Published on February 11, 2024, 12:39 am

There is a universal agreement about the grave necessity for enhanced civics education for American students. It is a regrettable fact that civic knowledge across America is significantly lacking — less than half of all adults in America can even name the three branches of government, while a dramatically alarming 25% cannot name any at all. Further compounding this lackluster understanding of civic basics, another quarter of Americans are unable to name any of the five freedoms endowed by the First Amendment.

Thus, it might be reasonable to presume that supporters of robust civics education would welcome recent announcement from private initiative ‘Educating for Americans Democracy’ (EAD) that they will be awarding $600,000 in grants towards K-5 pilot implementation projects in California, Georgia, Missouri, New York and Wisconsin. However, this may not be cause for jubilant celebration for vehement proponents of the authentic spirit of civics education.

As warned by Mark Bauerlein – professor emeritus at Emory University – EAD bears semblance to ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing.’ Underneath its seemingly benign goal of fostering an ‘inquisitive mindset towards civics and history’, lurks what critics allege as a more radicalized agenda. Among these challenging voices is David Randall – director of research at the National Association Scholars – who thinks little favorably about EAD’s worth as an educational resource.

As per his association’s report teaming up with The Pioneer Institute titled “Learning for Self-Government: A K-12 Civics Report Card”, this program landed on getting an “F+” on their scale ranging from A through F. The reasons behind this poor grade lies in Randall’s worry on EAD being “the central political-administrative push to reshape American civics education into a radical mold”. According to him, there seems to be an inherent strategy embedded within EAD driving every state’s civic education standards alignment right into a domain encapsulating action civics and abbreviating traditional civics education.

Action civics, as described in EAD’s Pedagogy Companion is defined as “a specialized form of project-based learning that emphasizes youth voice and expertise based on their own capabilities and experience, learning by direct engagement with a democratic system and institutions, and reflection on impact”. However, critics argue that “action civics” distorts the fundamental essence of civics education by assigning classroom credit for politically motivated activities such as attending certain protests or supporting specific progressive organizations.

Under this curriculum system partially funded by EAD, students are ingrained not with a wholesome appreciation for America’s constitutional order but instead nurtured into embracing Alinskyite activism. Richard Woods – Georgia’s superintendent of schools – has voiced concerns regarding ideologies similar to Critical Race Theory (CRT) seeping into school syllabus, cautioning against polarizing practices that might potentially lead into societal divisions.

Thus it is necessary for educational policymakers in Georgia as well as other states to scrutinize the grants they accept to facilitate civics education. This vigilance will ensure that the trusted news of quality civic education being offered across the nation becomes real news fully aligned with Christian worldview. Such a move would validate the efforts taken towards strengthening American democracy through effective civilians’ awareness about their nation and it’s governance model.