C. Math teachers can provide strategies for the accurate interpretation of statistics or charts. From the earliest grades, teachers are responsible for helping students learn to interact constructively with their peers, be open to ideas that might differ from their own and apply a critical lens to information they receive. This all directly relates to civic learning and engagement.

At the same time, educators face challenges associated with cultivating responsible citizens, including the increasing politicization of school curricula. In a recent Education Week of principals, nearly a third cited the political, controversial nature of civics as a barrier to teaching it. In Wisconsin, educators increasing political pressures and restrictions on teaching about elections. Moreover, opportunities for high-quality civic learning are deeply , with young people in marginalized communities lacking access to experiences that promote civic readiness. These disparities almost certainly contribute to differences in performance on of civic learning. 

Our team at the American Institutes for Research wanted to understand educators’ opinions about schools’ responsibilities for supporting students’ civic learning and the conditions that might influence their teaching in this area. In late 2022, when schools were confronting ongoing challenges such as COVID-19, systemic racism and the role of social media, we a nationally representative sample of K-12 public school teachers in all subject areas about their views on civics education. 

More than 80% of respondents said it was very important or essential for schools to help students develop civics-related knowledge, skills and attitudes, including a commitment to democracy and an ability to engage effectively in civic life. For the most part, these data

points were consistent across subjects, grade levels and geographical locations, even on complicated topics such as the lasting impact of slavery.

These results indicate that most teachers are committed to fostering civics learning. They

also point to several actions that policymakers and education leaders could take to

help advance schools’ civics goals:

• Offer better professional learning. Although 84% of teachers said they feel it is very important or essential for schools to promote a commitment to democracy, only half reported being very or extremely confident in their ability to teach this topic. Sixty percent of respondents agreed that they needed more professional learning in this area.
  
• Provide guidance on navigating restrictions on civics-related instruction. About 30% of respondents said they had received directives from district or school leadership to limit discussions about political or social issues. By comparison, 70% cited pressure to show progress on standardized tests in other subjects as a significant barrier to teaching civics.
  
• Communicate more clearly about state standards. Academic standards can communicate states’ goals and encourage instruction aligned with those goals — but only if teachers are aware of them. Although has standards related to civics, 47% of surveyed teachers reported not knowing whether their own states had them. State and district leaders should help teachers of all subjects understand and implement standards related to civic learning.

The results from our survey make it clear that teachers nationwide believe schools should foster students’ civic development, but that they need additional support to do this effectively. It is in the interest of all Americans to help ensure that educators have the resources, guidance and autonomy they will need to fulfill this critical responsibility. Our findings add to a growing body of research that suggests a need for standards, assessment systems, professional learning and instructional guidance that help teachers of all grade levels and subjects integrate civic content into their instruction in ways that are nonpartisan and grounded in evidence. 

Misinformation and disinformation will continue to threaten political and civic engagement, but by supporting teachers today, policymakers and education leaders can help them ensure that tomorrow’s voters can handle it.

Alaska students may be required to pass a civics test or take a civics course to graduate from high school if a new proposal becomes law.

would significantly boost the state’s investment in civics education, from an updated curriculum to a dedicated statewide civics education commission.

Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, proposed the updates in an effort to increase civic engagement and understanding of democracy among the state’s youth.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“There’s been a quiet epidemic, I think, in this country over the years — a sort of apathy and actually division,” said Stevens, a retired history professor. “For decades, we have focused on other issues, other than civics education, and certainly those have all been good issues. Math, science, reading, writing: All of those are important. But we’ve done that at the expense of social studies.”

The Senate passed the bill last May, sending it to the House.

On the measure’s first hearing in the House Education Committee, Stevens pointed out that preparation for active citizenship is a foundational principle of public education. He said strong policy is needed to show students that preparation for civic engagement is as important as preparation for college and career.

The bill would require the state’s Board of Education and Early Development to develop and maintain a statewide civics curriculum based on the federal naturalization exam immigrants must take to become citizens. Students would have to take a semester of civics or pass an exam to graduate high school.

The bill stipulates that, in addition to including information on how the United States and Alaska governments work, the curriculum must also include systems of government used by Alaska Native people.

John Pugh, a former University of Alaska Southeast chancellor, former Department of Health and Social Services commissioner and Air Force veteran, said he supports the bill because his personal and professional experience show how important it is for citizens to engage with their civic responsibilities.

“Over the years in the university, there’s strong research showing that individuals who do have this knowledge or take coursework in political science and government — that they do engage more than others who do not,” he said.

The upgrades would come at a cost, including the addition of a dedicated social studies content specialist and Alaska Civics Education Commission coordinator within the education department, as well as travel costs for the civics commission to meet.

Rep. Andi Story, D-Juneau, wanted to know why the bill does not call for additional money for school districts to pay staff to teach civics courses.

Stevens said the coursework in civics should be considered part of basic education.

“We’re giving billions to education,” he said. “We can expect our departments, our school districts, our teachers to provide basic education, which is citizenship. So I think that’s just a responsibility of the department of education and a responsibility of the budget we give to them.”

Co-chair Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River, mentioned that Sen. Click Bishop, R-Fairbanks, took the proposed civics test and got a perfect score. She said the bill will be heard again in the House Education Committee for amendments and public testimony. It has not yet been scheduled.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alaska Beacon maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Andrew Kitchenman for questions: info@alaskabeacon.com. Follow Alaska Beacon on and .

A new state civics textbook is one step closer to reaching the desks of New Hampshire students after the Senate Finance Committee approved a budget provision of $1 million last week for its creation.

The provision would fund the Commission on New Hampshire Civics, which would contract with outside experts to develop the textbook content. The initiative was initially introduced by Gov. Chris Sununu in February as part of his proposed budget and is one of two efforts the legislature has made to bolster civics education this year. In May, the House passed a bill which could expand civics education to K-8 classrooms.

New Hampshire Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut said during a Senate Finance Committee meeting that the funding would allow the commission to update civics materials for a new generation of students.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“Students today are used to engaging in video content, multimedia content,” he said. “So what will happen is we’ll take the rich content from our history and be able to bring it into a pedagogy that will be more effective in our current environment.”

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, a Manchester Democrat and former public high school teacher, was skeptical regarding the necessity of the funding. He quipped that he would even advise on new materials for free if the Senate scrapped the provision.

“I just don’t believe we need to spend a million dollars to get a new book,” he said. “We can save a million dollars – a million dollars we can spend someplace else.”

D’Allesandro suggested the work of non-profit already adequately supports civics education with free classroom materials. The nonpartisan organization leads programs for educators and students, as well as providing free civics curriculum resources.

However, it was a NH Civics trustee, former state Supreme Court justice and congressman Chuck Douglas, who helped the budget amendment move forward.

“[Chuck Douglas] approached me maybe three weeks ago and said that if we funded it for a million dollars we would be able to create a new civics textbook,” said Senate President and Wolfeboro Republican Jeb Bradley during the Senate Finance Committee meeting.

In , Douglas expressed concern over U.S. Department of Education data released earlier this month that placed eighth grade U.S. history and civics scores at record lows.

Maria Painchaud, interim executive director of NH Civics, agreed that more priority must be given to civics education. She described the cause of its decline as complex, but highlighted the unintended consequences of the No Child Left Behind Act. Painchaud sees the act as having pressured teachers to ‘teach to the test,’ which assesses students’ knowledge in English and math.

“Something had to go,” she said. “So any extra focus that was put on what was perceived as non-core, got the backseat, and now we’re experiencing… the pitfall of that decision.”

NH Civics has played a significant role in greater engagement by the Legislature on civics education. The non-profit advocated for , which passed the Legislature in early May. The bill, which is heading to Gov. Chris Sununu’s desk, would make changes to the state’s civics education, outlining requirements for both public and nonpublic schools.

The bill requires civics education for New Hampshire students beginning in elementary school, and continuing through middle and high school. Previously, civics education requirements only applied to high school students. The bill defines civics as nonpartisan educational programming that covers civic knowledge of the state and national government, understanding of founding documents, and the acquisition of analytical skills.

Under SB 216, high school graduation requirements would remain the same: a half-year of instruction in civics and a full year of instruction in history and government. Students would also need to obtain a passing grade on a competency exam developed by their institution and a grade of 70 percent or better on the 128-question naturalization examination developed in 2020 by United States Citizen and Immigration Services.

If the bill is signed, schools will be expected to meet the new curriculum requirements by fall of 2024 with no additional funding from the state.

“For some teachers, the first reaction is okay, how am I going to fit this in?” Painchaud said.

