America’s Schools Flunk Civics

The excessive discord among American political factions, and the rejection of traditional American values by a sizeable minority, may be fueled by the stunning inadequacy of the public education system, particularly in the teaching of civics and history. A fatal lack of knowledge about the meaning of the unique U.S. Constitutional form of government and the growing absence of historical memory warps the national dialogue.

Leftists and conservatives alike have worried about this issue. But what is to blame?

A Forbes article by George Leef reports that “A good many educators take seriously the idea that teaching is a political activity and accordingly feel justified in using their classrooms as platforms for spreading their social, economic, and philosophical beliefs. They want to act as “change agents” who will improve the world…Most of those educators have been imbued with a leftist cast of mind – hostile to capitalism, private property, and anything that stands in the way of their utopian visions of a just society brought about through government power. Instances like the recent ones at UC Santa Barbara (where a professor physically attacked a student who was peacefully protesting abortion) and Eastern Connecticut (where a writing professor went off on a rant about how evil Republicans are) are pretty common.”

Jonathon Cole, writing in The Atlantic, notes that “While there surely are many varied causes for the current American political situation, one among those is the relative ignorance of basic American history…and what some refer to as “civics” among a large sector of our population. It is testimony to the failure of the country’s education system that a high percentage of the voting-age population is simply ignorant of basic facts—knowledge that is necessary to act reasonably and rationally in the political process. This void isn’t limited to those with little education or those without significant professional achievements. It is telling, for example, that in 2009, 89 percent of those who took a test on civic knowledge expressed confidence they could pass it; in fact, 83 percent would have failed.”

The American Bar Association has long worried about this issue. In 2011, Mark Hansen, writing in the ABA Journal stressed that “Parents traditionally worry about what their children are learning in school, but it’s what those students are not learning that’s even more unsettling.”

Supportive Behaviour While Talking About ED Your partner shall likely notice issues that you are utilizing the addictive pharmaceutical medications, the naturopathic spehttp://valsonindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/VIL-DIV-2009-2010_final.xls online viagrats know the withdraw process that will simultaneously replace the anti-depressant medication with natural alternatives. This accurate identical capsule is also available as a branded discount viagra sale valsonindia.com. This helps to maintain an erection. female cialis Kamagra is introduced in two forms: Kamagra wholesale viagra tablets and oral jelly. Educational professionals are aware of the challenge. Chester Finn, writing for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute on Excellence in Education worries about the failure of civics education.

The Education Commission of the United States conducted a comprehensive survey on the teaching of civics. Finn states that “We’ve known for a while—thanks to the National Assessment and other measures—that American primary-secondary students aren’t learning a heckuva lot of civics… NAEP assessed civics in 2006 and found that fewer than a quarter of high school seniors could supply a satisfactory answer to a question about the means by which citizens can change laws. uCenter surveyed American adults in 2014 and found that only 36 percent could name the three branches of the U.S. government…”

A 2017 study by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that “Many Americans are poorly informed about basic constitutional provisions, according to a new national survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center…More than a third of those surveyed (37 percent) can’t name any of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment; Only a quarter of Americans (26 percent) can name all three branches of government. ‘Protecting the rights guaranteed by the Constitution presupposes that we know what they are. The fact that many don’t is worrisome,’ said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania…”

That research is echoed by The Brookings Institute: that asks “…do America’s young people have the tools they need to assess candidates for public office and influence the policy process? The statistics say no. According to a new book edited by David Feith, young Americans know little about the Bill of Rights, the democratic process, or the civil rights movement. Three of every four high school seniors aren’t proficient in civics, nine of ten aren’t proficient in U.S. history, and the problem is aggravated by a lack of civic education at the university level.”

The Report Concludes Tuesday, May 29.

Photo: Smithsonian Institute

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.