Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.
Students need to do more than just learn about democracy. They need to live it, writes Frazier.
Students must do more than just check the box on civic education
Frazier, a student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, runs The Oregon Way, a nonpartisan blog.
A few weeks back, the Tualatin Rotary Club kindly invited me to speak about The Oregon Way, the nonpartisan blog I started as a way to revive Oregon's civic culture. I ran through a presentation that, among other things, called for improving civic knowledge in the state.
When the meeting ended, a former educator approached me. They wanted to make sure I knew about SB 513, a recently passed bill meant to shore up civic education in Oregon schools. And, while the bipartisan legislators that championed that bill deserve praise, it's a woefully inadequate response to a dire lack of civic knowledge. Real civic knowledge requires civic education as well as civic experience.
The text of the bill itself lays out the dismal state of civic knowledge among America's youth. The last time high school seniors took a national assessment on civic knowledge — back in 2010 — less than one in four students scored "proficient." One in three had a "below basic" knowledge of our democracy. In response, the Oregon Legislature passed a bill that's too late and does too little.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
The crux of the bill — a requirement to pass a civics course before graduation — doesn't come into force until the Class of 2026 (students just starting eighth grade). In the interim, Oregon will continue to send students through an education system without preparing them to thrive as democratic participants. Most other states also require some sort of credit requirement prior to graduation.
But a couple of credits from civics-related courses will leave students short of developing meaningful civic knowledge. Imagine if Michael Jordan's basketball education was confined to reciting the rules of the game. Do you think he'd be the greatest of all time? No.
Most students will treat the mandated courses and assignments like any other requirement — check the box, complete the tests and move on to the next thing. What made MJ incredible was actually getting in the game. We need to give our future leaders the same opportunity — civic education and civic experience.
If we really want to prepare students to shape our democracy, then we must create opportunities for them to practice just that — actually participating. Of course, a basic understanding of our Bill of Rights, Constitution and federalist system is essential, but numerous and substantive experiences in democratic activities can be transformative.
The other person who came up to me after the meeting had just that sort of transformative experience. Her school required every student to work on a political campaign before graduation. She was assigned to assist Leon Panetta in his race for Congress. Of course, Panetta won that race and, decades later, eventually served as secretary of defense. With every move Panetta made up the political ladder, his student campaign volunteer kept her eye on him — she felt like she had an obligation to see if he lived up to the initial campaign pledges he made so many years before. That's civic knowledge in action.
Imagine if we empowered young Americans to attend city council meetings, submit testimony to the state legislature, and volunteer for a campaign of their choice (local, state or federal). That's the sort of learning that will build on traditional conceptions of civic education and actually improve civic knowledge.
Some people will say that requiring civic experiences just isn't feasible in these partisan times. And it's true that a participation requirement is more controversial than merely asking students to recite the Bill of Rights. However, that requirement, as mentioned above, doesn't have to be tied to a particular party, candidate or ideology. Attending a semester's worth of city council meetings doesn't force any sort of speech or preach a certain ideology, it merely reminds students that they have a seat at the table — and should make the most of that seat.
Others will say that students can seek out political internships on their own accord. The problem is many of those positions aren't paid and, even if they are, may only go to the kids of parents already thoroughly engaged in our democracy. Our hands-off approach to civic experiences means that only a select bunch of students tend to accumulate the knowledge necessary to shape our democracy. Our country must do better than that by making civic experiences just as much of an expectation as civic education and as soon as possible ... not years from now.
Oregon and the rest of the United States cannot wait until 2026 to give our students the tools they need to secure a democracy that's facing threats from nearly every angle. We need more than tests of civic education to prepare our students for the task of leading our state into the future. We ought to provide every student with meaningful civic experiences that remind students that they, like the rest of us, are the drivers of our democracy.
- The "business case" for civic education - The Fulcrum ›
- Community engagement as a vital component of civic education ... ›
- Report: America needs to reimagine civic education - The Fulcrum ›
- Our democracy demands an investment in civic education ›
- Comprehensive civics education should lead with equity - The Fulcrum ›
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.
Don't shy away from honest, open discourse
Frazier, a student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, runs The Oregon Way, a nonpartisan blog.
I wrote my first op-ed as a senior in high school. It was about John Steinbeck's book "East of Eden." "Timshel," a central word in the book, is a Hebrew word that translates to "thou mayest." I referred to it as part of a message to my fellow soon-to-be graduates. The piece wasn't a stroke of genius and I'd surely make some edits to it today.
Still, I'm glad I wrote it, even if it made only one other person think of a novel idea, explore a different perspective or pick up a new book. If any of those things happened, I achieved something because our popular discourse was enriched and the diversity of thought was expanded.
I'm glad I shared my two cents even though this piece or one of the 184 pieces I've written since then will inevitably be used against me — maybe in pursuit of a job, maybe in a run for office, maybe in a social media debate. Whatever the reason, the threat of my past ideas being used to thwart my present and future plans admittedly weighs on me.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
I'll be in a flow, typing word after word and riffing on what I think is an insightful piece, and then ... boom. I hear future Kevin asking, "What will people 20 years from now think of this?" That's when present Kevin contemplates erasing a few words, softening my tone and changing an explicit conclusion into one that readers will have to pick up between the lines.
Usually, that's when I channel the idea of timshel. After you read "East of Eden," you'll have a particularly deep understanding of why I think about one of Steinbeck's most important thoughts. Your past cannot and should not be allowed to dictate your future. Just as his book traces our ability to grow, learn and improve, I dare myself to share my growth, my mistakes and my improvements with a wider audience.