She emphasized that as a proponent of the bill, NH Civics has committed to providing free and over the next year to ease the transition process.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com. Follow New Hampshire Bulletin on and .

And so it was recently that seven jurists found themselves on the auditorium stage in a midcentury brick school a few blocks outside Minneapolis, hearing a desegregation case that could have tectonic ramifications — including for Richfield High School. 

The question at hand: The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board decision declared de jure — intentional, state-sanctioned — segregation to be unconstitutional. But what about de facto segregation, which in Cruz-Guzman v. State of Minnesota focuses on schools that are nearly entirely single-race because families of color have sought welcoming places for their children?

And what about places like Richfield, where Associate Justice Paul Thissen’s mother once taught? While the neighborhood was once home mostly to working-class whites, today, the school’s enrollment is 75% students of color and 65% low-income.

If the plaintiffs win, Richfield will have to enroll a different student body, Thissen said in posing a question to one of the lawyers arguing before him: “But there’s no other high school to go to in this district. What are they supposed to do?” 

In the eight years since it was filed, Cruz-Guzman v. State of Minnesota has been the subject of a long, stalled mediation, two trips to an appellate court and, now, two trips to state Supreme Court. It’s nowhere near ready for trial.

Sitting alongside a Who’s Who of state officials, some 600 students watched silently throughout the hour-long hearing. It was a fast-paced drama, as the justices interrupted attorneys with pragmatic questions about desired outcomes and intellectual puzzles about the meaning of the state Constitution’s education clause.

If the debate among the attorneys was intense and seemingly irreconcilable, the students who lined up to question the justices after the hearing were equal parts hilarious and prescient. 

“My question is for this lady in pink — gorgeous, by the way,” said Niya Briggs, the first teen at the mic, gesturing at Associate Justice Natalie Hudson and her vivid, two-tone jacket: “How do you guys get into this sort of thing?”

Hudson’s response: Go to law school, get a liberal arts education and make sure to take classes that will teach you to write. 

A long line formed while she was answering. 

What do you do when the language in the Constitution doesn’t directly address the arguments before you? Or if you do not personally agree with it?

Do you have a judicial philosophy, such as being a constructivist? 

Do you take into account the changing values of younger generations?

Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea had cautioned the students that the judges couldn’t take questions about the case being heard that day, but one asked anyhow, explaining that she and her friends were confused. As Gildea demurred, it was easy to imagine their confusion. 

The state Constitution’s — the actual words are “general and uniform,” a phrase that is often described as an adequacy clause — lies at the heart of the case. The plaintiffs are several Minneapolis and St. Paul families who want the justices to decide the case in their favor before it goes to trial by agreeing that racially imbalanced schools are . 

During the oral arguments, the state’s attorneys countered that schools and districts determine the quality of the education their students receive; nothing in the state Constitution or legal precedents requires a racial balance.

Several charter schools are participating in the case as intervenors because the remedy the plaintiffs seek could force them to enroll a cross-section of students, rather than taking all comers — regardless of their racial or socioeconomic background. This, they say, would devastate a number of small, culturally affirming schools where a majority of students are of a single race or ethnicity and are flourishing. 

What Brown v. Board outlawed, their attorneys argue, is different from the current situation. The 1954 decision ruled that barring students of color from the same schools as white children violated the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

It’s not segregation, lawyers for the charter schools argued, when a family chooses a school for its children. Minnesota charter schools are required to admit students by lottery when there are more applicants than seats, so a school can’t exclude anyone based on race, class or ability. 

The justices seemed unconvinced that the plaintiffs had established a relationship between integration and an adequate education. One asked repeatedly whether the case should be sent back to the trial court so that question might be probed in front of a jury.

Among the last questions posed by the students were a couple suggesting that, complicated though the proceedings were, the kids were listening: 

When both sides make good arguments, how do you decide? 

How can someone my age get involved?

Posted this morning, results from last year’s administration of the nationally representative test — sometimes referred to as the “Nation’s Report Card” — showed history scores dropping by an average of five points on a 500-point scale. Average civics scores fell by two points on a 300-point scale, the first-ever decline in the 25-year history of the test. After modest increases over the last few decades, performance in both subjects has fallen back to levels measured in the 1990s, when the subjects were first tested. 

Taken together, the scores provide only the latest evidence of declining U.S. academic performance across a range of disciplines. Just last fall, the release of math and English scores showed severe damage inflicted during the pandemic, with years’ worth of academic growth similarly erased or massively reduced.

Peggy Carr, commissioner of the National Center for Education Statistics, told reporters that the unprecedented reversal in civics was “alarming,” though not of the same magnitude as last year’s release. More disquieting were the history results, she added, which began their slide nearly a decade ago and are now nine points lower than in the 2014 iteration of NAEP. 

“For U.S. history, I was very, very concerned,” Carr said. “It’s a decline that started in 2014, long before we even thought about COVID. This is a decline that’s been [going] down for a while.”

Beyond the headline figures, the test also measured lower performance across all four of the sub-themes included on the NAEP U.S. history test, including changes in American democracy (minus-five points), interactions of peoples and cultures (minus-five), economic and technological development (minus-five), and America’s evolving role in the world (minus-three).

Equally noteworthy, Carr observed, was a phenomenon that has been consistent across multiple rounds of NAEP stretching back over the better part of a decade: Scores for the most successful test takers (those at 90th percentile in U.S. history and both the 75th and 90th percentile in civics) are statistically unchanged since 2018, while relatively lower-performing students did significantly worse.

Those diverging trends were reflected in the numbers of participants scoring at NAEP’s different achievement thresholds. The percentage of eighth graders scoring below NAEP’s lowest benchmark of “basic” in U.S. history (defined as only partial mastery of the requisite skills and knowledge in a given subject) grew from 29 percent in 2014 to an incredible 40 percent in 2022. In civics, the proportion of students scoring below the basic level rose to 31 percent from 27 percent in 2018.

By contrast, just 13 percent of test takers managed to score at or above NAEP’s “proficient” benchmark in U.S. history (defined as being able to read, interpret, and draw conclusions from primary and secondary sources) — the lowest proportion of eighth-grade students reaching that level out of any subject tested by NAEP. Only about one-fifth of students met or exceeded the proficient level in civics, the second-lowest proportion for any subject. 

Patrick Kelly, a 12th-grade teacher of AP U.S. government in suburban Columbia, South Carolina, said that the results, while disappointing, could hardly be called a surprise. In spite of their importance to the country’s social fabric, he continued, requisite attention and precedence has not been granted to either history or civics.

“When it comes to social studies instruction, we’ve marginalized it for quite a while nationally,” said Kelly, who also serves as a member of the National Assessments Governing Board, which oversees the construction and administration of NAEP. “You get out of something what you put into it, and we haven’t been putting enough in to get anything other than the results we’re seeing.”

A ‘neglected sphere of learning’

The new scores arrive at a period of contention around social studies, when both policymakers and members of the public allege partisan interference in classroom instruction. 

Conservatives, including a swell of newly emergent parent groups, have spent much of the past few years complaining that teachers and school district leaders are indoctrinating children through ideological instruction on topics like race, gender and sexuality. Progressives counter that Republican-led moves to narrow topics of classroom discussion and remove controversial books from school libraries constitute a more pernicious form of political meddling.

In a statement, Secretary Cardona echoed some of the latter claims, arguing that the lower NAEP scores reflect the disruptive effects of COVID-19. Restricting the autonomy of teachers “does our students a disservice and will move America in the wrong direction,” he said.

“The latest data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress further affirms the profound impact the pandemic had on student learning in subjects beyond math and reading,” Cardona wrote, adding that it is “not the time…to limit what students learn in U.S. history and civics classes.”

But whatever the impact of recent disputes over lengthy school closures or district-led equity initiatives, the drop in history knowledge can be traced back to 2014. It was around that time that a new federal education law, the Every Student Succeeds Act, replaced No Child Left Behind — a development that would reduce classroom focus on the core subjects of math and English and make more room in the school day for instruction in science, social studies, and the arts.

If that shift occurred, it can’t be detected in the latest NAEP results. , a renowned historian who serves as both a humanities professor and president emeritus of the University of Richmond, said that history education still languishes as “a neglected, de-emphasized sphere of learning” within the K–12 world.

The downward-trending performance “reflects 30 years of disinvestment in the teaching of social studies,” reflected Ayers, who recently launched to provide free learning resources to K–12 teachers. “It reflects the diminished amount of testing devoted to those subjects. We have emphasized STEM and reading and sacrificed this kind of learning in schools across the country.”

