Spring 2003
Civic Education -- A Close Up Look
Stephen A. Janger
In 1914, when Carl Albert was
six years old, United States Representative Charles D. Carter stopped by
Albert's school in Bug Tussle, Oklahoma, to tell the students what he
did in Washington -- an event the "Little Giant" said inspired him to
public life. Like the video of President
Kennedy shaking hands with a teenaged Bill Clinton, Albert's story of
that event records the power of face-to-face moments between leaders and
young people, moments that are too scarce today and that reach back to a
time when politicians were still the heroes, the celebrities.
The
Little Giant always had time for youngsters. He
understood their special need for inspiration. As
a native Sooner and an OU graduate who admired him for that and so many
other reasons, I gladly accepted the invitation to discuss in Extensions some of the Close Up
Foundation's work in civic education, particularly the important
interaction our participants have with the Congress.
I
had the pleasure of being a part of the beginning of the Close Up
Foundation in 1970, and thanks to generations of talented staff and the
devotion of a hands-on board of directors, it has grown into the
nation's largest nonprofit civic education organization. It
was established to create for young people a better understanding and
appreciation of the democratic process and to develop more classroom
capabilities for teachers in the social studies field.
The early seventies was a
complicated time in America. The Vietnam
conflict had set many young people against war, and anti-war sentiments
were devolving into less specific and more corrosive "anti-government"
and "anti-establishment" attitudes. At
Close Up, we tried to meet those attitudes head on by emphasizing
for young people the unique quality of the American system of
government, its openness and malleability. We
created Close Up Washington, which sought to teach
students how to think about
challenging issues -- not what
to think. Our goal was to highlight the
blessings of American citizenship and the twin responsibility of
sustaining those blessings through rational and committed civic
involvement. Bringing students of all
persuasions to Washington for a "close up" look at government
seemed a logical way to do that. Thirty-three
years and more than 600,000 participants later, we feel that our
mission of highlighting the unique legacy of American democracy is even
more critical now than it was then.
Our civic education programs
teach the mechanics of government while helping students see the
delicate balance of rights and responsibilities. On
our core Washington program, middle and high school students use the
nation's capital as a classroom, with 12 to 14 hours of instruction and
activities each day. We make civics a
living classroom with trips to Embassy Row, Capitol Hill, and many of
the country's most historic and symbolic places, where students meet the
people who make government work. Policy
experts, journalists, lobbyists, and other Washington insiders also
speak to students, helping to demystify much about government.
Through role-playing,
simulations, group activities, workshops, and discussion groups,
Close Up instructors teach the mechanics of government while
helping students see citizenship as both concept and action. We want students to form their own opinions
and return to their communities as contributors (and we are proud to say
that many Close Up program participants have gone into public
service, from aldermen and mayors to a standing governor, U.S.
representative, and senator). What is the
public agenda? How can young people help
shape it? Can they recognize emotional
appeals or distorted evidence in the news? Can
they evaluate information and make rational choices? These
are just some of the questions that guide our instruction.
In the early seventies, many
young people were politically "anti"; today they are apathetic and
largely disengaged. After more than three
decades as a civic educator, I know that something is not working --
that it is not far off the mark to say that the nation's young people
are civically illiterate. Civics is not as
precise a discipline as math or science, and quantifying the impact of
civic education is nearly impossible. Yet
while young people are engaging in community service in record numbers,
they are not going to the voting booths or getting involved in the
governance of their communities. In the
2000 election, according to the latest U.S. Census, less than a third of
eligible young Americans voted. One
projection has only 25% of eligible young voters between the ages of 18
and 24 voting for the president in 2004. More
alarming is the assertion that Òthe voting rate of 21-year-olds
perfectly predicts how they will vote thirty years later.1
Most of today's young people
lack basic knowledge about their government, to say nothing about the
concept of citizenship. In a recent survey
conducted at some of the nation's elite colleges (including Harvard,
Princeton, and Brown), 71% of the students did not know the purpose of
the Emancipation Proclamation; 78% could not identify the author of the
phrase "of the people, for the people, by the people"; 70% could not
link Lyndon Johnson with the historic Voting Rights Act of 1964,
although 98% of them could correctly identify Snoop Doggy Dog.2
Also consider the 1998
National Assessment of Educational Progress. This
congressionally mandated study found that only 9% of high school
students could name two ways active civic participation benefits a
democracy. More recently, the Pew Research
Center for the People and the Press co-sponsored a nationwide survey of
1,500 Americans two months after Sept. 11. The
survey showed that only 51% of 18- to 25-year-olds were able to
correctly identify Dick Cheney as the vice president. There
are always some hopeful statistics, such as the number of students
volunteering for community service, and it is perhaps unfair to present
only the worst findings. But talk to enough
students and teachers and it is not difficult to believe we are
witnessing what one journalist has appropriately called "the slow-motion
collapse of American citizenship."
