New Kind of Patriotism 1

Running Head: NEW KIND OF PATRIOTISM

A New Kind of Patriotism: Rethinking Modern Civic Education

Cassie Coughlan

Glen Allen High School

In today’s political climate, Americans are increasingly uneducated and disengaged.

Many are disillusioned with the stagnation of our political system, proclaiming its downfall.

Others believe that money—super PACs and hedge funds—have corrupted the political sphere,

making their small voice obsolete. A few look to history as a guide, harkening patriotism as the

key to a more engaged society. Most would agree that polarization has built barriers to

effectively listening to opposing viewpoints. Throughout the country, many school systems have

turned to civic education as the answer, begging the question: How can we create a more

civically-engaged society through civics programs in schools? Can civic education be the

solution to the crises facing America?

The restructuring of the party system in the late 1800s contributed to a drop in voter

participation that continued to spread and is now commonplace. Before the 20th century, election

day was a community event, with local parties playing a large role in administering a simple

voting process and ensuring that the majority of the electorate participated (Burnham, 1990).

However, with the rise of the mugwumps and Progressives, the parties became more hierarchical

and the process convoluted (Burnham, 1990). By bringing structure and centralization to the

electoral process, these reformers unintentionally discouraged participation, as registering with a

party and participating in party activities was limited to a smaller, select group of elite

individuals, marginalizing the common man (Burnham, 1990). The government’s inability to

address issues common voters care about leads to disinterest and a feeling that one’s voice has no

value.

In examining the statistics surrounding political engagement throughout history, the

trends in Americans’ participation in government are striking. In explaining the patterns in voter

turnout, Ruy Teixeira, in Why Americans Don’t Vote, agrees with Burnham and suggests a “voter
 New Kind of Patriotism 3

traits” approach (Valelly, 1990). He asserts that a shift in partisan identity and political efficacy

has contributed to a drop in voter turnout (Vallely, 1990). Combined with the hassle of

registering to vote, the inconvenience of going to the polls, and feeling that one’s vote is

useless—especially in gerrymandered, uncompetitive districts—has contributed to this decline

(Valelly, 1990). Teixeira focuses on more recent trends. In 1960, only 15% of Americans agreed

with the statements “People like me don't have any say about what the government does" and "I

don't think public officials care much what people like me think,” (Vallely, 1990). That number

rose to 32% in 1980 and continues to rise, as people truly believe that their vote doesn’t count

(Vallely, 1990). These numbers are exacerbated today as citizens’ trust in government declines,

and as they increasingly believe that, even if they were to vote, their representative would be

unlikely to put their constituents’ needs first. In 2017, according to a Gallup poll, 64% of

Americans said they have “not very much” confidence or “no trust at all” in the legislative

branch, up from 31% in 2000 and 25% in 1972, when the poll began (“Trust in government”).

Today, a great deal of research has focused on the problem, rather than the solution.

Americans are increasingly uneducated about their government. Though they may have a college

diploma or a graduate degree, because they lack knowledge of the inner workings of the

government and the ideals rooted within the words of the Constitution, they often hold a

pessimistic and surface-level understanding of the American government. Only 26% of

Americans can name all three branches of government (Shapiro & Brown, 2018) and 60% failed

to name the political party who currently controls the House of Representatives (Pitts, 2016).

Lacking knowledge about simple mechanisms within our government--60 percent of college

graduates could not describe the process for amendment ratification and 40 percent failed to

identify Congress’s power to declare war (Pitts 2016)—Americans often feel lost when it comes
 New Kind of Patriotism 4

to civics and are less able to hold their representatives accountable. A survey by the American

Revolution Center found that in 2009, 89% of people who anticipated taking a test on civic

knowledge said they would’ve passed it; however, 83% would’ve failed (Cole, 2016).

Americans’ overconfidence in our civic education system has led to mediocrity, as many

students continue to leave public schools lacking the tools of an engaged citizen.

Researchers have found similar disparities within the structure of the public education

system. In 2014, only 23% of eighth graders scored at or above “proficient” on the NAEP exam

(Shapiro & Brown, 2018), indicating a need for primary and middle school civics courses. In a

speech, Charles Quigley, the executive director for the Center for Civic Education, postulated

that only approximately 15% of students receive a satisfactory civic education before college

(1999). At the same time, there seems to be a decreased emphasis on civic education in schools.

With the rise of standardized testing, discussion in the classroom has been set aside in favor of

remediation and rigid preparation programs, as schools—especially those in poorer

neighborhoods—are constantly striving to maintain accreditation (2013). The Center for

American progress found similar trends, as math and reading take precedence over other subjects

and only nine states and the District of Columbia require one year of U.S. government or civics

(Shapiro & Brown, 2018). In 2016, the Education Commission of the States found that only

seventeen states include civic education in their accountability frameworks; therefore, few

schools have consequences for failing to meet civic education standards (Tripodo & Pondiscio,

2017).

Despite these negative findings, there is evidence that avenues for improvement exist. In

the 2010 Civics National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), public school students

reported that they discussed current events frequently in the classroom, as 74 percent of eighth
 New Kind of Patriotism 5

graders and 81 percent of twelfth graders reported discussing relevant issues at least one or two

times a month. The quality and structure of this discussion can be questioned; yet the efforts

made by teachers cannot be underestimated (Avery, Levy & Simmons, 2013). In 2006, McDevitt

and Kiousis’s focus groups with high school students, students expressed that their interest was

especially piqued by relevant classroom discussions about current issues (Avery, Levy &

Simmons, 2013).