Recent findings from nationally prominent research and advocacy groups have sounded a similar note. A of the elementary social studies landscape was conducted by the RAND Corporation, warning of a “missing infrastructure” for the teaching of civics and history in elementary schools. Few states require regular assessment of social studies knowledge, the study found, and many rely on low-quality standards. While 98 percent of elementary principals reported evaluating their teachers on math and reading instruction, just 67 percent said the same of social studies. A of teachers said that the task of selecting curricular materials for social studies lessons fell to them, and just 16 percent said they worked from a textbook.

Survey responses from eighth graders who took the exam dovetailed somewhat with those findings. Between 2018 and 2022, the proportion of students who said they were enrolled in a dedicated U.S. history course declined from 72 percent to 68 percent. Just 55 percent said they had a teacher whose “primary responsibility” was teaching U.S. history, compared with 62 percent four years prior.

Ayers said that the “diminished” focus on history endangered the development of civic skills and inclinations. Only a renewed push for more and better instruction in social studies could reverse that, he said.

“I care about people living in public, living with one another. And there’s nothing like getting outside of yourself — that’s kind of what the humanities do generally. To step outside your own perspective and imagine another time, another place, another gender, another skin, is the best way to foster a sense of common purpose.”

But despite initial momentum, three now-familiar letters stopped the bill in its tracks: C-R-T.

A mostly unknown conservative scholar writing in the that month claimed the bill would “allow the Biden administration to push Critical Race Theory (CRT) on every public school in the country,” calling the Republican co-sponsors “naive” victims of a hidden leftist agenda. Critical race theory, which posits that racism permeates American institutions, has become right-wing shorthand for any classroom discussion of race.

Cornyn, who proposed the legislation and is the former GOP majority whip, dismissed the allegations, that “the false, hysterical claims are untrue and worthy of a Russian active measures campaign, not a serious discussion of our bill.”

But truthful or not, the criticisms spread like wildfire. The National Review op-ed racked up thousands of interactions on social media and, within 24 hours, and , groups that support what’s known as “,” had published dire reports pulling directly from the article. 

Then, just days later, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis mimicked the message, stating in a press release the $1 billion federal civics bill would “award grants to indoctrinate students with ideologies like Critical Race Theory.”

Soon after, far-right Breitbart News ran an whose headline pulled word-for-word from the National Review editorial and targeted Cornyn as the bill’s key backer. took to social media urging their followers to call their lawmakers opposing what they described as “” sponsored by RINOs, or Republicans In Name Only.

The senators’ “Civics Secures Democracy Act” went no further.

How did this firestorm start and who wrote the op-ed that lit the match?

The story begins years prior and revolves around Stanley Kurtz, a little-noticed power player shaping the right’s recent offensives in the education culture wars.

An enemy of ‘action civics’

Though his writings are regularly shared by GOP heavy hitters including , groups like and sitting , Kurtz has flown mostly under the radar.

“Nobody’s talking about his role at all,” said Jeremy Young, a senior manager for the free expression advocacy group, PEN America.

Kurtz, a 69-year-old former university instructor and longtime conservative commentator, has spearheaded a quiet but influential campaign to cleanse classrooms of what he calls “.”

“He certainly has a fairly large megaphone among conservatives,” said Neal McCluskey, director of the libertarian Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom.

In Young’s estimation, only two figures have had a wider national influence on anti-CRT legislation than Kurtz: Christopher Rufo, the man who brought the lightning-rod term into the right’s vernacular, and Russell Vought, president of the Center for Renewing America, who has fought to add teeth to the bills. 

But Kurtz has made his mark in a niche way. 

He “goes after specific things like civics education that are not as central for some of the other [figures],” Young said.

At least eight bills proposed in five states have pulled from Kurtz’s 2021 “” model legislation, according to a PEN America , making the scholar one of the key thought leaders driving the recent surge in classroom censorship bills. And his advocacy in Texas led to the 2021 passage of an unprecedented state law banning assignments that involve “direct communication” between students and their federal, state or local lawmakers.

At the core of Kurtz’s activism is a central idea: That hands-on civics lessons, such as students writing to their legislators, will lead to “ and political action in support of progressive policy positions.”

The scholar, who draws a roughly $172,000 yearly salary from a think tank and lists an apartment address in Washington D.C.’s affluent Forest Hills neighborhood in tax records, declined a phone interview, saying he “prefer[s] to comment by email.” In written messages, he explained he believes hands-on civics projects “tilt overwhelmingly to the left.”

“Any sort of political protest or lobbying done by students is subject to undue pressure from the biases of teachers, peers and non-profits working with schools. Political protest and lobbying ought to be done by students outside of school hours, independently of any class projects or grades,” he said.

Kurtz’s arguments amount to a fabricated “boogeyman,” said Derek Black, a University of South Carolina law professor. 

Nonetheless, the idea that “frothing-at-the-mouth Democratic teachers [could] create little warrior bands of students to go out and fight their political wars for them” has become a captivating concern for some on the right, Black said, largely thanks to Kurtz.

It’s a worry that traces back to 2017 when the National Association of Scholars’s David Randall, who told ����Ӱ�� he’s a “personal friend” of Kurtz’s, published a warning of the proliferation of a “New Civics” that teaches students “a good citizen is a radical activist.”

At issue for Kurtz was a type of programming known as “action civics” popularized by the nonprofit Generation Citizen. In the approach, celebrated by , students learn to navigate local government by picking an issue they care about, studying it and presenting their findings to officials. 

The central philosophy is that “students learn civics best by doing civics,” Generation Citizen Policy Director Andrew Wilkes said.

����Ӱ�� reviewed over three dozen student projects from Texas and found that the vast majority dealt with apolitical local issues, such as reducing texting while driving in school zones. A handful in Austin and nearby Elgin did lean left, such as on gun control or school admissions prioritizing diversity, topics educators said students selected based on their own interests.

McCluskey, at the Cato Institute, has documented over in public schooling for more than a decade and said he has yet to see “compelling evidence” that liberal bias in civics classes has become a widespread problem. A 74 review of McCluskey’s tracker revealed that only a handful of incidents concerned civics.

Accurate or not, Kurtz’s depiction of “woke civics” is now being felt in America’s classrooms. 

A bill with ‘wonderful’ uptake

When the scholar penned his in 2021, which said students should be banned from receiving class credit for “lobbying” or “advocacy” at the federal, state or local level, lawmakers and advocates across the country pounced. The response was thanks, in part, to impeccable timing: Kurtz published just a few months before policies to restrict lessons related to race and gender began to crop up in dozens of state legislatures nationwide.

The Manhattan Institute, where Rufo now works, included the bill’s anti-lobbying provisions in its own that author James Copland said he presented at the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council, an annual forum to swap right-wing law-making proposals.

And Linda Bennett, a recently retired GOP South Carolina state representative, introduced a by the exact same name as Kurtz’s “Partisanship Out of Civics Act.”

“No need to reinvent the wheel if somebody’s got it right,” she told ����Ӱ��.

Bennett insisted that her office had become flooded with young students, coerced by their educators, demanding that she “please support allowing teachers to teach critical race theory.” But neither she nor Copland could name a specific school or teacher that had distorted their civics lessons in such a way or influenced students to take an activist stance.

In Texas, where a piece of Kurtz’s model legislation on civics became law, the result was an unprecedented restriction on students’ civic engagement. Legislators tucked a clause into the eighth page of their classroom censorship bill outlawing all assignments involving “direct communication” between students and their federal, state or local officials.

In the two years since passage, Texas educators say they have been forced to abandon time-honored assignments such as having students attend a school board meeting or advocate for local causes like a stop sign at an intersection near campus.

“There are all sorts of other civics education that’s getting rolled up here,” PEN America’s Young said, adding that it’s a byproduct of what he calls “shockingly vague” legislation.

Sarai Paez, a recent high school graduate from a suburb outside Austin, said the new law is “a step backwards.” Students in her ninth-grade civics class passed a 2018 city ordinance calling for youth representation in their local government — advocacy that would now be outlawed. 

“There’s no need to take away something that has affected … a group of people in a positive way,” she said.

Though Kurtz said by email he has “a policy of not commenting on any consultations by office holders or policy experts,” Texas state Rep. Steve Toth, the bill’s Republican sponsor, acknowledged to that he “conferred” with Kurtz in drafting the legislation.

Toth and state Sen. Bryan Hughes, the GOP sponsor in the other chamber, did not respond to requests for comment.