A 1989 survey by People for
the American Way meshes with my own direct experience as a civic
educator:
"Young people have learned
only half of America's story. Consistent with the priority they place on
personal happiness, young people reveal notions of America's unique
character that emphasize freedom and license almost to the complete
exclusion of service or participation. Although
they clearly appreciate the democratic freedoms that make theirs the
'best country in the world to live in,' they fail to perceive a need to
reciprocate by exercising the duties and responsibilities of good
citizenship."
The key words are "fail to
perceive." If a child perceives the need
to be responsible but fails to act, that is the child's fault. If he simply fails to perceive, the fault
shifts to adults, particularly educators and community leaders.
Close Up works to instill
in all young people the perception that civic contribution is vital and
we accept and encourage any student who is willing to learn. For the greater part of its existence,
Close Up has received a modest annual appropriation from Congress. Originally named after one of Close Up's
earliest supporters, the late president pro tempore of the U.S. Senate,
Allen J. Ellender of Louisiana, the congressional funding is now named
the Close Up Fellowships. The
fellowship funding is for students of need and their teachers to
participate in our Washington program and acts as an important seed
element that helps to create a dynamic multiplier effect of
participation from students who generate their own support in the
community.
The centerpiece of our
Washington, D.C. Program is Capitol Hill Day, when students typically
meet their senator and representative, or a staff member. Many
of the secondary school students and teachers who have come on our
programs have met presidents, vice presidents, Supreme Court justices,
senators, and representatives. These
meetings have a profound impact on our young participants, a fact often
stressed by Close Up alumni whose members of Congress made time for
face-to-face meetings despite their overloaded schedules.
The past two years, in a new
effort, we have undertaken a special program focusing on 10th graders in
major urban school districts, where many students come from impoverished
homes. A study by the National Association
of Secretaries of State has shown that socio-economic background has an
important impact on young people's political behavior, especially voting
habits. Because students from
less-educated families are less likely to vote or to be optimistic about
our country's future, we created the Great American Cities Program as part of this new focus. This year, through significant philanthropic
support, primarily from Oklahoma, a group of motivated sophomores and
their teachers from the Tulsa Public Schools will go through this
special Washington program. Afterwards,
during the early summer, they will continue their civic education
experience at The University of Oklahoma in a five-day workshop
conducted jointly by staff of the Carl Albert Center and the
Close Up Foundation. We have
undertaken similar programs in the District of Columbia Public Schools
and the Houston Independent School District.
Dramatic shifts in our
country's population prompted us, several years ago, to create our Program
for New Americans for recent immigrant and
migrant students. We bring these students
to Washington to learn about Congress but also help teachers organize
active learning and community service projects in the students'
hometowns.
Close Up also sponsors
government clubs in schools across the country and provides grant
support and structural guidance to what we call Close Up
Connections. Local or state Close Up programs
typically take young people out of the classroom for service and
learning, while our intergenerational programs bring together students
and older adults to discuss civic issues of concern across generations.
Because community service is
admirable, but not as a substitute for greater civic engagement and
voting, Close Up recently teamed with the American Express
Foundation to expand our First Vote program, in which some 9,000
high schools have participated. A video and
lesson plans on the history of voting are provided to teachers free of
charge. In return, we ask only that
teachers offer students a chance to register to vote as part of this
classroom instruction unit -- and that they report the results back to
us.
These Close Up programs
make a difference, but they are obviously not enough. We
cannot counter apathy until we first rise above cynicism and repair
public faith in government. In a sense,
educators and political leaders should replant the seeds of patriotism,
and restoring civics to its rightful place as a hub of the American
educational experience is a good start. During
the 1950s and 1960s, civics was a staple of American education, but
social unrest over the Vietnam War caused schools to divide the
responsibility of civic education between history and government classes. Even when taught by the best educators,
history requires a catalogue of dates, persons, and events. Government
classes too often narrow into the study of mechanisms and structure. The broader purpose of civics -- teaching how
best to live together in a democratic society -- falls into the gap. True, a returned focus on civics will require
educators to make room in a densely loaded curriculum, but we are seeing
that the cost of inaction is too great.
