Design Challenges for Civics and History Educators
By Peter Levine, Professor and Associate Dean in Tufts University’s Jonathan Tisch College of Civic Life
Explore Part 2 of our series, “Voices in Social Studies” where educators and thought leaders share the latest in social studies teaching and learning. Read Part 1.
A Crisis in Civic Life
The American people are badly polarized. Political scientist Shanto Iyengar and his colleagues write: “Democrats and Republicans both say that the other party’s members are hypocritical, selfish, and closed-minded, and they are unwilling to socialize across party lines, or even to partner with opponents in a variety of other activities.” Their article was published well before the 2020 election, which has surely made things worse.
Polarization has hampered education in American history and civics. These two fields inevitably address the kinds of issues that divide Americans, from the significance of racial injustice in the American story to the proper function of the national government today. For teachers and school leaders, it often seems safer to deemphasize history and civics than to risk criticism when such issues arise. Teachers in other fields may also shy away from topics that should contribute to civic education, such as environmental issues in science or enslavement in literature.
The less we teach civics and history, the less our students develop the skills and knowledge that could help them to talk with their fellow citizens across partisan lines. Polarization hurts civics, and a dearth of civics worsens polarization — a classic vicious cycle.
A Consensus Roadmap
However, consensus is possible. In 2019, during the Trump Administration, two federal agencies, the National Endowment for the Humanities and the U.S. Department of Education, funded an ideologically, philosophically, and demographically diverse team to write a “Roadmap” for teaching American history and civics. As a member of that team, I can report that we spent thousands of hours deliberating what and how to teach until we reached a consensus that satisfies all of us.
We did not compromise by splitting the difference but incorporated many perspectives authentically and fully in the overall document. We hope that it will demonstrate that consensus is possible and will help educators to navigate controversies. You are welcome to explore it on its new website and to use the portions that are applicable to your own role.
The Educating for American Democracy Roadmap offers advice, not directives. How it is used will depend entirely on the voluntary decisions of teachers, district leaders, state standards writers and policymakers, textbook publishers, and many others.
Explore the new 6–12 U.S. and World History programs:
🌏 Inspire students to experience history through multiple lenses and inquiry as they learn to practice civil discourse on their way to becoming future-ready citizens.
The Design Challenges
In addition to extensive advice about what and how to teach, we also name five “Design Challenges.” These are built-in tensions that confront history and civic education.
For these challenges, we don’t exactly suggest solutions, because we recognize that they are not completely solvable and that the best approach will depend on the precise context: the age and backgrounds of students, a teacher’s own interests and expertise, the course or curriculum in which these challenges arise, and even the nature of the community beyond the school.
That said, we think that by naming a small number of these challenges, we can direct more attention to addressing them. Teachers who are planning their own lessons, writers of curricula and standards, textbook authors, and even designers of tests should consider these challenges as they do their work, and as a result, better solutions should begin to emerge and spread.
The Good and the Bad
Here is one example. Design Challenge 4 asks, “How can we offer an account of U.S. constitutional democracy that is simultaneously honest about the past without falling into cynicism, and appreciative of the founding without tipping into adulation?”
This is indeed a challenge. When we emphasize the bad parts of the American past — oppression and exclusion — we may alienate some children, undermine their support for valuable institutions, and even reduce their belief that they can play positive roles in our society today. On the other hand, when we overlook the bad parts of our history, we prevent students from understanding the whole truth and from exploring possible solutions. A sanitized view of history may also prove fragile once students encounter troubling facts.
One response might be to split the difference and try to “balance” the good with the bad. I think we can do better than that. We can incorporate a true understanding of the special promise of American democracy along with a fully robust exploration of our deep injustices. If both are done well, without compromise, young people will emerge with a nuanced view and will be able to absorb new information and handle disagreement.
Again, by defining this challenge, we have not solved it. The same is true of the other four challenges, some of which have to do with integrating the disciplines of history and civics or connecting academic work to informed action. The point of the Design Challenges is to channel the creativity and experience of thousands of educators (and their students) to make progress on these central problems.
We hope you will join this effort.
Explore the new 6–12 U.S. and World History programs:
🌏 Inspire students to experience history through multiple lenses and inquiry as they learn to practice civil discourse on their way to becoming future-ready citizens.
Works Cited
The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States Shanto Iyengar, Yphtach Lelkes, Matthew Levendusky, Neil Malhotra, Sean J. Westwood. Annual Review of Political Science 2019 22:1, 129–146
Peter Levine is a professor and associate dean in Tufts University’s Jonathan Tisch College of Civic Life. He formerly directed CIRCLE (https://circle.tufts.edu/) and chaired the civics team for the C3 (College, Career, and Civic Life) Framework. You can read more of his work here.