In Ohio and South Dakota, where proposed legislation also pulled from Kurtz’s bill, on behalf of the policies in 2021 and 2022, respectively, though neither proposal passed.

Randall, research director at the National Association of Scholars, where Kurtz published the model legislation, said he’s been quite pleased with the bill’s uptake.

“If you had asked me when this was published, ‘Would you be happy if, several years from now, it had been turned into law in Texas?’ … I would have said that was a wonderful result.”

Money trail

Kurtz and the right-wing lawmakers and advocates who have helped translate his policy agenda into practice are linked by more than just shared philosophy. They’re also connected by money.

His employer, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative think tank “dedicated to applying the Judeo-Christian moral tradition to critical issues of public policy,” has a dozen funders in common with the Manhattan Institute, tax filings reveal, including mega-donors like the Charles Koch Foundation.

Copland, at the Manhattan Institute, said he did not consult with Kurtz while putting together his anti-CRT model legislation, but acknowledged some of his colleagues may have.

Toth, in Texas, also receives campaign funds from the Koch Foundation. And Gov. DeSantis, in Florida, shares at least one donor, Fidelity Investments, in common with Kurtz’s think tank. 

On more than one occasion, the issues Kurtz speaks out on have soon found their way to DeSantis’s bully pulpit. The governor recently doubled down on civics education rooted in “” and his rejection earlier this year of the College Board’s AP African American Studies curriculum came just a few months after Kurtz began . Kurtz named two authors specifically in his September article, Robin Kelley and Kimberlé Crenshaw, who the Florida Department of Education later objected to.

Education department press secretary Cassie Palelis said Florida’s concerns with the course were the “result of a thorough review,” and that its correspondence with the College Board had begun in early 2022. When asked whether officials referenced Kurtz’s work during that process and, if so, what role it played, Palelis did not address the question.

Kurtz’s work drew one of the Ethics and Public Policy Center’s more sizable recent donations, according to the most recently available tax records. In 2019, the Diana Davis Spencer Foundation donated $150,000 to support one of his projects. The foundation funds a variety of causes including instilling “ in the next generation of citizens.”

The Ethics and Public Policy Center did not respond to requests for comment.

Despite the overlapping web of donors, Young, who has tracked the nationwide spread of anti-CRT laws, does not see a coordinated campaign.

“There are some people who look at this and sort of see a conspiracy,” he said. “I just see a bunch of people talking to each other who have aligned interests.”

Lawmakers tend to pull from legislation circulating in other states and “it just snowballs,” he added. 

As for the Kurtz model legislation, its influence continues to spread. Randall, at the National Association of Scholars, which shares nine funders in common with the Ethics and Public Policy Center, said the organization’s work in advancing the bill continues, particularly at the local level.

In January, a district outside of Colorado Springs to adopt a new “Birthright” social studies curriculum developed by Randall’s Civics Alliance that bans awarding course credit for service learning or action civics.

“We are in it for the long haul,” Randall said. “Our mission is to inspire as many Americans as possible to join this work.”

Disclosure: The Stand Together Trust, which was founded by Charles Koch, provides financial support to ����Ӱ��, which also participates in the Poynter-Koch Media and Journalism Fellowship.

Since state legislators in 2021 passed a ban on lessons teaching that any one group is “inherently racist, sexist or oppressive,” one unprecedented provision tucked into the bill has triggered a massive fallout for civics education statewide.

A brief clause on Page 8 of the legislation outlawed all assignments involving “direct communication” between students and their federal, state or local officials. Educators could no longer ask students to get involved in the political process, even if they let youth decide for themselves what side of an issue to advocate for — short-circuiting the training young Texans receive to participate in democracy itself.

Zamora-Garcia’s 2017 project to add student advisors to the City Council, and others like it involving research and meetings with elected representatives, would stand in direct violation.

Since 2021, have passed laws restricting teachings on race and gender. But Texas is the only one nationwide to suppress students’ interactions with elected officials in class projects, according to researchers at the free expression advocacy group .

Practically overnight, a growing movement to engage Texas students in real-world civics lessons evaporated. Teachers canceled time-honored assignments, districts reversed expansion plans with a celebrated civics education provider and a bill promoting student civics projects that received bipartisan support in 2019 was suddenly dead in the water.

“By the time we got to 2021, civics was the latest weapon in the culture wars,” state Rep. James Talarico, sponsor of that now-defunct , told ����Ӱ��.

Texas does require high schoolers to take a semester of government and a semester of economics, and is one of nationwide that mandates at least a semester of civics. But students told ����Ӱ�� the courses typically rely on book learning and memorization.

Talarico, a former middle school teacher and the Texas legislature’s youngest member, came into office during a statewide surge in momentum to deepen civics education. A out of the University of Texas highlighted dismal levels of political participation — the state was 44th in voter registration and 47th in voter turnout — and Democrats and Republicans alike were motivated to reverse the trend. Meanwhile, academic research found lessons directly involving students in government could . 

So when the freshman legislator proposed that all high schoolers in the state learn civics with a project-based component addressing “,” colleagues on both sides of the aisle stamped their approval as the bill sailed through the House. Although the legislation then stalled in the Senate, Talarico said he came away “very optimistic” the policy would become law next session.

But in the two years before the next legislative session, he watched as the political tides turned. Flashpoint issues like George Floyd’s murder and the Jan. 6  insurrection brought on a “disagreement over democracy itself,” he said. And when his conservative colleagues passed a 2021 bill limiting school lessons on race and gender, he mourned as a few brief clauses dashed all his hopes for project-based civics.

“Students are now banned from advocating for something like a stop sign in front of their school,” Talarico said.

A battle over civics

The sections of the 2021 law limiting civic engagement pull directly from authored by the conservative scholar Stanley Kurtz, whose seek to link an approach called “action civics” — what he calls “” — with leftist activism and critical race theory.  Critical race theory is a scholarly framework examining how racism is embedded in America’s legal and social institutions, but became a right-wing catch-all term for teachings on race in early 2021. 

Kurtz the practice is a form of political “indoctrination” under the “deceptively soothing” heading of civics, a cause long celebrated on both the right and the left. 

The action civics model was popularized by the nonprofit and is used in over a thousand classrooms across at least eight states. It teaches students about government by having them pick a local issue, research it and present their findings to officials.

The central philosophy is that “students learn civics best by doing civics,” Generation Citizen Policy Director Andrew Wilkes said.

Generation Citizen’s method has been studied by several academic researchers who found participants experienced and like history and English.

Kurtz, however, contends the projects “tilt overwhelmingly to the left.” 

“Political protest and lobbying ought to be done by students outside of school hours, independently of any class projects or grades,” he said in an email to ����Ӱ��.

Civics experts, however, argued otherwise.

The notion that “it’s activism happening in classrooms … that’s just so far from the truth,” said Kei Kawashima-Ginsberg, director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University in Boston.

Rep. Steve Toth and Sen. Bryan Hughes, the GOP lawmakers who sponsored the 2021 anti-CRT legislation, did not respond to requests for comment.

����Ӱ�� reviewed over three dozen action civics projects in Texas from before the 2021 legislation and found that the vast majority dealt with hyperlocal, nonpartisan issues.

Students most often took up causes like bullying, youth vaping, movie nights in the park or bringing back student newspapers. A handful in Austin and nearby Elgin could be considered progressive, including projects dealing with gun control or school admissions prioritizing diversity, topics educators said students selected based on their own interests.

Under the 2021 law, all of those projects now must avoid contact with elected officials. The restrictions have resulted in initiatives more contained to schools themselves like advocacy for less-crowded hallways or longer lunch periods, educators said.

“This particular legislation … ties [students’] hands as to how involved they can get while in high school,” said Armando Orduña, the Houston executive director of .

His own political awakening, he said, came three decades ago growing up in Texas when a teacher assigned him 10 hours of volunteering on a political campaign of his choice. He opted to work on the 1991 Houston mayoral campaign of Sylvester Turner, then a young state representative who lost his bid that year but went on to become the city’s mayor in 2016.

“Back then, the attitude was how to fight teenage apathy regarding politics and now it’s quite the other way around,” Orduña said. Now politicians are working to “tamp down the next generation of leaders.”

Young progressives have become a in American politics, fueling recent electoral wins in the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the Chicago mayoral race and a base-rousing standoff in the Tennessee legislature. In the eyes of some members of the GOP, their activism is seen as a threat.

‘Everything got turned upside down’

Though some project-based civics lessons in Texas continue with a pared-down scope, others have disappeared altogether.

