Children learn as they live, and to the extent that our schools emphasize collaboration in games and creative work, children will come to learn the attitudes and mechanisms needed to collaborate at the national and global scale. This has long been known.
A national civics exam? The national civics exam that Americans want is already being inflicted on their children every day. They learn how to recite factoids, to obey, and to seek diversion not in the imagination and creation of better worlds, but through drugs and corporate entertainment. They learn very well the roles that society expects of them.
There are ways to change this for the better. But we'll have to see the situation for what it is before we can begin. A "national civics exam" along the lines suggested in this article would be about as useful as a pencil case.
A national civics exam? The national civics exam that Americans want is already being inflicted on their children every day. They learn how to recite factoids, to obey, and to seek diversion not in the imagination and creation of better worlds, but through drugs and corporate entertainment. They learn very well the roles that society expects of them.
There are ways to change this for the better. But we'll have to see the situation for what it is before we can begin. A "national civics exam" along the lines suggested in this article would be about as useful as a pencil case.
Thanks for all your thoughts in response to my letter. They were stimulating, suggesting new directions and ideas. The thrust was that we need civics education, but the devil is in the details. Some asked what a pluralistically- designed test meant; by that I meant a test that cuts across political and cultural groups that can be palatable to those of different political stripes, but emphasizes civics principles. Others worried it would be hard to get students off smartphones to study, but I'm more optimistic about how teachers can motivate our young. I think with good teachers they are intellectually capacious. Others thought we need to have more than just one course and it shouldn't be coordinated by the federal government, but by the states. All true, but just the process of developing a test -- and getting students to study and talk about it -- would be healthy. It would forge a civic, rather than private, identity and get us thinking as a country. If Trump wants to build an infrastructure, perhaps he should build an infrastructure around civics education, the symbolic foundation of the best of American values.
3
Justice Breyer also said that people don't know how government works, how policies affect them, who is responsible for decisions and whom to complain to when things don't work. This, he said, leaves people susceptible to a strongman who promises to fix everything. The Justice was prescient.
But what else explains why people who complain about things -- lost manufacturing jobs, job off-shoring, expensive health care, low flat wages, loss of union benefits, high taxes, income inequality, huge military budgets and endless wars contributing to slow economic growth -- would ever vote Republican when all these problems are straight-up GOP policy?
Civics education is now a top priority for school administrators, Hollywood screen writers and community outreach programs.
But what else explains why people who complain about things -- lost manufacturing jobs, job off-shoring, expensive health care, low flat wages, loss of union benefits, high taxes, income inequality, huge military budgets and endless wars contributing to slow economic growth -- would ever vote Republican when all these problems are straight-up GOP policy?
Civics education is now a top priority for school administrators, Hollywood screen writers and community outreach programs.
2
I like watching Watters. He is funny, and he does a fantastic job exposing the ignorance of our college students on civics topics. Most of them don't even know the very basics of how US Government functions. But hey, if you can be ignorant and become POTUS, who needs knowledge, right?
1
Professor Perlloff is correct in that we need a return to civics , problems of ,American Democracy, American history,,and other government courses as we used to have it here in the U.S.A., along with civics testing .
here is a vast literature on U. S. civics teaching and learning such as Farnen and J. Melonen ,Authhoritarianism, Democracy,and Education,Mavcmlllan, 2000’
Why not check It out ?
Russell Farnen
,Ph D Professor of Political Science
(emeritus)
University of Connectiicut
here is a vast literature on U. S. civics teaching and learning such as Farnen and J. Melonen ,Authhoritarianism, Democracy,and Education,Mavcmlllan, 2000’
Why not check It out ?
Russell Farnen
,Ph D Professor of Political Science
(emeritus)
University of Connectiicut
1
Just a single course in Civics during High School is not going to solve this problem. A glossing over of complex subject during the time when hormones and social connections occupy their minds is inadequate.
We teach math to children since very young and try to instill logic, and although they may not grow up to be scientist we are aware of it's indispensable need for life. In the same spirit, shouldn't we start to teach how society is organized and governed early in life? After all, it does affect their lives greatly. There is a vast difference between living in N. Korea and the U.S.
By the time they are in HS they should already be talking and discussing Marx, Hobbes, Confucius, Mill, ET-AL not just taking Civics 101.
Would a society better enlightened in this area be seeking answers to problems on the horizon and not just be in emergency repair as we always seem to be? For example, what will we do when robotics is married to a very sophisticated Artificial Intelligence and half of the population is left with out jobs?
We teach math to children since very young and try to instill logic, and although they may not grow up to be scientist we are aware of it's indispensable need for life. In the same spirit, shouldn't we start to teach how society is organized and governed early in life? After all, it does affect their lives greatly. There is a vast difference between living in N. Korea and the U.S.
