 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
America 101
How we let civic education slide—and why we need a crash course in the Constitution today.
Starting this October, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service will administer a new test for immigrants seeking American citizenship. The test is intended to be harder and more relevant than its predecessors. Replacing many of the more easily learned (and senseless) fact questions–“What are the colors of the flag?” “What colors are the stars on our flag?”–is a more meaningful series of questions about America’s constitutional democracy. Heralded as a real measure of “what makes an American citizen,” this new test asks, for example, “What is the supreme law of the land?” “What does the Constitution do?” “The idea of self- government is in the first three words of the Constitution. What are these words?” and “What is the rule of law?”
From the Framers onward, Americans have always considered civic literacy critical for a thriving democracy. “[A] well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people,” noted James Madison, the father of the Constitution and fourth president, in 1810. Americans continue to agree. A 1997 survey by the National Constitution Center (NCC) found that 84 percent of Americans believed that for the government to work as intended, citizens needed to be informed and active. Three-quarters of those polled claimed that the Constitution mattered in their daily lives, and almost as many people thought the Constitution impacted events in America today.
Yet, despite this nod to civic literacy, too few Americans could answer the questions on the citizenship test or similar questions. Forty-one percent of respondents to the NCC national survey were not aware that there were three branches of government, and 62 percent couldn’t name them; 33 percent couldn’t even name one. Over half of all those answering the NCC survey did not know the length of a term for a member of the Senate or House of Representatives. And another NCC study found that while 71 percent of teens knew that “www” starts an online web address, only 35 percent knew that “We the People” are the opening words of the Constitution. A study by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute found that “the average college senior knows astoundingly little about America’s history, government, international relations and market economy, earning an ‘F’ on the American civic literacy exam with a score of 54.2 percent.”
Things weren’t always this way; civics and current events courses were once common, even required, in American schools. But since the late 1960s, civic education in the country has declined. The main culprit in this sad tale is our educational system. “Civic education in the public schools has been almost totally eclipsed by a preoccupation with preparing the workforce of a global economy,” writes former Harvard University President Derek Bok. “Most universities no longer treat the preparation of citizens as an explicit goal of their curriculum.” The congressionally required National Assessments of Educational Progress confirms Bok’s point. A 1988 report found significant drops in civic knowledge since 1976; another in 2002 found “that the nation’s citizenry is woefully under-educated about the fundamentals of our American Democracy.” And while some have questioned the continuousness of the decline, there is little dispute with the troubling, perhaps ironic, conclusion: As the role of government has enormously expanded over the last 80 years, and as our voting rolls have opened to more and more groups of people, efforts to prepare our citizens for their civic responsibilities have fallen precipitously.
And this only addresses our basic civic literacy. Citizens still need a deeper understanding of the Constitution, an advanced set of knowledge to evaluate the operation of our government and weigh its successes and failures. A more advanced set of questions might ask: What is the vision of human nature that underlies the Constitution? What is the primary task of American government? Does the Constitution favor process over product and, if so, why? What is a special interest group? How does the Constitution define the common good?
Our civic ignorance is putting our constitutional democracy at risk. It is a significant part of the willingness of Congress and the public to defer to executive claims of authority since 9/11, with little understanding of its negative constitutional consequences. More generally, as the government continues to expand into our daily lives, our very freedom depends upon every citizen’s ability to understand and respond to it. Civic education, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor recently noted, is our only hope for “preserving a robust constitutional democracy…The better educated our citizens are, the better equipped they will be to preserve the system of government we have.” The only answer, then, is to reinject civic literacy into our educational system.
The ABCs of Civic Literacy
Preserving “a robust democracy,” as Justice O’Connor called for, requires citizens to know and understand the Constitution, both its content and its context. At a minimum, every American should be able to answer every question asked of naturalized citizens in the new test, and they should know what their answers mean. For example, in this presidential election season, Americans should know that they vote for electors and not directly for the president, and why the Framers chose this method. Americans must also know the different branches of government, their respective governing roles, and why they have them.
But Americans must understand much more about the Constitution. What the Framers sent out from Philadelphia for ratification was more than just a description of the institutions and processes of a new government. It was a set of ideas and principles about government and democracy, the ones that have come to form our constitutional conscience.
it is sad that a degree in history is sen as futile
Sep 17, 2008, 10:01 AMI recently became a US citizen. The civics test was very easy for me as someone who is educated and takes an active interest in history and politics.