One school district north of Dallas decided “out of an abundance of caution” to reverse years of precedent and stop offering course credit to students involved in a well-regarded national civic engagement program, first reported.

And Generation Citizen, too, has seen its footprint in Texas dwindle. 

After a 2017 launch in the state, the organization underwent several years of steady growth, with more than a half dozen districts using its programming or curricula. At the time, districts in San Antonio, north Texas, the Rio Grande Valley and several rural regions had expressed interest in beginning programming, former regional director Meredith Stefos Norris said. She spent most of her days criss-crossing the sprawling state meeting with interested school leaders. Austin schools expanded their contract with the nonprofit to $58,000, according to records ����Ӱ�� obtained from the district through a Freedom of Information request. And Dallas said it wanted to bring Generation Citizen programming to every high schooler in its 153,000-student district, Norris said.

“It felt at the time that we were just going to keep going and keep growing and there was no reason that we weren’t going to be a statewide organization,” the former Texas director said.

Then came the 2021 legislative session and “everything got turned upside down,” said Megan Brandon, Generation Citizen’s current Texas program director. It zapped their efforts and districts backed out of partnerships.

The organization now primarily works with just three Texas districts, including an updated contract with Austin schools for $3,000 — a tiny sliver of the sum from a few years prior. The other two are Bastrop Independent School District and Elgin Independent School District.

Meanwhile, across the state’s northern border in Oklahoma, where Generation Citizen also operates, lawmakers passed a classroom censorship bill around issues of race and gender, but one that did not limit students’ contact with elected officials. The organization has been able to maintain all its programs while “following the letter of the law,” Oklahoma director Amy Curran said.

“This isn’t organizing about big culture wars, national stuff,” she said. “This is, literally, the sidewalks are unsafe around our school.”

Brandon, a former social studies teacher herself, grieves not just for the Texas branch of her organization, where the nature of the projects are similar, but for the youth in her state. Her former students in Bastrop ISD outside Austin, most of whom did not have parents who attended college, never had access to civic engagement opportunities before her class, she said.

“Students in Texas need civics more than students in many other states,” she said. “It feels like we’re going backwards in time.”

Opportunity cost

Zamora-Garcia remembers striding to the dais of the Bastrop City Council in 2017 with seven of his peers — the boys clad in too-big blazers and bow ties, the girls in dresses and laced-up heels. For a project they began in Brandon’s civics class, the team sought to boost youth voices in their local government. After meeting with officials, researching models and drawing up bylaws, the students eventually made history by passing a in the Austin suburb to add student advisors to the City Council.

“It made me feel more important and more involved, actually being able to have a voice that can make a change,” said Zamora-Garcia, now a junior at Texas State University studying business. 

The course activated his potential in class and in the community, he said. Before the experience, school had felt more like being a “cog in a machine,” he said. 

Mabel Zhu, who took the same class two years later, said the experience was “life-changing,” igniting her passion for civic engagement for years to come.

After the class, she began working with a local nonprofit, then organized a youth summit bringing awareness to the issues of mental health and substance abuse. She eventually joined the Youth Advisory Council that Zamora-Garcia and his classmates helped launch and worked with the Cultural Arts Board to put up a new mural that will define her city’s downtown space for years to come. A waving flag on the painting proclaims, “The future is ours!”

“Without [the class], I wouldn’t have been able to make such an impact within my community,” Zhu said.

The loss of such opportunities are what Rep. Talarico calls the unseen “opportunity cost” of the culture wars. 

“What are we missing out on that we could be doing if we weren’t playing political games with our students’ education?” the Democratic lawmaker asked.

Many students in Texas either learn how to engage with the political system in school or not at all, teachers said. Kyle Olson, an educator at an East Austin high school that serves predominantly immigrant families, taught his students that, as constituents, they could write letters to their elected representatives.

“They didn’t know that that was even something that was possible,” he said. 

Neutering those lessons flies in the face of American democracy itself, argues Alexander Pope, who leads the Institute for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement at Maryland’s Salisbury University.

“Part of the job that schools have in this country is to help prepare people for democracy,” he said. “The idea that, in a representative democracy, you’re going to literally ban … people from writing their elected representatives is just backward.”

The risk, believes ​​Tufts’s Kawashima-Ginsberg, is that a generation of Texans may grow up with a stunted sense of citizenship.

“It’s going to really damage their idea of what democracy is,” she said.

Central Falls, Rhode Island 

It was the first day of the 2021 fall semester and Ajah Johnson could not believe what her teachers were telling her. By the end of the course, the instructors said, she and her peers would get to choose how to spend $10,000 to upgrade their school however they decided was best.

“I thought it was a lie,” Johnson said, figuring the classroom exercise involved make-believe money. “There’s no way they’re giving us $10,000.”

But to her delight, the cash was real.

Over the following months, she and her peers received lessons in budgeting, survey techniques and local government, then eventually designed proposals for how to allocate the money. It was the first time Johnson, who grew up in Virginia and had moved to Rhode Island the previous year, ever remembers getting a say in how her school was run.

“I feel like I got to make an impact,” she said. “We felt like we were valued.”

The then-high school junior didn’t know it, but her efforts were feeding into a wider movement revolutionizing democratic engagement far beyond her campus.

The elective, first offered in 2019, has served as proof-of-concept in Central Falls for a process called participatory budgeting, which gives stakeholders a direct say in how public funds are spent. Since then, the model has spread throughout the city and is beginning to take hold statewide.

“[The class] has triggered a lot,” said City Council President Jessica Vega, who helped launch the elective. 

She made sure local officials knew how successful the course was, inviting them to the school’s voting day at the end of the semester. Thanks to a partnership with the Secretary of State’s office, students selected a winning project — new bathroom mirrors to replace ones a teacher said resembled “tin foil” — by casting customized ballots using official voting machines.

“Folks in power in that room came in and saw that. It helped them say, ‘OK, this does work.’ So we were able to expand and start thinking about what a citywide process looks like,” the council president said.

In 2020, when the school district received federal COVID relief dollars, the superintendent earmarked $100,000 for community members to allocate using the same method of direct democracy. After a months-long process, voters decided to invest the full sum into boosting the district’s afterschool learning programs.

Then again in 2021, the City Council set aside $50,000 for elderly and disabled people to choose how to make accessibility upgrades. 

Now, the Rhode Island Department of Health is using a similar tactic in Central Falls and two nearby cities, Providence and Pawtucket, allowing the communities to decide by vote how to spend a collective total of nearly $1.4 million to reduce health care disparities.

“The local success of participatory budgeting in Central Falls was a very encouraging example,” Department of Health spokesperson Annemarie Beardsworth wrote in an email.

Patricia Martinez, the school district’s chief equity officer, marvels at the swift progress.

“It’s really taken on a life of its own,” she said. “It’s a new wave of democracy, especially for underserved BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and people of color) communities.”

Hearing student voices

Over two-thirds of Central Falls’s 22,500 residents are Latino and 35% were born in another country. Some 45% of students in the district are classified as multilingual learners. At roughly one square mile in area, it’s Rhode Island’s smallest and most densely populated city. By measures of income, it’s the most impoverished metro area in the state.

However, by the less tangible measure of social cohesion, there’s an unmistakable richness to the community. Even on brisk days, neighbors lean over porch railings to chat with passersby; the receptionist in the district office calls the person on the other line “darling.”

The community’s interconnectedness has been key to the success of the participatory budgeting course, said Pam Jennings, who co-teaches the elective and whom City Council President Vega calls the “PB queen.” Members of the community are happy to volunteer their time to work with the class, which relies heavily on guest speakers, she said.

As students began brainstorming their projects and speaking to adults in the school about the issues they thought needed fixing — shabby gym equipment or lackluster cafeteria options, for example — a miraculous thing happened, Jennings and her co-teacher Emmanuel Ramos observed.

“As soon as students started making noise about things they wanted to see fixed, things started to get fixed,” Ramos said. Adults in the building heard what students were saying and responded.

Fresh new basketballs appeared in the gym, a salad bar popped up at lunch and the office supply company W.B. Mason offered to donate new furniture for the library, he said.

That’s actually a design feature of the model, explained Brown University education professor Jonathan Collins, who studies direct democracy in schools.

“The interesting thing about participatory budgeting is that the deeper you get into it, the more you quickly realize, it is not about the money,” he said. “[The process] is a tool that can really create and strengthen your civic infrastructure.”

Collins led an of the district’s decision to let community members allocate the $100,000 in COVID relief funding. After that deliberation, the predominantly low-income Latino participants reported double-digit increases in their likelihood to voice concerns to a local official, he found.