By the time they are in HS they should already be talking and discussing Marx, Hobbes, Confucius, Mill, ET-AL not just taking Civics 101.
Would a society better enlightened in this area be seeking answers to problems on the horizon and not just be in emergency repair as we always seem to be? For example, what will we do when robotics is married to a very sophisticated Artificial Intelligence and half of the population is left with out jobs?
2
Thanks for the comment about my letter -- totally agree. We need a curriculum and a societal commitment and money for civics, the heart of democracy, but not something lobbyists would support.
3
The supreme court ruled that literacy (or civics) tests for voters are unconstitutional, but I do not think they said anything about such tests for candidates. This is what we need (badly).
1
This is the unfortunate outcome of educational cuts and low quality education and its values. If any further proof is needed look who was elected president.
We are proudly a nation of know nothings. Honestly if you asked high schoolers what 'civics class' is for they would not know the answer.
This dumbing down of America helps the government and businesses manipulate and control its ignorant citizens. When they get smarter or more informed is when they get haughty, demanding and quite possibly revolutionary. See the 60's for example.
We are proudly a nation of know nothings. Honestly if you asked high schoolers what 'civics class' is for they would not know the answer.
This dumbing down of America helps the government and businesses manipulate and control its ignorant citizens. When they get smarter or more informed is when they get haughty, demanding and quite possibly revolutionary. See the 60's for example.
9
WHy is everyone overcomplicating this issue? Let's just start with having high school graduates understand what the three branches of government are and how they interact, and why there are three. "Democracy" is fast becoming a contest of rabble noise. Does anyone understand the concept of consensus?
3
As a former dean at Brandeis H.S., then as a lecturer in French and English st 2 African universities and a stint at PRF in Ziguinchor as a teacher trainer, I convinced that the struggle to make students literate, knowledgeable in any subject matter is "sans espoir!" Majority could not pass a word usage test, distinguish between a gerund and a participle, between a proper and a common noun, write declarative sentences and coherent paragraphs.Boards of education have given up the struggle, and now focus solely on computer literacy. And author wants to hold a national civics exam? Dream away. Years ago at Rugby I spoke with staff who complained students made elementary mistakes in style, punctuation and diction, and didn't seem even to care.Breslin's story of entering subway at rush hour and his horror seeing that not one person was reading a newspaper said it all. Everyone had his eyes on his Smartphone.How many folks believe that they can be happy in life without having read MOBY DICK?
1
Your point is well-taken. In writing the letter, I did assume a modicum of knowledge. But Americans were less literate when Moby Dick was written, and they improved. The problem is hard to solve, you're right, maybe impossible, but it needs attention -- and money. This is a problem of civic infrastructure.
2
American civics literacy is an embarrassment. We are over entertained and under educated. Yes, there should be better preparation in school and universities, but that is only for a children and a minority. For the electorate to be better informed we need better journalism, better access and government funding. Civics education is desperately needed for everyone, not just students.
8
Mary: Traditional standards of learning can never compete with the increasing popularity of technology. Students who could not write a declarative sentence if their lives depended on it, could not even define what it is, are wizards in terms of their understanding of latest innovations in cell phones and Smartpads. Engineer for a local radio host in Fla. was asked if he had ever heard of Sartre. No, he hadn't!Yet he had to be a technological wizard in order to qualify as an engineer for a radio nation. Imagine Joseph Alsop,great journalist of an earlier era. descended from old wasp aristocracy, tweeting.How undignified he would have considered such a "machin" a "truc!"
Civis used to be a required course. Given the misunderstandings of both the purposes and the powers of the various branches of government and, particularly, the increasing distrust of our public officials, we need to cultivate an informed public.
In light of the discussion of politically correct speech, this course could also teach how to be an informed listener, to recognize that information coming from one channel too often is news with a determined bias implicit in its delivery.
In light of the discussion of politically correct speech, this course could also teach how to be an informed listener, to recognize that information coming from one channel too often is news with a determined bias implicit in its delivery.
7
"The government should require that high school students pass a pluralistically designed national civics exam."
"Pluralistically designed"??
What does that mean?
One with questions and answers "designed" to suit the views of academicians with the correct political views.
"The government"???
Which government?
The federal government?
Imposing requirements on the states?
Isn't one of the first lessons of civics that public education is a function of the states, not the federal government?
Oar maybe a "pluralistically designed" exam would say that it is the function of the federal government.
"Pluralistically designed"??
What does that mean?
One with questions and answers "designed" to suit the views of academicians with the correct political views.
"The government"???
Which government?
The federal government?
Imposing requirements on the states?
Isn't one of the first lessons of civics that public education is a function of the states, not the federal government?
Oar maybe a "pluralistically designed" exam would say that it is the function of the federal government.
I thought you made a good point in response to my letter. So let the states develop it, that's fine. That's federalism. Yes, there are problems in doing this-- you want a test that does reflect different views of history and politics, one that all groups can accept, not just liberal academics. Actually the process of setting up a committee to do this could be helpful in building and forging bridges across our polarized citizenry.
1
Professor Perloff, I couldn't agree with you more... in principle. The problem I see lies in the execution of such a process. One would hope the exercise would engender some measure of collegiality, but I would hold out no hope for that. Our recent culture/education wars demonstrate that. We no longer have a shared national history, only state-based depictions of what America "means". Our textbooks are designed to be acceptable to highly partisan school boards, many of which have members who are themselves ignorant of history(and science) or who view negative depictions of our history as betrayals of our nation. Look: I absolutely believe that what we used to call "civics" should be brought back into the standard common curriculum. I would go further and demand that such instruction be designed so that high school students would be at minimum capable of passing the test taken by applicants for American citizenship. But I don't see anything like this happening. I truly hope I'm wrong.
1
What does "pluralistically designed" mean?
3
I think you raise a good point in response to my letter. Pluralistically designed means a program that appeals to people of different political and cultural views across the political spectrum and can be palatable to teachers in a rural town in Texas, as well as to those in Scarsdale. It's a multifaceted country and we need a test that cuts across cultures, but centers on civics principles.
1
Professor Perloff is 100% correct.
3
Revitalizing civics education is a worthwhile goal. Sell it to your elected school board. More important is the need to understand that conflict is at the heart of democracy. Remember, there is no political conflict under a dictatorship: It is shape up or ship out to the gulag.
Democracy requires representatives and senators to be open to the needs of all of their constituents, not just the pros or cons. Instead of resolving issues within their voting public, they take one hard position all the way to Washington or state capital; no need to compromise or teach their communities. One issue that divides the country is pro- versus anti-deficit spending. Another is, of course, abortion. When the pro- or anti- position is the best answer at a particular time or for an individual is lost. Build a road for us, not for them. Cut our taxes, raise theirs. Politicians pick the predominant position in their community in order to win. Texas has a committee that makes sure that no one has the opportunity to study evolution. From these origins are created conflict-free dictatorships, REGARDLESS of what a constitution may suggest.
Democracy requires representatives and senators to be open to the needs of all of their constituents, not just the pros or cons. Instead of resolving issues within their voting public, they take one hard position all the way to Washington or state capital; no need to compromise or teach their communities. One issue that divides the country is pro- versus anti-deficit spending. Another is, of course, abortion. When the pro- or anti- position is the best answer at a particular time or for an individual is lost. Build a road for us, not for them. Cut our taxes, raise theirs. Politicians pick the predominant position in their community in order to win. Texas has a committee that makes sure that no one has the opportunity to study evolution. From these origins are created conflict-free dictatorships, REGARDLESS of what a constitution may suggest.
7
I thought that you made an interesting point in response to my letter. Setting up a civics test would, of course, be political; that's a given. And maybe we could never get agreement on the questions. But even a watered down test that would force students to think about history and talk about it, going outside their comfort zones in politics and smartphones, would be better than the vapid status quo. Thanks for the point.
1
"If people do not understand the importance of a free press, they will readily agree with a White House that calls the media 'the opposition party."
CBS, CNN, MSNBC and this paper are loaded with liberal Democrats. That many of them believe the "ends justify the means" is beyond dispute. From Dan Rather and Mary Mapes to Donna Brazille they have demonstrated both conscious bias and sub-conscious bias in what issues and events they headline and what they let slip under the next wave of news. There is no danger in President Trump calling those outlets the opposition party. They are effectively part of the Democratic Party.
The danger to free speech comes when the government investigates investigative reporters. like Mr. Obama did. There is danger to free speech when the IRS targets conservative 501c4 political groups with more interrogatories and delays than they do liberal 501c4s. Which is just what the IRS's Ms. Lerner did under Mr. Obama's presidential tenure. There is danger to free speech when liberal college students chase Charles Murray off the stage and then pursue both he and his debate opponent through the campus, slightly injuring his debate antagonist.
Other than the sentence I quoted I agree with Professor Perloff. The population's general gross ignorance of our political institutions and their history is appalling. And I blame the radical left for that ignorance, not President Trump.
CBS, CNN, MSNBC and this paper are loaded with liberal Democrats. That many of them believe the "ends justify the means" is beyond dispute. From Dan Rather and Mary Mapes to Donna Brazille they have demonstrated both conscious bias and sub-conscious bias in what issues and events they headline and what they let slip under the next wave of news. There is no danger in President Trump calling those outlets the opposition party. They are effectively part of the Democratic Party.
The danger to free speech comes when the government investigates investigative reporters. like Mr. Obama did. There is danger to free speech when the IRS targets conservative 501c4 political groups with more interrogatories and delays than they do liberal 501c4s. Which is just what the IRS's Ms. Lerner did under Mr. Obama's presidential tenure. There is danger to free speech when liberal college students chase Charles Murray off the stage and then pursue both he and his debate opponent through the campus, slightly injuring his debate antagonist.
Other than the sentence I quoted I agree with Professor Perloff. The population's general gross ignorance of our political institutions and their history is appalling. And I blame the radical left for that ignorance, not President Trump.
2
I read your comment in response to my letter; you make a good point about Murray, obviously. But the key is getting people of all stripes to realize the centrality of free speech, and be a little more tolerant. That goes for the students who inappropriately blocked Murray, but it also goes for the white nationalists who talk about the liberal media as if it were a conspiratorial entity when it is more variable and variegated. Thanks for your reaction.
1
Yes indeed.
We could start by pointing out that the alternative to a fact is either a lie or a fiction. Then, kids could be helped to identify the difference.
Here's one example: "Public-School Students Take on Fake News
Fake News Finders, an after-school workshop run by the nonprofit group Mighty Writers, teaches media literacy to kids" - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/03/public-school-students-take...
“What’s the danger when you talk to other people about something that’s not true?”
Unfortunately, we all use social media that isolate us from fact checking, even my fellow progressives. There is no longer a common acceptance of what is reliable. But I do think in classroom situations it would be possible to explore how to evaluate the difference, so exploiters like this - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump - can't get such a toehold on the cliff of real knowledge.
People should learn to observe and trust their observations. If they did, they'd stop denying climate change, for example.
“You’ll either end up in a war or a riot,” one boy said. “Something really bad will happen.”
We could start by pointing out that the alternative to a fact is either a lie or a fiction. Then, kids could be helped to identify the difference.
Here's one example: "Public-School Students Take on Fake News
Fake News Finders, an after-school workshop run by the nonprofit group Mighty Writers, teaches media literacy to kids" - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/03/public-school-students-take...
“What’s the danger when you talk to other people about something that’s not true?”
Unfortunately, we all use social media that isolate us from fact checking, even my fellow progressives. There is no longer a common acceptance of what is reliable. But I do think in classroom situations it would be possible to explore how to evaluate the difference, so exploiters like this - http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/10/31/trolls-for-trump - can't get such a toehold on the cliff of real knowledge.
People should learn to observe and trust their observations. If they did, they'd stop denying climate change, for example.
“You’ll either end up in a war or a riot,” one boy said. “Something really bad will happen.”
11
Susan, observation is not enough. One has to do a little research many times to get to the facts. Google is a great help here. For example, in "Behold the G.O.P. Civil War on Health Care", Davis Leonhardt wrote, "Lacking this agreement, many Republicans have pretended that a magical health plan exists, one that would cover everyone, provide good insurance and cost less money. Wouldn’t that be nice!"
But of course, such a magical health plan exits. In fact, about thirty such plans exist. There are the plans of the other members of the OECD. They are universal, provide better health care results and cost on average only 40% per person of what we pay.
One has to do a tiny bit of work tiny bit of work to find this out.
PS I do not use social media unless you consider comments like this to be social media.
But of course, such a magical health plan exits. In fact, about thirty such plans exist. There are the plans of the other members of the OECD. They are universal, provide better health care results and cost on average only 40% per person of what we pay.
One has to do a tiny bit of work tiny bit of work to find this out.
PS I do not use social media unless you consider comments like this to be social media.
5
Yes Len, it's complicated. Someone else put it well above "overentertained and undereducated".
But the ease with which one can find answers on the internet means one can also isolate oneself from real information. In climate change, which is my main subject, a google search brings you to a great deal of plausible propaganda, disinformation, fake materials.
My worry about the progressive end is all the hatred that is directed into the circular firing squad. It enables the real attackers of liberty to fight with each other.
But the ease with which one can find answers on the internet means one can also isolate oneself from real information. In climate change, which is my main subject, a google search brings you to a great deal of plausible propaganda, disinformation, fake materials.
My worry about the progressive end is all the hatred that is directed into the circular firing squad. It enables the real attackers of liberty to fight with each other.
3
Oops, failure to proof. That was defenders of liberty. aargh ...
As for social media, again that's complicated. It's a new world out there. I'm as guilty as the next guy.
Curiosity, that's the thing.
As for social media, again that's complicated. It's a new world out there. I'm as guilty as the next guy.
Curiosity, that's the thing.
3
The question is, HOW can we revitalize civics education? I suggest that every education organization, at every level--city, state, and national--make this a priority and take any and all steps necessary to remedy the appalling lack of knowledge in civics among Americans.
14
Really appreciate that you read and respond to the comments. So many times we write a comment in hopes that the editorial writer and not just other commenters will read it. I wonder how often they do!