However, the most fundamental changes may need to be made not in simply stressing the

importance of civics in schools, but altering the methods through which it is taught. In seeking to

remedy the nation’s ignorance, the most effective civic education programs are inclusive and are

both knowledge- and action-based. Florida is viewed as the gold standard when it comes to

innovative civic education. iCivics, created by former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day

O’Connor, provides online materials for every Florida student (Pitts, 2016). Combined with

participation in the We the People competition and the US Senate Youth program, the Florida

curriculum has made impressive progress toward a more involved and interactive framework

(Pitts, 2016).

In the city of Chicago, more than 200 students take part in Project Soapbox, through

which students research and speak about a current issue, from gun rights to abortion rights, about

which they feel strongly (Strauss, 2016). Through speech-writing, and, perhaps more

importantly, listening to other students give their own speeches, the students gain both academic

(speaking and writing) and interpersonal (listening and empathic) skills (Strauss, 2016).

Fostering the latter is essential to inspiring cooperation in today’s society, as President of the

University of Pennsylvania and political scientist Amy Gutmann asserted (Strauss, 2016). In

another program—Current Human Issues Research Projects (CHIRPS)—fifth graders in State

College Pennsylvania solve community issues through meaningful action, complete with a

proposal and website (Strauss, 2016). Many of these programs have real impact on the attitudes

and practices of the students they serve. Consisting of a skills-based course and the Judicially

Speaking program—through which local judges visit classrooms and walk students through their

decision-making process--, Colorado’s civic education program “may contribute to a youth voter

participation rate and youth volunteerism rate which is slightly higher than the national average,”

(Shapiro & Brown 2018).

However, low-income students often fail to reap the benefits of these programs due to the

programs’ concentration in primarily wealthy and specialized schools. The marginalized students

who need to have a voice are the ones who are left out of the civic education conversation. This

civic empowerment gap is evident as white, wealthy students are more likely to participate and

succeed in civic education programs, as only seven percent of students who received free or

reduced lunch reached “proficient” on the National Assessment for Educational Progress in

civics (2013). Minority, low-socioeconomic-status students have less access to political

information through conventional means, like participation in community organizations and

parental involvement, leading to a disadvantage that begins at a young age and is often not

addressed in poorer schools (Levinson, 2010). Researchers often extolled the results and benefits

of many select civic education programs, deeming them solutions to the problems facing our

nation, while failing to identify the narrow populations they serve.

As evidenced by the research surrounding Americans’ lack of knowledge and

participation when it comes to politics, change is a necessity. Civic education, when involving

discussion of current issues and community action coupled with a thorough curriculum, can
 New Kind of Patriotism 7

remedy America’s political participation and engagement problem, only if expanded to

accommodate students from all backgrounds.

Research List

(2013, Oct. 9). Groundbreaking report released on educating America’s youth for civic and

political participation. Harvard IOP at the Kennedy Center. Retrieved from

http://www.iop.harvard.edu/about/newsletter-press-release/

groundbreaking-report-released-educating-america%E2%80%99s-youth-civic.

Avery, P. G., Levy, S. A., Simmons, A. M. (2013). Deliberating controversial public issues as

part of civic education. The Social Studies, 104(3). Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aqh&AN=86060497&site=ehost

-live.

Burnham, W. D. (1990, Dec. 1). Democracy in peril: The American turnout problem and the

path to plutocracy. The Roosevelt Institute. Retrieved from

http://rooseveltinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/burnham-white-paper-pdf.pdf.

Cole, J. R. (2016, Nov. 8). Ignorance does not lead to election bliss. The Atlantic. Retrieved from

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/11/ignorance-does-not-lead-to-

election-bliss/506894/.

Levinson, M. (2010). The Civic Empowerment Gap: Defining the Problem and Locating

Solutions. Handbook of Research on Civic Engagement in Youth. Retrieved from

https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8454069/Levinson%20The%20Civic%20Em

powerment%20Gap.pdf?sequence=1.

Pitts, A. B. (May 2016). Raising the bar on civic education. The Florida Bar Journal, 90(5).

Retrieved from https://www.floridabar.org/news/tfb-journal/?durl=%2FDIVCOM%

2FJN%2FJNJournal01.nsf%2Fd59e2cf27607c0cf85256ad1005ba53f%2Ff7d4e93fa0ed5

dea85257fa1004d0e4a%21OpenDocument.

Quigley, C.N. (1999). Civic education: Recent history, current status, and the future. American

Bar Association Symposium. Washington, D.C.: Center for Civic Education.

Strauss, V. (2016, Nov. 5). We talk a lot about civic education. Here's how to get kids really

engaged in it. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/

news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/11/05/we-talk-a-lot-about-civic-education-heres-how-to-get-

kids-really-engaged-in-it/?utm_term=.c3eead08e62e.

Tripodo, A., & Pondiscio, R.. (Nov. 2017). Seizing the civic education moment. Educational

Leadership, 75(3). Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-

leadership/archived-issues.aspx.

Trust in government. Gallup. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/5392/trust-

government.aspx.

Valelly, R. (1990). Vanishing voters. The American Prospect. Retrieved from

http://prospect.org/article/vanishing-voters.