Second, take civics and
government studies out of the classroom as much as possible. We do not expect children to drive a car after
a written test and we should not expect our young people to learn the
art of citizenship through books alone. The
best learning is active learning; hands-on experience makes civics come
alive.
Third, elected leaders have to
get more involved. In 1976, Hubert Humphrey
spoke (as he often did) to a mesmerized crowd of Close Up students. He challenged young people with his
no-nonsense response to grumblers who complain that politics is dirty: "Get yourself your bar of political Ivory soap
and clean it up, or if you don't mind my suggestion, just shut up." He believed leaders should help young people
face and understand the hard facts of life. Without
leadership, he said, young people would "drift backwards" and become
stagnant. Too many already have.
Our elected
leaders have a duty to inspire young people, to help them make sense of
a rapid-fire world that often seems devoid of reflection and full of
confusion. But there are competing
priorities. One congressional aide summed
up the situation well: "speaking to kids
has a low cost/benefit." In addition to
their consuming legislative duties, most of our senators and
representatives need to raise large sums of money every day to stay in
office. This is current reality and, while
the system may be flawed, it seems unfair to call on people to serve and
then condemn them for raising the money required to get elected. That said, political leaders must make time
for young people. Students don't have PACs
but they do have a keen sense of when they are being treated as a
photo-op. Unless our elected leaders find
time for genuine connections, a sad cycle will continue: young
people are ignored, fail to see their stake in the system, become
cynical and disconnected -- making it less likely that politicians will
reach out to them. Cynicism is correctable
but not easily self-corrected. Sports
figures and rock stars may provide some types of inspiration, but young
people also need optimism, clarity and help in understanding how they
can leave the world better than they found it. Elected
leaders can offer that through meaningful face-to-face interaction.
Finally, the need for citizens
of all ages to feel that their local and national leaders are accessible
to them is greater than ever. When I met
Carl Albert in 1963, you could drive to the Capitol and walk in
unimpeded. Not today. On Capitol Hill,
security is now the preeminent consideration and this has a real impact
on visitors. Our political leaders need to
make special efforts to balance security concerns with access and
openness, to make more time for the purest form of democracy -- the
face-to-face meeting. Achieving this
balance is a real dilemma in these troubling times, but the effort to
teach, to mentor, should always be made. If
it becomes less practical to do so in Washington, then more face-to-face
meetings need to take place at the local and state levels.
So many great political
leaders have made the time. I have seen
individuals such as Lindy Boggs, Bob Dole, Mark Hatfield, and Hubert
Humphrey spend the better part of two hours talking with students. These meetings were never shy of political
persuasions, but they were always infused with inspiring messages about
the country, our system of government, and the need for patriotic
contribution. Countless others through the years have made time for
similarly significant messages and connections. It
is imperative that more follow their lead.
In his eighties, the
indomitable Brooks Hays, the former congressman from Arkansas and one of
Close Up's original champions in Washington, would often set off
waves of student laughter by lifting his toupee and saying, "I'm not as
young as I look, because what God hath not wrought, old Brooks went out
and bought!" He devoted the better part of
his retirement years to sharing with young people his perspectives on
the American system of government he so dearly loved. He
felt that every policymaker needed also to be an educator who passes
down to succeeding generations an appreciation for the fundamental
institutions of democracy.
The seeds of
patriotism are best planted in the freshness and enthusiasms of youth.
Humphrey and Hays knew well that young people still have hope. They
still have dreams. They long to talk about what can be. But far too many
of them, especially those languishing in our inner cities, are sliding
into a permanent political underclass marked by cynicism, isolation, and
distrust of government. The slide can be stopped. Witht the right
effort, civic educators, elected representatives, and others with the
will to do so, can lead young people of all backgrounds and abilities
out of the shadows of cynicism to a brighter vision of what is possible.
We owe them -- and the future -- that much.
Notes
1. Hart, Roderick P., "From the Director," The Strauss Report: A Publication of the Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Participation, 2002-3 Edition, p. 3, The University of Texas at Austin.
2. Ibid.
Table of Contents| |Editor's Introduction| |Special Orders| |News|
|Announcements| |Other Issues of Extensions |
| HOME | | Contact Us |
| Teaching & Research | | Public Outreach | | Congressional Archives | | Graduate Fellowship |
Copyright, The Carl Albert Center