It's scary. It may come back to bite me. But it will all be worth it if my pieces help challenge others to engage in a more honest and open discourse with their friends and community. It's true that some ideas aren't worth discussing — for example, the merits of ethnic cleansing. Society is pretty good at drawing bright red lines around certain subjects. But there is a difference between indefensible ideas and controversial ones. It's the controversial ones that push us to examine our own biases, our own assumptions and our own areas for growth.
When folks like Nicholas Kristof, a New York Times columnist and potential candidate for Oregon governor, dive into controversies their explorations should be celebrated and never used as evidence against their pursuit of important positions. Yet, some folks are already citing old Kristof pieces as reasons to doubt his credibility and capacity to serve in office.
Kristof and others who dare to share their perspectives on controversial subjects are performing a public service. The second that concerns about our future selves silence our present voices is the second that our democratic discourse becomes monotone. That's a reality we cannot accept. You don't learn from monotone. You don't ask new questions in an environment where every controversy is easily resolved. You don't progress as a society if people self-censor their struggles with difficult concepts.
In "East of Eden," we see characters evolve in the face of new challenges. That's all we can ask of anyone. We're all better than our worst day and all more thoughtful than a single piece. So pick up a pen and paper, share your ideas and dare to deliberate.
- Kristin Hansen of AllSides honored as an everyday hero - The Fulcrum ›
- Community engagement as a vital component of civic education ... ›
- Digital Citizen, Mismatch offer ways to improve dialogue - The Fulcrum ›
- Think before you post? 5 reasons people self-censor on Facebook ›
- Facebook self-censorship: What happens to the posts you don't ... ›
- NEW SURVEY: Majority of college students self-censor, support ... ›
- Poll: 62% of Americans Say They Have Political Views They're ... ›
- Open Dialogue | A website for the international Open Dialogue ... ›
We must all be lifeguards for democracy
Frazier, a student at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, runs The Oregon Way, a nonpartisan blog.
One lifeguard stood guard over a Santa Cruz beach full of sunbathers and swimmers. With temps topping the 80s and the Pacific providing a cool, but not freezing, source of relief, the lifeguard had his hands full at once ensuring that basic beach etiquette was being followed and monitoring the surf for swimmers struggling against strong rip currents. Unsurprisingly, he couldn't do both.
A small girl snuck into the waves while her parents were distracted with three other children. In a flash, the girl had been toppled by a machine-washer of a wave and was losing a battle against the water to regain access to air. Thankfully, an outlooker identified the increasingly dire condition of the girl and sprinted into the water. The lifeguard came soon after, but absent the action of this good Samaritan it's unclear whether anyone would have been there in time.
Our democracy, like the beach, requires that we all actively contribute to a healthy public environment, rather than leaning on single individuals and institutions to do the entirety of the hard work of good governance and civil discourse.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
At the beach, some people feel that they're off the hook when it comes to looking out for others — that's the lifeguard's job, they say. In our democracy, many people feel that it's on politicians, the media and civic institutions to reinforce democratic norms — that's their duty, they say.
In both cases, there's a faulty assumption at work — that the appointed safeguards have the resources (financial, personnel, temporal) required to protect everyone. That assumption may have held true decades ago, but just as the seas have become rougher, the illiberal waves crashing on the foundation of our democracy have become stronger. The result is that we can no longer rely on these singular entities to do a job that requires collective action.
At the beach, a safer experience for all requires a little more engagement by all. Despite the lifeguard placing a "rip tide warning" flag at the beach entry, repeatedly making calls on his megaphone and rushing into the surf on numerous occasions to help struggling swimmers, most beachgoers seemed quite fine ignoring the rules he tried to set. Part of this is an understandable inclination toward freedom and liberty — you're at the beach, after all, let other people do as they please! That inclination, though, can only go so far. A girl nearly lost her life — a situation that only occurred because of failures by public and private parties alike.
On the public end, the most glaring issue was a lack of lifeguards. On the private end, a number of parties were arguably at fault, including parents too busy with other kids and bystanders too fearful of litigation resulting from a rescue gone wrong.
In our democracy, a healthier democracy likewise is the responsibility of public and private stakeholders alike. For one, elected and public officials should be held to higher, more enforceable standards. A sample reform could be designating those standards and then empowering a bipartisan, independent agency to rigorously enforce those standards. Such a body would have been of immense value in Oregon during the state's last legislative session — at least three elected officials were the subjects of ethical investigations — each investigation took too long and involved too many partisan interests. A standing agency could have resolved each case in a standardized, transparent and efficient manner — resulting in better behavior among officials and more trust among the public.
But we should not hold our breath for elected officials suddenly improving their behavior. Voters and the public in general have to take ownership over our collective civic health. Self-restraint is in order: for example, reserving Facebook for photos of friends and family, rather than as a platform for partisan mud-slinging. But we can and should also do more to intervene on the behalf of others: inviting friends and family to attend city council meetings, encouraging community leaders to run for office, asking others to join a mutual pledge to volunteer more in the community.
Collective action (and restraint) is required for everyone to have a great day at the beach; same goes for everyone to access the liberty and freedoms created by a strong democracy.
- Protecting voting rights law requires army of lawyers - The Fulcrum ›
- Time for a cross-partisan push to prevent abuses of power - The ... ›
- Protecting voting isn't enough to save democracy - The Fulcrum ›
- Liz Cheney, Margaret Chase Smith and protecting democracy - The ... ›
- A summer of the individual vs. the common good - The Fulcrum ›