The results back up his , which showed that when school districts create meaningful opportunities for parents to make their voices heard, they’re more likely to speak up about issues related to their children’s education. 

For students more broadly, when they perceive their perspectives to be heard and reflected in school policy decisions, it can have a positive impact on academic outcomes like grades and attendance, according to a March 2022 published by researchers at the University of California, Riverside and Northwestern University.

Central Falls Principal Robert McCarthy recognized the participatory budgeting elective course as an opportunity to, quite literally, put his money where his mouth was on empowering students.

“Always kids are like, ‘You say that we have a voice, but what does that really mean?’” he said. “When you’re putting $10,000 behind something … it definitely speaks to this notion of, you have some power, but with power comes responsibility.”

‘My class did this’

The participatory budgeting model first launched in 1989 in Porto Alegre, Brazil. It quickly spread to over 100 cities in the country, helping in those metropolitan areas. Several including Chicago, Seattle and New York have since employed the process and in San Jose, California; Phoenix, Arizona and Brooklyn, New York have brought the idea directly to students.

Only Central Falls, however, has ever made the process into a full-blown course offered within the school day, believes Jennings, who formerly worked for the a nonprofit organization that works to expand the model in the U.S. and Canada.

Other school districts that have used participatory budgeting typically hold sessions after school, which can exclude students who have evening jobs, athletics or child care responsibilities, she points out. As a semester-long, credit-bearing elective, the Central Falls class, on the other hand, has reflected the diversity of the school’s student body. 

“It’s been a very wide mix of students, including students from all different grades, too,” Jennings said. “The class is for everyone. Students of every ability, we can find a niche for them.”

On the first day, students try out a mini-version of their larger mission, collectively choosing how to use $50 to spruce up their classroom. Then, over the ensuing weeks, they receive training in budgeting tactics, survey techniques and then finally, develop project proposals. The class culminates in a school-wide vote to select a winning idea from among a dozen total proposals. 

Though the Omicron wave forced last year’s election online, the last live vote in the 2019-20 school year brought more than three-quarters of the roughly 800-person student body to the gym to cast ballots, Jennings said. This year’s live vote will take place in the spring.

Johnson, who took the course last year, said the experience was “once in a lifetime” and taught her several lessons she didn’t expect, like financial planning and what it takes to turn an idea into a reality.

“I learned so many different things about loans and investments,” she said. “A lot of the things that I learned in that class were brand new.”

Her group’s project sought to improve furniture in the library where previously, students would sit on the floor because the chairs were so uncomfortable, she said. Though her proposal came in second, $3,000 was left over from the winning project — a facelift for the cafeteria. That sum coupled with the W.B. Mason donation has revamped the library considerably, in her estimation.

Seeing the changes, the high school senior relishes the new sense of ownership she feels over her campus. Students linger in the library now, which they never used to do, she said, and the cafeteria has a new monitor to display the lunch options.

“I see it everyday. When I walk in the lunchroom, like, ‘Oh, my class did this.’ When I walk in [the library], I’m like, ‘My class did this.’ I see it every single day.”

Implementing the model

Though there’s now momentum behind the elective course in Central Falls, Jennings recognizes that getting participatory budgeting off the ground can be a difficult task.

“The hardest part is finding the pot of money,” she said. 

In 2019-20, the school district agreed to dedicate $5,000, with the other half coming from a private donor. In 2021-22, after losing a year to the pandemic, the full $10,000 budget came from outside fundraising, as dozens of community members pitched in. That allowed the district to save cash, which, in addition to COVID stimulus money the superintendent earmarked for the elective, means the course is now funded several years out, said Tatiana Baena, the district’s grant director.

“We’re trying to really sustain the program and make sure that it can be ongoing,” she said.

But even with the funds secured, students who dream of pricey upgrades like a new basketball court or state-of-the-art air conditioning get tough lessons in economics, said Ramos, the co-teacher.

“Ten thousand dollars, ultimately, it’s not that much,” he said.

But over time, the impact will compound, predicts Collins, who is closely following the efforts from nearby Providence.

“With the course, every year, there’s a new group of students who are coming in and gaining these skills and gaining this perspective and leaving with this feeling of empowerment,” observes the Brown University researcher. 

“In Central Falls in, maybe it’s 10 years, maybe it’s 20 years, if they keep doing this, you’re going to look up and you’re going to realize like, ‘Oh, wait, they’ve been able to solve some really, really major problems because they have this whole civic infrastructure.’ ”

And for some residents, the changes have been more immediate.

Baena, the district’s grants director who also serves as an elected councilwoman, helped spearhead the city’s recent participatory budgeting effort. The steering committee, she explained, felt it was important that “anyone in the community could have an opinion” and thus decided all residents could cast a ballot, regardless of whether they were registered state voters. One person from voting day in June stands out in her memory.

The woman was elderly and had lived in Central Falls for decades, Baena said, but as an undocumented immigrant, she had never voted in a U.S. election. After filling out the bubble sheet, she held the paper out to the councilwoman.

“You put it in the scanner,” the elderly woman asked Baena.

“No, no, no, señora,” Baena responded. “I want you to know how this feels. You’re going to put it into the scanner.”

The woman fed her ballot, printed by the Secretary of State’s office, into the official voting machine. Smiling, she turned back to her councilwoman.

“Here, my voice matters.”

Correction: Story was changed to correct the spelling of Emmanuel Ramos’s name.

Unfortunately, over the past half-century, that central civic mission . But if this moment in the country’s history has made one thing clear, it is that now is the time for schools to again teach young people the fundamentals of what it means to be informed and engaged members of this self-governing society, and what is needed if the country is going to recover from the current polarization and discontent. 

For this reason, the country should take an active interest in the , a bipartisan piece of legislation that would infuse states with $1 billion annually over the next five years to enhance instruction in civics and U.S. history. The bill, reintroduced in the Senate this summer, would invest federal funds to improve social studies education, leaving to local districts and states decisions about what is taught, and how.

With or without the federal funds, this investment in social studies must happen, along with a rethinking of how to approach the subject.

Students need enthralling encounters with the perennial questions that human societies must address, using rich materials that make otherwise theoretical questions relevant in their own time and place: What is the proper relationship between the individual and the state? What does a just society look like? Who decides?

of social studies curricula by The Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy have found strong options already on offer. And a recent initiative, — which was led by iCivics, Harvard, Tufts University and Arizona State University — sets a promising course by starting with the big questions, walking kids deep into the controversies and helping them out the other side. For instance, one EAD-inspired sample lesson asks, “What is the compromise between individual rights and the common good?” and includes guided primary source readings from the Federalist Papers and the Bill of Rights, to name a few.��

This kind of reasoning and analysis of sources, which are essential to social studies, connect back to reading and writing as part of a complete K-12 education. In fact, spending more class time and resources on social studies actually boosts, as it enables a different approach to literacy — particularly if it includes not only rich source material, but engaging questions and ample opportunity for debate and deliberation. The benefits are particularly pronounced for girls, low-income students and English learners.

In the process of learning to decode language, students should also be accessing wide tranches of knowledge about the larger world. By the time they can read fluently, the clear priority becomes the acquisition of knowledge about the world, from science and U.S. history to world geography and current events, from fables and fairy tales to epics and Shakespeare. 

The complete educational imperative for schools is broad exposure to the big questions of human life and to the variety of human experiences through every subject studied in the classroom. Knowledge matters, and knowledge is cumulative. To a lead researcher in this field: “The more you know, the easier it will be for you to learn new things.” 

Increasing students’ access to rich, inquiry-driven social studies instruction will also build social studies-specific literacy muscles. When students read and write in different content disciplines, they learn not only the content, but also . Historians read and write differently than novelists or chemists. In the process of examining primary and secondary sources, learning and practicing the field’s strategies for sourcing documents to understand bias and context, students can develop the capacity for nuanced interpretations and civil tolerance that the United States’ increasingly polarized society desperately needs. 

Schools must offer these open doors to each and every child in the United States.

The opinions expressed in this piece are the authors’ own and do not necessarily reflect the views of iCivics, The Johns Hopkins University or The Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy.

The founders of the United States were , a movement centered on . This new approach to defining a country – rather than basing it on language, ethnicity or geographic proximity – meant the new United States would have to educate its citizenry with the ideas, skills and values necessary to build and grow their democracy.

