Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Meet the reformer: Louise Dubé, driving more equitable and inclusive civics learning

Louise Dubé of iCivics

Louise Dubé, at a 2019 event in Boston showcasing iCivics' efforts to improve education about democracy in the city's schools.

iCivics

Louise Dubé is about to mark her sixth anniversary at the helm of iCivics, which offers a menu of online games and lesson plans that have become perhaps the most widely adopted civics curriculum in the country. (The nonprofit was started by Sandra Day O'Connor soon after she retired from the Supreme Court.) Dubé started her career as an attorney in Montreal but has been an educational innovator in the United States since the 1990s — founding an alternative school for youthful offenders in New York, launching three educational software startups and helping start PBS LearningMedia while directing the digital education efforts of the network's station in Boston. Her answers have been edited for clarity and length.

What's the tweet-length description of your organization?

iCivics reimagines K-12 civic education to build civic strength.


Describe your very first civic engagement.

I'm from Quebec, and I grew up during the independence movement. It was a scary time, and you had to take sides. The father of one of my classmates was kidnapped during the conflict. I campaigned actively for the federal system, which won in a referendum. I marched and knocked on doors. I was proud of having helped in a small way to keep Canada together.

What was your biggest professional triumph?

I'm proud of the growth and impact of iCivics. We have more than tripled in size since I joined, and expanded to all 50 states. Students learn actively and deeply with our games and other curriculum materials. I am most proud of the community of educators we have built who are enthusiastic about iCivics. No learning happens in schools without the buy-in and skill of teachers.

And your most disappointing setback?

Over the past three years, we have sought to stimulate a movement to prioritize and improve civic education to combat what ails our constitutional democracy. We have made a lot of progress, but so far, the field has not found a home — in other words, no set of supporters for whom this is the primary mission. While every report and every person concerned with democracy reform mentions and highlights the need for civic education, it has not gotten the investment it deserves.

Many funders see elementary and secondary education as resistant to change. Others see it as a long-term project that is the responsibility of the government. Yet, the government has dis-invested in civics over decades, with clear results. I am still hopeful this critical mission will find the supporters and resources it needs to be the solution it can be.

How does your identity influence the way you go about your work?

iCivics is deeply committed to nonpartisanship. To do this work, I needed to adopt that same stance in my personal life. I do not post or share about political issues. I do not rail against politicians or support issues viewed as belonging to one party or the other.

But while iCivics will never take partisan stances, we will uphold moral imperatives, such as racial justice.

As a result our CivXNow coalition of educators has aligned behind policies that address equity in civics and democratic schooling environments — plus support for educators to have difficult conversations in the classroom as well as deeper knowledge and media literacy. We're working to do this while ensuring respect for a range of schools across very different viewpoints and local contexts.

Recently, though, iCivics made a commitment to pointing out institutional systemic racism in teaching about our institutions. This will alienate some, but it is the moral imperative of today.

What's the best advice you've ever been given?

I hate advice, but here is something that has inspired me over the years: Start with the end. It helps bring much-needed clarity.

Also: Look deep inside to see where you need to go, and join with others to find purpose.

Create a new flavor for Ben & Jerry's.

I sent this challenge to the iCivics team, which greatly appreciated the mission. The winner was a minty tie — between "Mint CitizenCHIP" (suggested by colleague Molly Launceford) and "27 A'mint'mints" (with 27 kinds of mint).

The runners up are "Liberty and Justice for Allmonds" (every other nut is out of luck, says suggester and head punster Emma Humphries) and "Seven Cream 76" (suggested by David Buchanan).

What's your favorite political movie or TV show?

"Twelve Angry Men," the 1954 play written originally for television by Reginald Rose. It's not actually political, but it's about the power of one person to strive for justice. I was trained as a lawyer after all. And HBO's "Veep," because ... it's fact based?

What's the last thing you do on your phone at night?

Check email to see if a million-dollar donation came through. This rarely happens, though.

What is your deepest, darkest secret?

Starting when I was 12 years old, I tried to figure out how to move to "The States," as they call it in Quebec. A number of harebrained schemes to get here all failed due to lack of cash. It is very gratifying today to have a very small role in improving our constitutional democracy as an American citizen.

Also, I hate mint ice cream.


Read More

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Crowd of people walking on a street.

Andy Andrews//Getty Images

Paul Ehrlich was wrong about everything

Biologist and author Paul Ehrlich, the most influential Chicken Little of the last century, died at the age of 93 this week. His 1968 book, “The Population Bomb,” launched decades of institutional panic in government, entertainment and journalism.

Ehrlich’s core neo-Malthusian argument was that overpopulation would exhaust the supply of food and natural resources, leading to a cascade of catastrophes around the world. “The Population Bomb” opens with a bold prediction, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

People clear rubble in a house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. The United States and Israel continued their joint attack on Iran that began on February 28. Iran retaliated by firing waves of missiles and drones at Israel, and targeting U.S. allies in the region.

Getty Images, Majid Saeedi

Bravado Isn’t a Strategy: Why the Iran War Has No Endgame

Most of what we have heard from the administration as it pertains to the Iran War is swagger and bro-talk. A few days into the war, the White House released a social media video that combined footage of the bombardment with clips from video games. Not long after, it released a second video, titled “Justice the American Way,” that mixed images of the U.S. military with scenes from movies like Gladiator and Top Gun Maverick.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon, War Secretary Pete Hegseth boasted of “death and destruction from the sky all day long.” “They are toast, and they know it,” he said. “This was never meant to be a fair fight... we are punching them while they’re down.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A student in uniform walking through a campus.

A Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) cadet walks through campus November 7, 2003 in Princeton, New Jersey.

Getty Images, Spencer Platt

Hegseth is Dumbing Down the Military (on Purpose)

One day before the United States began an ill-defined and illegal war of indefinite length with Iran, Pete Hegseth angrily attacked a different enemy: the Ivy League. The Secretary of War denounced Ivy League universities as "woke breeding grounds of toxic indoctrination” and then eliminated long-standing college fellowship programs with more than a dozen elite colleges, which had historically served as a pipeline for service members to the upper ranks of military leadership. Of the schools now on Hegseth’s "no-fly list," four sit in the top ten of the World’s Top Universities for 2026. So, why does the Secretary of War not want his armed forces to have the best education available? Because he wants a military without a brain.

For a guy obsessed with being the strongest and most lethal force in the world, cutting access to world-class schools is a bizarre gambit. It does reveal Hegseth doesn’t consider intelligence a factor–let alone an asset–in strength or lethality. That tracks. Hegseth alleges the Ivies infect officers with “globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks…” God forbid the tip of the sword of our foreign policy has knowledge of international cooperation and global interconnectedness. The Ivy League has its own issues, but the Pentagon’s claim that they "fail to deliver rigorous education grounded in realism” is almost laughable. I’m a veteran Lieutenant Commander with two Ivy League degrees, both paid for with military tuition assistance, and I promise: it was rigorous. Meanwhile, are Hegseth’s performative politics grounded in reality? Attacking Harvard on social media the eve of initiating a new war with a foreign adversary is disgraceful, and even delusional.

Keep ReadingShow less
Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?
Person working at a desk with a laptop and books.

Are We Prepared for a World Where AI Isn’t at Work?

Draft an important email without using AI. Write it from scratch — no suggestions, no autocomplete, and no prompt to ChatGPT to compose or revise the email.

Now ask yourself: Did it feel slower? Harder? Slightly uncomfortable?

Keep ReadingShow less