However I was shocked that many of my friends and professional colleagues would not have passed the test.
It's much harder to become a citizen that to be one. Perhaps the concept of "citizen" should include some qualifications.
What an interesting article! Eric Lane reviews a rationale for civc education, explicates the reasons for the downfall of said education in the last forty-plus years in American history, and offers some (limited) suggestions for a renewed inclusion of civics literacy in the curriculum offered by public schools. On the surface, this article offers some important insights and suggestions, but it is woefully lacking in depth.
First, Mr. Lane's desciprtion of the need for civic literacy is actually quite good. He stresses the importance of knowledge and understanding of American history and American institutions and ideals. I admire his brief, but cogent, argument.
Mr. Lane then moves to a descirption of the downfall of civic education that began in the mid 1960s. He stresses, without really emphasizing the negative effects of the self-centered world view of the Baby Boomer generation, the effect of rampant individualism on our society and it's negation of the notion of "the common good." At any stage in history, the balance between the individual and society must be renogotiated over and over, and Lane. although acknowledging its effects, minimizes e Boomer's complete disregard for societal l needs and responsibilities. Mr. Lane, although also acknowledging the impact of minority group identity needs, ignores the impact of the civil rights movement to improve the standing of African-Americans and it's contributions to identify politics.
In addition, although Mr. Lane pays lip service to the current emphasis on math and science education, he ignores the pernicious effect of the overthrow of our political system by our concerns for economics. Although public education began with the desire to educate our young to be responsible decison-makers, society has now turned to educating our young to be successful economic entities as the primary aim of public education. This issue needs to be explored in greater detail.
But the real weakenss in Mr. Lane's propsals are to be found in his recommendations for an improved civic literacy curriculum. The first weakness in Mr. Lane's proposal is the age at which he believes that civic education should begin. The fourth or fifth grade is way too late to begin this aspect of eduction. If we really wish our youth to be aware of civid their civic heritage and repsponsibility, we need to begin their education at a much younger age. Tw0-year-olds are known for their burgeoning interest in decision-making (ask any parent who has been told, "No, I do it!!!" about the indpendence needs of two-year-olds), and education for the responsibilites of independence and liberty can begin at that early age. Three-and-four-year-olds can be given many more opportunities for decision-making, and that process should be a major part of the processes that are taught in preschools. The long-held social studies curriculum of community-based studies, the expanding community curriculum, and the holiday-based social studies curriculum, had it weaknesses, but it taught our children some of their civic history. The social studies curriculm based on political and economic subjects in the early years, as supported by Carol Seefeldt and others, added greatly to the contributions of social studies education to civic literacy. Mr. Lane focuses on civic education content, while ignoring the processes that are involved in civic literacy. That's too bad, and he should expand his suggestions.
I am a 69-year-old woman, who was the recipient of the "old" schooling (Prior to the 1960s), and I am forever grateful for my civic education. I just wish that my grandchildren would have the same opportunities as I had.
I see your point, good job, can't wait for more posts
stegna noclegi
Post a Comment
Eric Lane is a professor at Hofstra Law School and a senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. He is the co-author, with Michael Oreskes, of The Genius of America: How the Constitution Saved Our Country and Why It Can Again.
News
Vivek Wadhwa Talks Immigrant Entrepreneurs on NPR
On the August 23 edition of NPR’s “Morning Edition,” Vivek Wadhwa, a visiting scholar at the University of California-Berkeley, discussed the need to reform our visa policies to encourage immigrant entrepreneurs to stay in the United States. Wadhwa wrote about his specific ideas for reform in our entrepreneurship symposium in the Summer 2011 issue.
News
ABC News Interviews Elizabeth Warren, Cites Democracy Essay
On the July 18 edition of ABC’s “World News Tonight,” senior White House correspondent Jake Tapper interviewed Elizabeth Warren about the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which begins operations this week, and cited the Democracy essay in which she first introduced the idea for the agency.
Events
Stone, Kendall Continue Democracy Debate at Brookings Event
On July 18, the Brookings Institution hosted a debate between Doug Kendall, president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, and University of Chicago law professor Geoffrey Stone on how progressives should interpret the Constitution. The discussion, which was co-hosted by Democracy editorial chairman E.J. Dionne, built on their exchange in our newest issue.