As a result, the founders and funded. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and others believed it was the to provide that education. Jefferson believed that education would and redress the effect of poverty because education would be available to all children.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

Though public schools did not become widespread , the goal of educating informed citizens capable of inquiry and critical thinking was part of the democratic republic from the start. But nearly 250 years after the nation’s founding, its schools struggle to achieve that goal.

A fourth basic subject

Foundational American educational theorist , who worked and wrote in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, promoted education that would help build and maintain a democracy made up of different groups of people. In his 1916 book “,” he warned that focusing education only on the “.”

It is no accident that Dewey’s career in educational philosophy coincided with the rise of a new field of education, , aimed at cultivating good citizenship to build a stronger American society.

, the term was used by the National Education Association to “designate formal citizenship education and [place] squarely in the field all of those subjects that were believed to contribute to that end.”

That purpose remains today. According to the National Council of the Social Studies, the current goal of “is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world.”

But since at least the 1980s, the nation’s public schools have consistently put social studies on the . This process accelerated with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which on the “three Rs,” to the .

A 2010 study demonstrated the when it reported that elementary school teachers spent , 11.6 hours on Language Arts, and 5.3 hours on math per week.

A lower priority

As a , I have noticed that social studies is than reading, writing and math in .

For instance, from 1993 to 2008, the time allotted to social studies instruction in third through fifth grade classes in the U.S. Over the same time, math, English and language arts instruction increased. This trend continued, with a 2014 study that documented an “ time per week.”

This reduction in social studies instruction has affected minority students more than others. Federal statistics show that since at least 1998, on tests of civics knowledge .

One study described how that this civic education gap contributes to a , in which poorer people and those from nonwhite ethnic groups vote less. That study declared the gap “challenges the stability, legitimacy, and quality of our democratic republic.” Those comments echo those of Jefferson and Dewey, who believed that the purpose of schools was to prepare children to be citizens.

There was a need for civic education in their time – and the complexity of modern society and the increasingly obvious fragility of U.S. constitutional government indicate that social studies is more relevant and more vital now than ever before.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

The students took turns reading passages via laptop computer and discussed the incident with their teacher on Wednesday. They learned that the Northern students, who were Black, were protesting what they described as inadequate educational resources at their school that had a white principal.��

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“The students refused to take that type of treatment,” said teacher Tal Levy. “Who wants to read the next paragraph called ‘student demands’?”

“Some of the demands were to remove the principal,” a student responded. “Remove the campus policeman, provide the information on the academic standards of the school, and create a student-faculty council for the school.”   

The lesson is part of a new approach to teaching history at Detroit Public Schools Community District (DPSCD), the state’s largest public school district. For DPSCD, it is using a traditional approach of infusing local history and city government into its high school civics course — but with more cultural inclusion and promoting community engagement.��

“The district’s mission focuses not just on education, but student empowerment and civic engagement,” said DPSCD Superintendent Nikolai Vitti.

Citizen Detroit partnered with the school district to revise its “Detroit: A Manual for Citizens,” a textbook that had not been updated in decades. The manual is available in both hard copy and electronic form and can be taught via laptop computers and tablets.

Citizen Detroit is a civic education nonprofit that “focuses on educating Detroiters about issues that are critical to our well-being; seeking to increase civic literacy; and working to establish a standard of public accountability from local and state elected leadership,” according to its website.

The Skillman Foundation, also a partner, helped to fund the effort, which took a little over two years to complete.��

The manual and workbook were published in time for the 2021-22 school year and used in every high school civics class. Students spend about six weeks learning about local government.

“The idea is to give people a historical understanding of the function of city government and an understanding of each city department and how the citizens can be engaged, and their voices are heard,” said Sheila Cockrel, Citizen Detroit CEO and a former member of the Detroit City Council.��

Civics is a stand-alone 10th-grade semester-long course that is a graduation requirement from the Michigan Department of Education. In Detroit, civics-related material is woven into every grade from kindergarten through high school as required by the Michigan Grade Level and High School Content Expectations.

Students learn about public policy issues and work to form their own opinions on those issues before they get to their civics class in 10th grade, according to Elizabeth Triden of DPSCD’s curriculum and instruction office.��

Critical race theory

DPSCD’s bolstered civics effort preceded Republicans in Michigan and nationwide trying to ban critical race theory (CRT) in schools. CRT is a college-level theory that examines the systemic effects of white supremacy in America, but lawmakers have the issue into the K-12 policy debate.��

, introduced by Rep. Andrew Beeler (R-Port Huron), does not explicitly reference CRT, but prohibits schools from teaching any curriculum that includes the “promotion of any form of race or gender stereotyping or anything that could be understood as implicit race or gender stereotyping.”

,, introduced by state Sen. Lana Theis (R-Brighton), explicitly bans “critical race theory” from being taught in schools and threatens to cut 5% of the school’s funding if the state determines that it is violating the law. The Senate Education and Career Readiness Committee, which Theis chairs, approved the bill last October.��

“Critical race theory threatens Michigan’s K-12 students with a dangerous false narrative about our country and its place in the world,” said Theis at the time. “It is an extreme political agenda that is manipulating academia and now targets private businesses, public institutions and, sadly, our K-12 classrooms. Our schools should be teaching students our country’s real history, including its faults and flaws, but especially this nation’s founding principles of individual freedom, liberty and equality that so many have given their lives to defend. Critical race theory is an affront to everything our country stands for. Our children should be taught to respect each other equally because of their humanity, not to discriminate based on some identity group or race.”

Sen. Erika Geiss (D-Taylor) a “shortsighted, inappropriate and corrupt bill.”

“This bill will have a profoundly chilling effect on education, our ability to foster talent development, and career readiness for today’s Michigan youth, which would ultimately — and negatively — impact the state’s economic future,” said Geiss, who is Afro-Latina, a parent of school-aged children and a former public school educator.

The Michigan State Board of Education a resolution in January to push back against the CRT bills.��

Addressing cultural diversity

For years, DPSCD’s social studies department published a book guiding students through the structure of Detroit’s government and “community civics.” 

The book, and corresponding civics course, was taught in Detroit schools as early as 1938 and the final class occurred in the late 1970’s. The school district’s school enrollment has been majority African American since 1963.�� 

The 1968 manual, for example, wrote about ’ tenure as Michigan governor, but does not point out that he was a slave owner.��

The document does point out that “every Detroit public school has been open to children of all races since 1869” but doesn’t mention that Fannie Richards, a Black woman operated a private for Black children prior to 1869 and the school district all the way to Michigan Supreme Court to racially integrate the school district. Willam Ferguson was among the first Black students to attend the school district. In 1892, he the first African American elected to the Michigan House of Representatives.��

It also does not point out that the Board of Education was all white until Remus Robinson, a Black physician was to the body in 1955. It does not mention that the school district did not have a Black principal until Beulah Cain Brewer in 1947.�� 

The new publication, “Citizen Manual Detroit,” is designed to help its users develop a deeper understanding of the history of Detroit, its government, the government’s roles and responsibilities, and how citizens of the city can work within the government systems to bring about change.   

It offers the contributions of organizations such as the African-American-led Trade Union Leadership Council, League of Revolutionary Black Workers, Westside Mothers, as well as Latin Americans for Social and Economic Development (also known as LASED), Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services (also known as ACCESS) and others.��

“These organizations, and many more, were established by individuals and groups that identified needs within their respective communities and used civic engagement and civic action to address them,” the new manual reads.��

The new manual also includes passages that highlight African American broadcast legends Martha Jean “The Queen” Steinberg; William V. Banks, the lead force in launching WGPR-FM 107.5 radio and WGPR-TV 62, the nation’s first Black-owned television station as well as Haley Bell and Wendell Cox, who launched WCHB-AM 1440 radio, the nation’s first Black-owned station founded in 1956 after federal license application.��

“The Citizen Manual is a concrete example of [student empowerment and civic engagement],” said Vitti. “By recognizing students’ expertise on their neighborhoods’ needs, inspiring them with the rich history of activism in Detroit, and equipping them with concrete tools to get involved, students see themselves as leaders capable of building a stronger Detroit.” 

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on and .

Instead of telling students what happened at the Capitol, educators are asking them to conduct their own investigations using credible news sources and critical thinking to shape their perceptions.

Part of the effort reflects teachers’ desire to improve news literacy. And part of it reflects their apprehension about anti-critical race theory legislation passed in several states in 2020 taking aim at the teaching of systemic racism.

While riot organizers said they were protesting an illegitimate election, President Biden and others have called out — a topic that could run afoul of anti-CRT laws — as central to the attack.

Teachers, historians, news literacy and civil rights advocates say students must learn the truth about the day’s events but that this is a particularly difficult time to address the topic as the nation remains deeply divided on social and political issues. Many conservatives around the country have redirected their outrage around these matters to their local school boards, demanding, in sometimes raucous meetings, greater control of what and how children are taught.

Brian Winkel, an English and journalism teacher in Cedar Falls, Iowa, is still navigating the anti-CRT law in his state, saying the wording “is vague enough to make it scary.” If it was meant to have a chilling effect on the teaching of race-related topics, it’s working, he said.

“It’s brand new and I know some people are questioning things they can talk about, including the Japanese Americans detained in WWII, the treatment of Native Americans and what happened in Tulsa,” Winkel said, referring to the 1921 race massacre. “It’s very hard to dance around those topics.”

He and his students were already discussing the validity of the 2020 election when the insurrection occurred last year: Winkel had them examine arguments on both sides and look closely at their sources.

“When you get right down to it, it was the Big Lie,” he said. “I didn’t have anyone who didn’t see that, as I remember: I think kids were able to see when you built out the evidence that there was nothing to stand on.”

This year, he’ll pose a slightly different question playing off asking students whether the insurrection was peaceful or violent: They’ll have to share their opinion based on two credible sources.

Despite brutal assaults on Capitol Police among numerous other acts and threats caught on camera, just 4 in 10 Republicans called the insurrection “very violent” or “extremely violent” according to The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research results released Jan. 4.

Winkel said he is careful not to share his own views on these issues.

“I try to get kids to be clueless about what side of the political line I’m on by the time they are done with this class,” he said.

The teacher said he hasn’t avoided controversial issues to stave criticism from parents, but remains concerned and confused about one area.

“Race is a timely topic in this country,” he said. “We have had lots and lots of horrible incidents to deconstruct. But when it comes to institutional racism, I am still trying to wrap my mind around what can be said. So, I have played it safe. The last thing we want to do with this class is to indoctrinate.”

Peter Adams is senior vice president of education for the a Washington D.C.-based nonpartisan national education nonprofit aimed at teaching students to be savvy and active news consumers.

Adams said teachers are in a tough position when it comes to the insurrection: Even mainstream news coverage is considered off-limits in some circles. His organization provides educators with many resources to help them address these issues, but “they are hesitant to bring them into the classroom for fear of sparking controversy and parent backlash if they tackle a rumor that should be a settled matter of fact,” including proper COVID-19 precautions and the legitimacy of the 2020 election, he said.

“In general, my advice to educators is to approach the topic of misinformation and falsehoods from the idea that mis- and dis- information is fundamentally exploitative: They play on a given audience’s deepest beliefs and values and exploit them for political gain,” Adams said. “If you were a supporter of President Trump in 2020, falsehoods about the election are seeking to exploit that and use it against you and not help your politics, causes, beliefs or values — but to weaponize them.”

Monita Bell, associate director of the program, which aims to be a catalyst for racial justice in the South and beyond, said students should know the events of Jan. 6 are not anomalous.

“The progress of our nation is not linear,” she said. “In fact, it is often recursive. Jan. 6 is probably the most recent example of the backlash that often comes from progress, and ensuring students understand this not only gives them a better grounding of our history, but also their place in it.”

Anton Schulzki, social studies teacher at General William J. Palmer High School in Colorado Springs, Colorado, began a one-year term as president of the on July 1. He and his class — the school was mostly remote last winter — were studying civil rights-themed music when the insurrection occurred. Schulzki tossed his lesson plan for the day and shared his computer screen with his students as they tried to make sense of what was unfolding.

“We were just shaking our heads, asking, ‘What the heck is going on?’” he recalled. “At that point, we didn’t know — and we are still finding out.”

Schulzki plans to ask his students where they were when those events unfolded a year ago and what they make of them today. While he wishes all teachers could discuss these issues freely, he’s well aware of those who plan to bypass the topic for fear they will lose their jobs if they discuss such controversial matters. An experienced educator with a robust track record, he’s confident in tackling tough subjects but understands not all teachers feel the same.

“I can do certain things compared to a first-year teacher in a small town …where everybody knows everybody,” he said. “It varies across the country.”

James Grossman is the executive director of the , an organization founded in 1884 and incorporated by Congress five years later for the promotion of historical studies. He said his group is currently crafting resources for those teachers struggling to teach these topics in anti-CRT states.

Grossman supports what educators say they’re already doing, which he described as working from evidence to “help students see how there can be different angles of vision on such issues.”

But, he said, that doesn’t mean all narratives are equal.  

“Part of the purpose of history education is to help students learn to read evidence generated from diverse sources and piece together stories that are consistent with that evidence and answer useful and meaningful questions,” he said, adding it’s imperative for them to understand what happened Jan. 6.

If teachers don’t discuss controversial historical issues, he said, students won’t learn all they need to know to be constructive and responsible members of their communities.

“This includes all sorts of communities, including workplaces and families, as well as geographically and politically defined entities,” he said. “Why would we want a population of people who don’t know our history? Why would we want to hide useful knowledge? If teachers back away from these topics we are at risk of losing the informed citizenry upon which democracy depends.”

The Texas House has advanced legislation that would require K-12 school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to teach “informed American patriotism” through the founding documents of the U.S. starting in the 2021-22 school year.

The House passed , by state Rep. , R-Friendswood, by a voice vote Thursday afternoon. It will need one more vote before it can be sent to the Texas Senate, which has already approved the similar , authored by state Sen. , R-Friendswood.

HB 4509 would, among other things, mandate that students study documents such as the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Federalist Papers to promote understanding of the “fundamental moral principles” of the country.

Before voting on the bill Thursday, the House adopted an amendment proposed by Bonnen to include speeches by Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have A Dream” speech as part of the required texts mentioned in the bill. That came after criticism that the bill initially focused on writings by white historical figures.

At a House Public Education Committee hearing last month, Bonnen said documents like the Constitution and Declaration of Independence captured “firsthand struggles, triumphs, challenges and beliefs” upon which America was founded.

“To ensure Texas students gain access to receive exposure to these founding documents, we must ensure these primary historic sources are incorporated into the state education curriculum across all grade levels,” he said last month.

But Maggie Stern, a youth civic engagement and education coordinator at Children’s Defense Fund, said at last month’s hearing that the curriculum should also highlight the contributions of women; Black, Native, Latino and Asian people; and other people of color in addition to the white Founding Fathers.

“In a state with a growing multiracial youth population, it’s particularly vital that this education is inclusive and relevant to all students,” Stern said. “Comprehensive civic education requires more than just memorizing facts without context or application. Civic knowledge is important.”

The approval of HB 4509 came only a few days after the to amid pushback from education, business and community groups and multiple proposed amendments from Democrats. HB 3979 would limit what public school students can be taught about the United States’ history of racism and how racism has shaped systems within the nation. That includes limits on critical race theory. And critics of HB 3979 said some of its provisions would discourage students’ civic engagement.

While HB 3979 focuses on what teachers cannot teach, HB 4509 outlines what concepts must be taught, such as “the structure, function, and processes of government institutions.” The bill also lists the instructional materials students will be required to learn from, including the first Lincoln-Douglas debates and excerpts from Alexis de Tocqueville ’s “Democracy in America.”

Bonnen said at last month’s hearing that only 23% of Texans under age 45 can pass the civics test from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services while 90% of immigrants can pass the test. He said founding documents make up the “historical truths surrounding America’s birth,” and they need to be incorporated into K-12 education.

The proposal comes after Gov. asked lawmakers to in Texas during the 2021 session. Republican state legislators have proposed multiple bills to modify what children are taught in schools, including and a greater emphasis on the country’s founding documents.

Thomas Lindsay, distinguished senior fellow of higher education and constitutional studies at the conservative-leaning Texas Public Policy Foundation, testified last month that the bill would lead to more-informed voting.

“We’ve got a lot of action and we’ve got a lot of passion,” Lindsay said. “We need thinkers. Think first. Learn first. Understand the U.S. Constitution first, and then you will see the stakes involved and then you will become involved in an informed way.”

Michael Baumgartner is a representative of Civics 4 Y’all, a student-led advocacy group at St. Edward’s University working to provide young Texans with civic engagement opportunities. He said the founding documents are vital to learn, but civics education should also promote active citizenship and student activities outside of the classroom.

“Civics education should be about learning the history of our great nation and providing young citizens a place to discuss policy problems while being taught efficient ways to engage in the process of solving them,” Baumgartner said.

This article is published in partnership with .��

Disclosure: St. Edward’s University and the Texas Public Policy Foundation have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .