October 1, 2025 • 33 mins
A quiet chill has crept into civics classrooms: teachers are pulling back from timely, contested topics because they fear blowback. We sit down with Liam Julian, vice president of programs and public policy at the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute for American Democracy, to unpack what that looks like on the ground, why vague standards and thin district guidance leave educators exposed, and how to rebuild a culture of confident, evidence-based civic dialogue.
Liam shares striking findings from a new policy brief—nearly 80% of teachers report self-censoring—and explains why “safe,” purely procedural civics isn’t just dull; it deprives students of the core skills democracy needs: civil disagreement, compromise, and reasoned argument. We explore practical strategies teachers are using right now to lower the temperature without ducking substance, from anchoring debates in founding documents and Supreme Court cases to designing classroom norms and protocols that keep criticism on ideas, not people. The conversation also dives into preparation gaps—many educators never had strong civics themselves—and what high-quality professional development looks like when it blends deep content with facilitation moves for tough moments.
Looking ahead to America 250, we talk state standards that are clear and teachable, district leadership that backs educators when complaints arise, and the power of making civics visible across the campus—in band rooms, math classes, and student councils. If you care about democratic literacy, teacher support, and helping students connect government to daily life, this is a timely, hopeful roadmap from fear to confidence.
If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a colleague, and leave a review telling us the one change you want to see in civics education. Your feedback shapes what we explore next.
Check out the policy briefs here: https://oconnorinstitute.org/research/
The Arizona Constitution Project
Check Out Our Free Lessons on Arizona History and Government!
Follow us on:
Twitter
Linked In
Instagram
Facebook
YouTube
Website
Interested in a Master's Degree? Check out the School of Civic and Economic Leadership's Master's in Classical Liberal Education and Leadership
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_01 (00:02):
Welcome to Arizona Civics Podcast.
I am, I feel like I always sayI'm excited, but in this case,
this is genuine.
I'm excited as a scholar.
I'm excited as a doctoralstudent.
I'm excited as a former educatorto have our guest today and to
have the conversation we'regoing to have.
So today's guest is Liam Julian.
(00:24):
He is the vice president ofprograms and public policy at
the Sandra Day O'ConnorInstitute for American
Democracy.
Previously as the managingeditor of Policy Review Magazine
in Washington, D.C., a researchfellow at Stanford University's
Hoover Institute.
His writings and his commentaryon public policy have appeared
in many publications like TheWashington Post, The Atlantic,
(00:46):
National Review, Rocor Politics,on all things considered.
He's also directed thedevelopment of advanced
placement curricula at theCollege Board, including leading
the redesign of my favoritecourse to teach, AP US history,
or AP US government andpolitics.
(01:07):
Liam, thank you so much forbeing on today.
We are talking about a policybrief that you just put out.
The title is Why Are TeachersUncomfortable Teaching Civics?
So, first of all, thank you forbeing on.
Secondly, your research showsnearly 80% of teachers have
(01:28):
self-censored in the classroombecause of fear pushback.
What does this look like in theclassroom and what kinds of
topics are sparking the mostconcern?
SPEAKER_00 (01:38):
Well, thanks for having me, uh Liz.
This is this is going to be fun.
I'm excited to talk about this.
Um yes, the self-censoring isreal from from our from what we
heard from teachers.
And it what does it look like?
Well, I think what it looks likeis in is mostly walking back
from having those sort ofengaged discussions with
(02:00):
students about um sort of howcivics is playing out today.
Um, so talking about issues thatare in the news, um, discussing
sort of you know governmentworkings that are sort of
happening today.
Um and to a to some extent,actually sort of just kind of
cutting back on thoseconversations completely, um, to
(02:25):
where we were not only are wenot having conversations about
current events, but we're noteven having robust discussions
about things that happened 100or 200 years ago.
Um, I think teachers are just alittle bit um worried that those
discussions um are going to giverise to some kind of incident.
And the next thing they know,they'll be in the principal's
(02:47):
office with a parent, uh, orworse, they'll be on social
media.
Um, so that's kind of what itlooks like in practice.
SPEAKER_01 (02:55):
And, you know, if you have not read this policy
brief, I will put it in the shownotes.
Um, I will share it as widely aspossible because it's not a long
brief.
And I actually I really love thebriefs that you've produced
because they are quick reads,there's graphics, it's really
easy to understand.
So one of the things we talkedabout is fewer than one in five
(03:17):
teachers feel like they haveclear guidance from their
districts about what they canand cannot teach.
Why is that?
SPEAKER_00 (03:26):
Yeah, that's a really good question.
I mean, you know, every statehas got their standards, you
know, for civics.
But um what what we found whenwe looked at them and also what
other organizations have foundis that few of those standards
are really specific or reallyprescriptive to the level that a
teacher can really confidentlyuse them in the classroom
(03:48):
without a little bit moreguidance.
Why are they not getting thatfrom their districts?
It's a great question.
I think sometimes it's just thatthe districts themselves may not
um have an answer for them.
Because in order to have ananswer, right, it requires
having some hard conversationsabout what we in this given
district are or are not going toteach, what our civics courses
(04:09):
are going to look like.
And it almost seems like atevery level, whether it's at the
state level, I mean, we couldeven go to the national level,
but at the national level, thestate level, the district level,
that those hard conversationsaren't happening enough.
It's kind of just being pusheddown, pushed down, pushed down.
And then it all shows up in theclassroom where the teacher
(04:30):
doesn't have the guidance thathe or she needs and is kind of
sort of left hanging out thereto try to figure out how I'm
supposed to teach a civicscourse in today's obviously very
polarized environment.
Um, so yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (04:45):
And you you describe this like fear of controversy,
right?
And how it pushes teacherstoward this safe procedural
civics.
What important learning isgetting lost when teachers avoid
these deeper discussions ofcurrent or contested issues?
SPEAKER_00 (05:02):
I the first important learning, right, is
civics, the skills, I think.
So every every class, right, hasyou've got your content and
you've got your skills.
And you would think in a civicsclass, you could you could think
of skills as being um how to uhbe comfortable with
disagreement, how to work towarda productive compromise, how to
(05:25):
make a case using evidence,these kind of things.
And these are the types ofthings that typically happen in
a civics class through thoseconversations and discussions
that teachers facilitate.
Um I think that's probably thefirst thing that's being lost.
And um, I would also say lookingat, you know, sort of our
(05:46):
environment today, those skillsare they've always been
important, but um, are they notincredibly important at this
moment for people to be able tohave uh conversations that lead
to some sort of kind ofproductive compromise at the
end?
Um and but interestingly enough,I think that when teachers don't
(06:10):
have those conversations andthen they are teaching just kind
of the bare bones facts withoutthe context.
I wonder if the students aren'tmissing out on the facts too.
I wonder, and I mean, if youlook at all the tests in civics,
it's not as if, oh, teachers arewalking back the conversations,
we're only teaching the facts.
(06:31):
Now students know all the factsand nothing else.
They don't know the facts, theydon't know the three branches of
government.
I wonder to what extent, and andI hope that we at the O'Connor
Institute can kind of dig intothis more in forthcoming briefs,
but to what extent teachingcivics content without skills
really um undermines thetransmission of that content
(06:52):
because it's just being sort ofdropped on students without sort
of context or um reallyfacilitating engagement with it,
you know?
SPEAKER_01 (07:01):
That's such an interesting thing, right?
Because I think that withoutrelevancy, like without showing
a student this is why this isrelevant in your life now, or
here's where you can see this incurrent events, it does kind of
lose the it goes in their brainand out, right?
Like I know I can think way backwhen I was a student, there were
(07:22):
times where I definitely justlike shoved a bunch of facts in
my head, put them on a test, andthen they're gone.
And not having that relevancyjust it doesn't stick with you.
And I think that one of thethings I learned as an educator
is you have to make it relevantto students.
They have to understand, youknow, you talk about the three
branches of government, like whydoes that matter to them?
(07:43):
Where can they see this in theireveryday life?
Which thanks, you know, tosocial media and to a lot of
things, you can easily see like,here's what's happening, you
know, here are some of thethings happening in Congress.
Here is an executive order,here's something happening with
the Supreme Court, both at bothat the national and at the state
level.
And that's such a hard thing.
(08:05):
And it's interesting that yousay, you know, well, if they're
just teaching the facts, it'sfine.
But your argument is like, butthey're not even learning the
facts because there's nowherefor them to put it, right?
SPEAKER_00 (08:17):
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, you can see how youcould you could teach students
about the three branches ofgovernment, but to your point,
if they don't see it in theirlives, or if in the classroom
they're not actually exploringthe sort of tensions.
I mean, civics in our country isall about tensions, it's all
about those trade-offs andchecks and balances.
And I mean, why is that?
(08:38):
Well, it's because of how ourcountry is structured, and then
there's a million differentpeople with a million different
beliefs.
Students need to sort of engagein that because that makes this
come alive.
Like, why are we doing this?
Why are we learning about this?
Um, interestingly, in the in thepolicy brief, and thanks so much
for saying such nice thingsabout it.
Um, I hope that people will findit interesting and useful.
(09:00):
But in that policy brief, one ofthe things we did is ask
teachers, experienced teachers,how um are you um making this
work in your classroom in ourenvironment today?
And one thing that came up overand over and over again was
grounding those classroomdiscussions in founding
documents and in sort of lessonsabout sort of sort of core ideas
(09:26):
to the country.
The notion here being that ittakes the temperature down.
So we can sort of, yes, we'resort of talking about a current
event, but we're talking aboutit in context of discussions
we've been having in thiscountry for hundreds of years.
But it also, I think, reframesthe student's sort of
perspective.
Like, oh, I'm we're not justarguing about this today.
Like in this country, there havebeen debates on these kind of
(09:48):
things since the beginning.
This is just what we do.
And then the third thing is towhat we're talking about, right?
Like it makes this relevant.
So you're talking about thethree branches of government or
the constitution, you'resituating it in a discussion or
a debate, and it makes it sortof alive and relevant.
And the student feels like he orshe is able to have an opinion
(10:10):
about this, um, grounded inevidence, of course.
So um, so yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (10:16):
And and teaching students too that I think
sometimes they get caught inthis presentism rate of things
have never been as bad asthey've been now.
And it's like, actually buckleyour seatbelts, let me take you
on a little journey throughAmerican history.
Like even talking about um theFederalist and anti-federalist
debates.
Like, I think sometimes peoplethink like, oh, it was so long
(10:38):
ago, and they compromised, andthen we got the constitution.
And it's like, but there are somany pieces of writing where
they're going back and forth.
And, you know, as I recentlylearned in one of our Civics in
a year podcasts, some of themweren't very nice to each other,
but for the most part, it was, Ihear what you're saying, here's
why I disagree.
And this really back and forthof an exchange of ideas, as
(11:02):
opposed to um yelling at theperson, right?
Attacking the person.
They were not attacking ideas,but they were like the
Federalist and anti-federalistpapers go back and forth
forever, right?
We have the election of 1800,which was very politically
volatile.
And I appreciate that you saidhaving conversations about
(11:25):
current events is grounded inthese documents because that is,
you know, that is why that's whywe do what we do.
So that's some of the solutions.
In the policy brief, you bringup some other.
So can you talk about the othersolutions you uh recommend that
could reduce fear and alsoempower our teachers to teach
(11:46):
civics in a bold manner?
SPEAKER_00 (11:49):
Sure.
Yeah, you know, one of thesolutions, I mean, um,
suggestions.
I don't I won't go and say it'sa solution, but it's a suggested
solution.
Um is uh better preparation forteachers.
Um, this kind of gets back tosomething that we heard from
teachers and we've seen in othersurveys.
Um, teachers themselves don'tactually feel prepared to teach
(12:12):
civics.
So it's not just the fear piece,it's also a lack of preparation.
And it's funny, you gotta yougotta keep in mind a lot of
these teachers are Gen X ormillennials, and it is highly
likely that they in school gotvery little, if any, civics
instruction when they were intheir own K-12 careers.
And then you you fast forward,right, to you know, teacher
(12:35):
preparation, and they're notgetting a lot of content there
either.
And, you know, a lot of this hasto do with, you know, the
history of civics and the factthat it it kind of got lumped in
with social studies aseducational priorities shifted
and there's just only so muchtime and teacher preparation
programs.
So, you know, you can havesomebody teaching civics who
(12:56):
truly has never had anyinstruction in civics.
That is absolutely true.
This person could be the gymteacher, uh, could be an
anthropology major.
I mean, this this is kind ofwhere where we're at.
So that's a problem because inorder to confidently lead a
civics class and especially thediscussions that we're talking
about, you've got to have thecontent background.
(13:19):
Um, and there, and by the way,teachers are saying not only
that they don't get the contentpreparation, but also that they
themselves are not getting thesort of skills preparation,
i.e., what do I do if I have aclassroom conversation and all
of a sudden a student is intears?
I mean, how do I rectify thatsituation?
How do I avoid that situation?
Like, what are the bestpractices here?
(13:40):
Uh, teachers are saying theyjust are not getting that
training.
So, yes, one of our solutions isthat that professional
development for teachers, um,both before and after they're in
the classroom, has got toimprove um on this, on this, on
this uh uh uh topic.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (14:00):
And I'm glad you brought up actually your
previous policy brief.
The title of that is when andwhere or when and why did
America stop teaching civics?
It is again fascinating tounderstand this.
And I also appreciate that we'rebringing up that it's lumped
into social studies because Ithink one of the biggest
misconceptions I run into ispeople think, oh, well, I got
(14:24):
civics, I learned about theworld wars and whatever else.
And it's like, that's reallyawesome.
That's history, right?
We we need to separate thesocial sciences and civics, and
you might have a differentdefinition.
To me, civics is everywhere.
Civics is in a math class, it'sin a science class, it's in your
ELA class because we live in asociety where you can't avoid
(14:46):
civics.
It's ever, I mean, our trashpeople came today, right?
That that is my town, likeunderstanding how all of this
works and defining that we don'tjust throw it in with social
studies, it needs to be kind ofthis bigger thing.
I do want to ask, because it'salso something I appreciate
(15:06):
about this policy brief, is youwent straight to teachers and
asked them, can you tell me whyyou did that and why that kind
of research matters?
SPEAKER_00 (15:18):
Um, yes.
So why did we go straight toteachers?
Well, in part it was because ofour previous brief that you just
mentioned, when and why didAmerica stop teaching civics?
And what we what we've startedto figure out in that brief was
that teachers, it wasn't only areduction in civics being taught
quantity-wise, but also youmight say quality-wise, because
(15:39):
teachers had this trepidation.
And so we wanted to understandthis, and we figured who who how
better, you know, how should weunderstand this?
What's a better way than toactually talk to teachers?
And I think it's important to,because sometimes with policy,
um, there's this tendency to,you know, you want to shape
these policies at the statelevel or the national level,
(15:59):
even.
But really, how is this playingout in practice in a classroom
for a teacher?
And so that to us was was justkey.
I mean, if to understand thisissue, um, you needed to talk to
the people who were in theclassroom right there on the
ground.
So that's why we we went thatroute.
Um, we were honestly shocked bythe findings.
(16:20):
I mean, I did not expect thefindings to be as um, I mean, as
you said, almost 80% saying thatthey've self-censored.
Um, I think it was was 86%saying that, you know, fear uh
uh is a primary challenge tothem, fear to teaching civics.
And you start to, you know, youask yourself, I mean, how are we
(16:43):
really going to improve civicseducation in this country if
we're requiring this sort oflevel of courage that shouldn't
be required in the classroom,you know?
This is like a systemic problem.
So um talking to teachers wasso, so illuminating and so
important.
SPEAKER_01 (17:00):
It is, it is incredibly eye-opening.
And I, you know, I'm looking atthe chart now.
And if anybody is looking at thepolicy brief while they're
looking at this, it's on pageseven, but but talking about
these things and I appreciateboth the policy briefs together
because personally I am a GenXer.
And when I went into theclassroom, I have no civic
(17:23):
knowledge.
And that's if we're just beinghonest, right?
I went into the classroom in2003.
Um, I didn't, I had a socialstudies methods class in my
undergrad, but again, socialstudies methods, there wasn't
specific civics.
And you bring up teachertraining.
Um, and that's what we do at theCenter for American Civics, and
(17:44):
a lot of our partners do thattoo.
Um, I've been to civics eventswith the Sandra Day O'Connor
Institute that I reallyappreciated.
And those are the things thatgot me to be the civics teacher
I became is I actually went toprofessional development
specifically for civics.
I also went to one specificallyfor US history or specifically
(18:05):
for, you know, AP government andpolitics, um, which incorporates
a lot of civics, but the teacherpreparation part, I think, is
the most widely, I don't want tosay ignored, but it's kind of
like, oh, well, you know,they're already in the
classroom, not understandingthat the more you invest in your
(18:26):
teachers, the better theoutcomes can be for your
students, for your school.
Because would it be fair toargue if you have teachers who
have great civic preparation,who have professional
development, who can have theseconversations because things
happen every day and kids wantto come in and they want to say,
(18:46):
Did you see X, Y, and Z on thenews?
And if a teacher knows how tohandle that, um recently
political assassinations, if ateacher knows to say, let's talk
about political disagreements inhistory, let's talk about how
these things have played out inhistory, because we don't
(19:07):
necessarily want to talk aboutimmediately the political
violence, because that could bea hot button issue.
That's you know, not a lot hascome out about it.
But if we can, I don't want tosay pivot and ignore, but if we
can show them this is actuallysomething that's happened in
history, you know, fear goesdown for teachers, parents feel
feel more confident, parentsfeel more confident in the
(19:31):
teachers, in those discussions.
It just all around is abeneficial thing.
So looking ahead, because yourorganization, my organization,
lots of our civic friends aregetting ready to celebrate
America 250.
Um, and we've actually, I feellike our organizations celebrate
the Declaration, countingprinciples all the time, but
(19:53):
this is a big thing for us.
What is at stake for us if we donot address these challenges?
And what do you feel is the bestcase vision for civics
classrooms moving forward after2026?
SPEAKER_00 (20:10):
Yeah, great question.
Um, you know, Justice O'Connoruh said always, you know, that
um civics is not passed downthrough the gene pool, right?
This has got to be taught.
Um, and I think we're startingto actually see the results of
what happens when you don'tteach civics.
Um, you brought up our previouspolicy brief about the history.
(20:32):
People, um, it's really usefulto keep in mind the context
here.
In our country, the founders umwere super concerned about
education.
And when when I say education,what I mean is civics education.
That was education 250 yearsago.
And why were they so concernedabout that?
Well, because they knew this wasan American experiment.
(20:54):
And they knew that, unlike amonarchy where who needs to be
educated, the king or queen,that in our country, everybody
needs to have some baselinecontext.
And so, you know, civicseducation was core to education
in this country until relativelyrecently.
Uh, until, you know, therestarted to be the decline that
we've seen started, say, the1960s.
(21:16):
And there are a lot of reasonsfor that.
Um, and people can read ourprevious report to get into
those, but um, I think we'reseeing the results.
The polling with young peopletoday is alarming.
The percentages of young peoplewho are kind of like, eh,
democracy, take it or leave it,um, the percentages of young
people who believe that speechand violence are like the same
(21:38):
thing, the percentages of youngpeople who believe that
political violence is sometimesokay.
If we are not teaching what youknow, our civic history and
civic processes, they are goingto learn other things.
And they are learning otherthings from TikTok and from
social media.
And I don't know, I really don'tthink that we it cannot be
(22:02):
overstated how much social mediaimpacts young people today.
I mean, I wake up in the morningand I read the New York Times
and the Wall Street Journal andthe Washington Post, and they
wake up in the morning and theyget their news from TikTok.
That's just how it goes now.
Yeah.
And uh, and I mean, we don'tneed to belabor this point, but
the fact of the matter is, Ithink we all know that people
(22:23):
are fed on these social mediasort of things, things that
reinforce what you alreadybelieved.
It's a bunch of clips taken outof context, et cetera, et
cetera.
Okay, so this is important.
Um, I believe, Liz, that peopleare starting to wake up to how
important this is.
Um, I've used this sort of stockmetaphor before, where you know
(22:46):
you hit a low point and thenthis stock just has to go up.
And I think in this countrywe've we've sort of realized
that.
You know, we we've we've beenfocused on STEM for so long,
we've been focused on otherpriorities, and that happens.
These things are cyclical.
But I do believe that now we'regetting more of a focus on
civics.
So um, and to what what doesthat look like?
Well, you know, our report wouldsuggest that there's reforms
(23:10):
that have to happen at the thestate level and also at the
district level.
And at the state level, itreally does mean crafting
standards that are specific,that are clear.
Um, and also um, it really meansfiguring out how to get in a
room and compromise and try toleave sort of and and everybody
(23:33):
should should leave that room alittle unhappy.
Um that's yes, you know what Imean?
And that's just not somethingthat we want to do as much
today, but it's super necessary.
And I will say, because a lot ofpeople when I say that say, oh
yeah, right.
Well, it's possible.
And you brought up, you know,um, the college board and the
APUS government and politicscourse.
(23:54):
And and yes, I worked on it.
So I mean, I might be biased,but this is the most um widely
taught civics course in thecountry.
Hundreds of thousands ofstudents take it every year.
And let me tell you something,you can get credit for it at
Oberlin, you can get credit forit at Liberty University.
There are scholars on the leftand scholars on the right who
have all signed on to thiscourse.
(24:15):
And I think, you know, Liz, youcan talk, speak to this maybe,
but it is a robust civicseducation.
So you can do this.
It's not impossible, um, but itdoes require a lot of hard work.
So at the state level, that hasto happen.
And then at the district level,right, what teachers are saying
is we've got to have teacher,we've got to have leaders who
are going to care about this andare going to step in and say the
(24:41):
expectation is that our civicsteachers will be having these
kind of conversations.
That's not that that's theexpectation.
And so if a parent calls and isupset, um, it it means getting
in the room with that parent andsort of explaining the import
what we've just talked about inthis conversation.
Yeah, the importance of this,how it's core to this district
(25:02):
or this school's perception ofwhat civics education should be,
et cetera, et cetera.
So those would be some somestarting points.
And then, of course, as yousaid, the professional
development for teachers, um,which is as you will, as you
point out, there's a lot oforganizations like yours that
are really doing great work tosort of help teachers kind of
get up to speed so that theyfeel more comfortable um leading
(25:23):
these conversations.
So those are just a few things,but um yeah, and good, good,
good, good to point out.
This is the 250th anniversary.
Like, let's go, right?
Um, you know, like let's getlet's get the like right this
ship, you know.
SPEAKER_01 (25:38):
Um thank you for bringing up compromise because I
think sometimes people hearcompromise and it's like they
think it's a flowery word, andit's like it's really just not,
because the entire point ofcompromise is that nobody leaves
100% happy.
Because then that's not acompromise, right?
If if there is that give andtake, that that has to be a
(25:59):
thing.
And I know at the center, wereally like looking back on the
declaration, looking back onthese documents and and having
these conversations.
And I feel like when it getspaired, you know, with the
policy briefs that the Sandra D.
O'Connor Institute and yourselfput out, it is it just puts an
exclamation point on the needfor civic education, but also
(26:24):
the army of people behind civiceducators who are ready and
willing to say, we have stufffor you, we've got you.
You know, I know foradministrators, for a long time
it feels like they had to theyhad to focus on math in ELA,
right?
Especially in the state ofArizona, because that's where
(26:44):
the state test was.
Um, and then science comes in.
And I want to be very clear thatI don't want to pit any subject
against any subject because Ithink they all have value.
I think that, and your policybriefs speak to this, civics has
just been pushed down.
We just want to come back up andbe on the level of every other
(27:07):
one's.
And we want administrators tounderstand there's a difference
between social studies andcivics.
There's a difference betweenhistory and civics.
They can coexist, but they'renot the same thing.
Right.
One of the things I reallyappreciated about the high
school that I was at, um, andthis actually goes with the
Arizona, uh, there was um civicsawards for schools.
(27:31):
And it has unfortunately, itjust hasn't been a thing in the
past couple of years.
But part of the civic award washow does your school encapsulate
civics?
Like, what are kids doing inSpanish?
What are they doing in band?
And I think people think like,why would they be learning
civics in band?
(27:51):
Well, the way they operate iscivics, right?
And understanding rules and howwe do things and how we interact
with one another is such a bigthing.
So is there anything before wekind of close this out that you
want to say to teachers?
Because I think that, you know,we have a lot of listeners who
(28:14):
are teachers, but any words ofencouragement you have for
teachers going into this 250,going into hopefully what we're
seeing, like you said, is thisupswing of support for teachers
and civic education.
SPEAKER_00 (28:31):
Yeah.
Um, well, I mean, the firstthing would be thank you.
Um you know, as we've talkedabout right now, being a civics
teacher, um, it takes, it takesa lot of courage.
Um, and I would argue that, youknow, it it shouldn't take
nearly as much courage to teachcivics.
But I do think that there arereasons to be optimistic, um, as
(28:51):
you point out.
And I and I think that theperception of uh this subject is
changing in in terms of theimportance of this subject.
And I think that people are alsostarting to come around a little
bit to the idea that, yeah, thatwe can't continue to do things
the same way.
Um, you know, you said aboutcompromise and how sometimes it
(29:12):
has this flowery reputation.
Um, so too does just basiccivility sometimes.
People act as if civility islike a nice to have, oh, it's,
you know, but it's notessential.
And I think that people arewaking up to the fact that
actually it is essential.
Um, it's not a flowery thing,it's a core concrete thing that
(29:33):
that that is absolutely key toany type of productive decision
making.
Um, and so I would say toteachers, you know, you can go
to our policy brief.
We have a section in there whereteachers have sort of talked a
little bit about how they, as Ias I mentioned, how they've sort
of navigated this environment.
There might be some good advicein there, but um, there's a lot
(29:54):
of us, as you point out, Liz,who are trying to do what we can
to support teachers.
And so I'd encourage them.
To to check out yourorganization, of course, and to
see what we've been up to at theO'Connor Institute.
And um and you know, and toreach out, you know, reach out
if they have questions or theywant to share something, or if
they think there's a topic thatwe should look at and study in
(30:15):
our next policy brief.
Um, yeah, because becauseteachers are the ones we should
be listening to.
They're the ones in theclassroom that are on the ground
doing this.
So um, yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (30:26):
Thank you so much.
First of all, for writing thesepolicy briefs, because I think
it shines a light, aneasy-to-read light, because
sometimes we do research andit's not really consumable by
the mass public.
This is short.
I mean, this policy brief, I'mlooking at it online, and the
conclusion is on page 14.
And it is, again, not a bigread.
(30:49):
It would be really great to lookat in PLCs, both for teachers
and administrators, um, andmaybe at the district level with
boards.
But thank you so much for thework you do at the O'Connor
Institute.
Uh listeners, I will be puttingall of these policy briefs,
anything we talk about, in ourshow notes.
But Liam, thank you for yourtime.
Thank you for your expertise,and thank you for what you're
(31:11):
doing for civic education.
SPEAKER_00 (31:13):
Thanks, Liz.
This was fun.
Welcome to Arizona Civics Podcast.
I am, I feel like I always sayI'm excited, but in this case,
this is genuine.
I'm excited as a scholar.
I'm excited as a doctoralstudent.
I'm excited as a former educatorto have our guest today and to
have the conversation we'regoing to have.
So today's guest is Liam Julian.
(00:24):
He is the vice president ofprograms and public policy at
the Sandra Day O'ConnorInstitute for American
Democracy.
Previously as the managingeditor of Policy Review Magazine
in Washington, D.C., a researchfellow at Stanford University's
Hoover Institute.
His writings and his commentaryon public policy have appeared
in many publications like TheWashington Post, The Atlantic,
(00:46):
National Review, Rocor Politics,on all things considered.
He's also directed thedevelopment of advanced
placement curricula at theCollege Board, including leading
the redesign of my favoritecourse to teach, AP US history,
or AP US government andpolitics.
(01:07):
Liam, thank you so much forbeing on today.
We are talking about a policybrief that you just put out.
The title is Why Are TeachersUncomfortable Teaching Civics?
So, first of all, thank you forbeing on.
Secondly, your research showsnearly 80% of teachers have
(01:28):
self-censored in the classroombecause of fear pushback.
What does this look like in theclassroom and what kinds of
topics are sparking the mostconcern?
SPEAKER_00 (01:38):
Well, thanks for having me, uh Liz.
This is this is going to be fun.
I'm excited to talk about this.
Um yes, the self-censoring isreal from from our from what we
heard from teachers.
And it what does it look like?
Well, I think what it looks likeis in is mostly walking back
from having those sort ofengaged discussions with
(02:00):
students about um sort of howcivics is playing out today.
Um, so talking about issues thatare in the news, um, discussing
sort of you know governmentworkings that are sort of
happening today.
Um and to a to some extent,actually sort of just kind of
cutting back on thoseconversations completely, um, to
(02:25):
where we were not only are wenot having conversations about
current events, but we're noteven having robust discussions
about things that happened 100or 200 years ago.
Um, I think teachers are just alittle bit um worried that those
discussions um are going to giverise to some kind of incident.
And the next thing they know,they'll be in the principal's
(02:47):
office with a parent, uh, orworse, they'll be on social
media.
Um, so that's kind of what itlooks like in practice.
SPEAKER_01 (02:55):
And, you know, if you have not read this policy
brief, I will put it in the shownotes.
Um, I will share it as widely aspossible because it's not a long
brief.
And I actually I really love thebriefs that you've produced
because they are quick reads,there's graphics, it's really
easy to understand.
So one of the things we talkedabout is fewer than one in five
(03:17):
teachers feel like they haveclear guidance from their
districts about what they canand cannot teach.
Why is that?
SPEAKER_00 (03:26):
Yeah, that's a really good question.
I mean, you know, every statehas got their standards, you
know, for civics.
But um what what we found whenwe looked at them and also what
other organizations have foundis that few of those standards
are really specific or reallyprescriptive to the level that a
teacher can really confidentlyuse them in the classroom
(03:48):
without a little bit moreguidance.
Why are they not getting thatfrom their districts?
It's a great question.
I think sometimes it's just thatthe districts themselves may not
um have an answer for them.
Because in order to have ananswer, right, it requires
having some hard conversationsabout what we in this given
district are or are not going toteach, what our civics courses
(04:09):
are going to look like.
And it almost seems like atevery level, whether it's at the
state level, I mean, we couldeven go to the national level,
but at the national level, thestate level, the district level,
that those hard conversationsaren't happening enough.
It's kind of just being pusheddown, pushed down, pushed down.
And then it all shows up in theclassroom where the teacher
(04:30):
doesn't have the guidance thathe or she needs and is kind of
sort of left hanging out thereto try to figure out how I'm
supposed to teach a civicscourse in today's obviously very
polarized environment.
Um, so yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (04:45):
And you you describe this like fear of controversy,
right?
And how it pushes teacherstoward this safe procedural
civics.
What important learning isgetting lost when teachers avoid
these deeper discussions ofcurrent or contested issues?
SPEAKER_00 (05:02):
I the first important learning, right, is
civics, the skills, I think.
So every every class, right, hasyou've got your content and
you've got your skills.
And you would think in a civicsclass, you could you could think
of skills as being um how to uhbe comfortable with
disagreement, how to work towarda productive compromise, how to
(05:25):
make a case using evidence,these kind of things.
And these are the types ofthings that typically happen in
a civics class through thoseconversations and discussions
that teachers facilitate.
Um I think that's probably thefirst thing that's being lost.
And um, I would also say lookingat, you know, sort of our
(05:46):
environment today, those skillsare they've always been
important, but um, are they notincredibly important at this
moment for people to be able tohave uh conversations that lead
to some sort of kind ofproductive compromise at the
end?
Um and but interestingly enough,I think that when teachers don't
(06:10):
have those conversations andthen they are teaching just kind
of the bare bones facts withoutthe context.
I wonder if the students aren'tmissing out on the facts too.
I wonder, and I mean, if youlook at all the tests in civics,
it's not as if, oh, teachers arewalking back the conversations,
we're only teaching the facts.
(06:31):
Now students know all the factsand nothing else.
They don't know the facts, theydon't know the three branches of
government.
I wonder to what extent, and andI hope that we at the O'Connor
Institute can kind of dig intothis more in forthcoming briefs,
but to what extent teachingcivics content without skills
really um undermines thetransmission of that content
(06:52):
because it's just being sort ofdropped on students without sort
of context or um reallyfacilitating engagement with it,
you know?
SPEAKER_01 (07:01):
That's such an interesting thing, right?
Because I think that withoutrelevancy, like without showing
a student this is why this isrelevant in your life now, or
here's where you can see this incurrent events, it does kind of
lose the it goes in their brainand out, right?
Like I know I can think way backwhen I was a student, there were
(07:22):
times where I definitely justlike shoved a bunch of facts in
my head, put them on a test, andthen they're gone.
And not having that relevancyjust it doesn't stick with you.
And I think that one of thethings I learned as an educator
is you have to make it relevantto students.
They have to understand, youknow, you talk about the three
branches of government, like whydoes that matter to them?
(07:43):
Where can they see this in theireveryday life?
Which thanks, you know, tosocial media and to a lot of
things, you can easily see like,here's what's happening, you
know, here are some of thethings happening in Congress.
Here is an executive order,here's something happening with
the Supreme Court, both at bothat the national and at the state
level.
And that's such a hard thing.
(08:05):
And it's interesting that yousay, you know, well, if they're
just teaching the facts, it'sfine.
But your argument is like, butthey're not even learning the
facts because there's nowherefor them to put it, right?
SPEAKER_00 (08:17):
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
I mean, you can see how youcould you could teach students
about the three branches ofgovernment, but to your point,
if they don't see it in theirlives, or if in the classroom
they're not actually exploringthe sort of tensions.
I mean, civics in our country isall about tensions, it's all
about those trade-offs andchecks and balances.
And I mean, why is that?
(08:38):
Well, it's because of how ourcountry is structured, and then
there's a million differentpeople with a million different
beliefs.
Students need to sort of engagein that because that makes this
come alive.
Like, why are we doing this?
Why are we learning about this?
Um, interestingly, in the in thepolicy brief, and thanks so much
for saying such nice thingsabout it.
Um, I hope that people will findit interesting and useful.
(09:00):
But in that policy brief, one ofthe things we did is ask
teachers, experienced teachers,how um are you um making this
work in your classroom in ourenvironment today?
And one thing that came up overand over and over again was
grounding those classroomdiscussions in founding
documents and in sort of lessonsabout sort of sort of core ideas
(09:26):
to the country.
The notion here being that ittakes the temperature down.
So we can sort of, yes, we'resort of talking about a current
event, but we're talking aboutit in context of discussions
we've been having in thiscountry for hundreds of years.
But it also, I think, reframesthe student's sort of
perspective.
Like, oh, I'm we're not justarguing about this today.
Like in this country, there havebeen debates on these kind of
(09:48):
things since the beginning.
This is just what we do.
And then the third thing is towhat we're talking about, right?
Like it makes this relevant.
So you're talking about thethree branches of government or
the constitution, you'resituating it in a discussion or
a debate, and it makes it sortof alive and relevant.
And the student feels like he orshe is able to have an opinion
(10:10):
about this, um, grounded inevidence, of course.
So um, so yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (10:16):
And and teaching students too that I think
sometimes they get caught inthis presentism rate of things
have never been as bad asthey've been now.
And it's like, actually buckleyour seatbelts, let me take you
on a little journey throughAmerican history.
Like even talking about um theFederalist and anti-federalist
debates.
Like, I think sometimes peoplethink like, oh, it was so long
(10:38):
ago, and they compromised, andthen we got the constitution.
And it's like, but there are somany pieces of writing where
they're going back and forth.
And, you know, as I recentlylearned in one of our Civics in
a year podcasts, some of themweren't very nice to each other,
but for the most part, it was, Ihear what you're saying, here's
why I disagree.
And this really back and forthof an exchange of ideas, as
(11:02):
opposed to um yelling at theperson, right?
Attacking the person.
They were not attacking ideas,but they were like the
Federalist and anti-federalistpapers go back and forth
forever, right?
We have the election of 1800,which was very politically
volatile.
And I appreciate that you saidhaving conversations about
(11:25):
current events is grounded inthese documents because that is,
you know, that is why that's whywe do what we do.
So that's some of the solutions.
In the policy brief, you bringup some other.
So can you talk about the othersolutions you uh recommend that
could reduce fear and alsoempower our teachers to teach
(11:46):
civics in a bold manner?
SPEAKER_00 (11:49):
Sure.
Yeah, you know, one of thesolutions, I mean, um,
suggestions.
I don't I won't go and say it'sa solution, but it's a suggested
solution.
Um is uh better preparation forteachers.
Um, this kind of gets back tosomething that we heard from
teachers and we've seen in othersurveys.
Um, teachers themselves don'tactually feel prepared to teach
(12:12):
civics.
So it's not just the fear piece,it's also a lack of preparation.
And it's funny, you gotta yougotta keep in mind a lot of
these teachers are Gen X ormillennials, and it is highly
likely that they in school gotvery little, if any, civics
instruction when they were intheir own K-12 careers.
And then you you fast forward,right, to you know, teacher
(12:35):
preparation, and they're notgetting a lot of content there
either.
And, you know, a lot of this hasto do with, you know, the
history of civics and the factthat it it kind of got lumped in
with social studies aseducational priorities shifted
and there's just only so muchtime and teacher preparation
programs.
So, you know, you can havesomebody teaching civics who
(12:56):
truly has never had anyinstruction in civics.
That is absolutely true.
This person could be the gymteacher, uh, could be an
anthropology major.
I mean, this this is kind ofwhere where we're at.
So that's a problem because inorder to confidently lead a
civics class and especially thediscussions that we're talking
about, you've got to have thecontent background.
(13:19):
Um, and there, and by the way,teachers are saying not only
that they don't get the contentpreparation, but also that they
themselves are not getting thesort of skills preparation,
i.e., what do I do if I have aclassroom conversation and all
of a sudden a student is intears?
I mean, how do I rectify thatsituation?
How do I avoid that situation?
Like, what are the bestpractices here?
(13:40):
Uh, teachers are saying theyjust are not getting that
training.
So, yes, one of our solutions isthat that professional
development for teachers, um,both before and after they're in
the classroom, has got toimprove um on this, on this, on
this uh uh uh topic.
Yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (14:00):
And I'm glad you brought up actually your
previous policy brief.
The title of that is when andwhere or when and why did
America stop teaching civics?
It is again fascinating tounderstand this.
And I also appreciate that we'rebringing up that it's lumped
into social studies because Ithink one of the biggest
misconceptions I run into ispeople think, oh, well, I got
(14:24):
civics, I learned about theworld wars and whatever else.
And it's like, that's reallyawesome.
That's history, right?
We we need to separate thesocial sciences and civics, and
you might have a differentdefinition.
To me, civics is everywhere.
Civics is in a math class, it'sin a science class, it's in your
ELA class because we live in asociety where you can't avoid
(14:46):
civics.
It's ever, I mean, our trashpeople came today, right?
That that is my town, likeunderstanding how all of this
works and defining that we don'tjust throw it in with social
studies, it needs to be kind ofthis bigger thing.
I do want to ask, because it'salso something I appreciate
(15:06):
about this policy brief, is youwent straight to teachers and
asked them, can you tell me whyyou did that and why that kind
of research matters?
SPEAKER_00 (15:18):
Um, yes.
So why did we go straight toteachers?
Well, in part it was because ofour previous brief that you just
mentioned, when and why didAmerica stop teaching civics?
And what we what we've startedto figure out in that brief was
that teachers, it wasn't only areduction in civics being taught
quantity-wise, but also youmight say quality-wise, because
(15:39):
teachers had this trepidation.
And so we wanted to understandthis, and we figured who who how
better, you know, how should weunderstand this?
What's a better way than toactually talk to teachers?
And I think it's important to,because sometimes with policy,
um, there's this tendency to,you know, you want to shape
these policies at the statelevel or the national level,
(15:59):
even.
But really, how is this playingout in practice in a classroom
for a teacher?
And so that to us was was justkey.
I mean, if to understand thisissue, um, you needed to talk to
the people who were in theclassroom right there on the
ground.
So that's why we we went thatroute.
Um, we were honestly shocked bythe findings.
(16:20):
I mean, I did not expect thefindings to be as um, I mean, as
you said, almost 80% saying thatthey've self-censored.
Um, I think it was was 86%saying that, you know, fear uh
uh is a primary challenge tothem, fear to teaching civics.
And you start to, you know, youask yourself, I mean, how are we
(16:43):
really going to improve civicseducation in this country if
we're requiring this sort oflevel of courage that shouldn't
be required in the classroom,you know?
This is like a systemic problem.
So um talking to teachers wasso, so illuminating and so
important.
SPEAKER_01 (17:00):
It is, it is incredibly eye-opening.
And I, you know, I'm looking atthe chart now.
And if anybody is looking at thepolicy brief while they're
looking at this, it's on pageseven, but but talking about
these things and I appreciateboth the policy briefs together
because personally I am a GenXer.
And when I went into theclassroom, I have no civic
(17:23):
knowledge.
And that's if we're just beinghonest, right?
I went into the classroom in2003.
Um, I didn't, I had a socialstudies methods class in my
undergrad, but again, socialstudies methods, there wasn't
specific civics.
And you bring up teachertraining.
Um, and that's what we do at theCenter for American Civics, and
(17:44):
a lot of our partners do thattoo.
Um, I've been to civics eventswith the Sandra Day O'Connor
Institute that I reallyappreciated.
And those are the things thatgot me to be the civics teacher
I became is I actually went toprofessional development
specifically for civics.
I also went to one specificallyfor US history or specifically
(18:05):
for, you know, AP government andpolitics, um, which incorporates
a lot of civics, but the teacherpreparation part, I think, is
the most widely, I don't want tosay ignored, but it's kind of
like, oh, well, you know,they're already in the
classroom, not understandingthat the more you invest in your
(18:26):
teachers, the better theoutcomes can be for your
students, for your school.
Because would it be fair toargue if you have teachers who
have great civic preparation,who have professional
development, who can have theseconversations because things
happen every day and kids wantto come in and they want to say,
(18:46):
Did you see X, Y, and Z on thenews?
And if a teacher knows how tohandle that, um recently
political assassinations, if ateacher knows to say, let's talk
about political disagreements inhistory, let's talk about how
these things have played out inhistory, because we don't
(19:07):
necessarily want to talk aboutimmediately the political
violence, because that could bea hot button issue.
That's you know, not a lot hascome out about it.
But if we can, I don't want tosay pivot and ignore, but if we
can show them this is actuallysomething that's happened in
history, you know, fear goesdown for teachers, parents feel
feel more confident, parentsfeel more confident in the
(19:31):
teachers, in those discussions.
It just all around is abeneficial thing.
So looking ahead, because yourorganization, my organization,
lots of our civic friends aregetting ready to celebrate
America 250.
Um, and we've actually, I feellike our organizations celebrate
the Declaration, countingprinciples all the time, but
(19:53):
this is a big thing for us.
What is at stake for us if we donot address these challenges?
And what do you feel is the bestcase vision for civics
classrooms moving forward after2026?
SPEAKER_00 (20:10):
Yeah, great question.
Um, you know, Justice O'Connoruh said always, you know, that
um civics is not passed downthrough the gene pool, right?
This has got to be taught.
Um, and I think we're startingto actually see the results of
what happens when you don'tteach civics.
Um, you brought up our previouspolicy brief about the history.
(20:32):
People, um, it's really usefulto keep in mind the context
here.
In our country, the founders umwere super concerned about
education.
And when when I say education,what I mean is civics education.
That was education 250 yearsago.
And why were they so concernedabout that?
Well, because they knew this wasan American experiment.
(20:54):
And they knew that, unlike amonarchy where who needs to be
educated, the king or queen,that in our country, everybody
needs to have some baselinecontext.
And so, you know, civicseducation was core to education
in this country until relativelyrecently.
Uh, until, you know, therestarted to be the decline that
we've seen started, say, the1960s.
(21:16):
And there are a lot of reasonsfor that.
Um, and people can read ourprevious report to get into
those, but um, I think we'reseeing the results.
The polling with young peopletoday is alarming.
The percentages of young peoplewho are kind of like, eh,
democracy, take it or leave it,um, the percentages of young
people who believe that speechand violence are like the same
(21:38):
thing, the percentages of youngpeople who believe that
political violence is sometimesokay.
If we are not teaching what youknow, our civic history and
civic processes, they are goingto learn other things.
And they are learning otherthings from TikTok and from
social media.
And I don't know, I really don'tthink that we it cannot be
(22:02):
overstated how much social mediaimpacts young people today.
I mean, I wake up in the morningand I read the New York Times
and the Wall Street Journal andthe Washington Post, and they
wake up in the morning and theyget their news from TikTok.
That's just how it goes now.
Yeah.
And uh, and I mean, we don'tneed to belabor this point, but
the fact of the matter is, Ithink we all know that people
(22:23):
are fed on these social mediasort of things, things that
reinforce what you alreadybelieved.
It's a bunch of clips taken outof context, et cetera, et
cetera.
Okay, so this is important.
Um, I believe, Liz, that peopleare starting to wake up to how
important this is.
Um, I've used this sort of stockmetaphor before, where you know
(22:46):
you hit a low point and thenthis stock just has to go up.
And I think in this countrywe've we've sort of realized
that.
You know, we we've we've beenfocused on STEM for so long,
we've been focused on otherpriorities, and that happens.
These things are cyclical.
But I do believe that now we'regetting more of a focus on
civics.
So um, and to what what doesthat look like?
Well, you know, our report wouldsuggest that there's reforms
(23:10):
that have to happen at the thestate level and also at the
district level.
And at the state level, itreally does mean crafting
standards that are specific,that are clear.
Um, and also um, it really meansfiguring out how to get in a
room and compromise and try toleave sort of and and everybody
(23:33):
should should leave that room alittle unhappy.
Um that's yes, you know what Imean?
And that's just not somethingthat we want to do as much
today, but it's super necessary.
And I will say, because a lot ofpeople when I say that say, oh
yeah, right.
Well, it's possible.
And you brought up, you know,um, the college board and the
APUS government and politicscourse.
(23:54):
And and yes, I worked on it.
So I mean, I might be biased,but this is the most um widely
taught civics course in thecountry.
Hundreds of thousands ofstudents take it every year.
And let me tell you something,you can get credit for it at
Oberlin, you can get credit forit at Liberty University.
There are scholars on the leftand scholars on the right who
have all signed on to thiscourse.
(24:15):
And I think, you know, Liz, youcan talk, speak to this maybe,
but it is a robust civicseducation.
So you can do this.
It's not impossible, um, but itdoes require a lot of hard work.
So at the state level, that hasto happen.
And then at the district level,right, what teachers are saying
is we've got to have teacher,we've got to have leaders who
are going to care about this andare going to step in and say the
(24:41):
expectation is that our civicsteachers will be having these
kind of conversations.
That's not that that's theexpectation.
And so if a parent calls and isupset, um, it it means getting
in the room with that parent andsort of explaining the import
what we've just talked about inthis conversation.
Yeah, the importance of this,how it's core to this district
(25:02):
or this school's perception ofwhat civics education should be,
et cetera, et cetera.
So those would be some somestarting points.
And then, of course, as yousaid, the professional
development for teachers, um,which is as you will, as you
point out, there's a lot oforganizations like yours that
are really doing great work tosort of help teachers kind of
get up to speed so that theyfeel more comfortable um leading
(25:23):
these conversations.
So those are just a few things,but um yeah, and good, good,
good, good to point out.
This is the 250th anniversary.
Like, let's go, right?
Um, you know, like let's getlet's get the like right this
ship, you know.
SPEAKER_01 (25:38):
Um thank you for bringing up compromise because I
think sometimes people hearcompromise and it's like they
think it's a flowery word, andit's like it's really just not,
because the entire point ofcompromise is that nobody leaves
100% happy.
Because then that's not acompromise, right?
If if there is that give andtake, that that has to be a
(25:59):
thing.
And I know at the center, wereally like looking back on the
declaration, looking back onthese documents and and having
these conversations.
And I feel like when it getspaired, you know, with the
policy briefs that the Sandra D.
O'Connor Institute and yourselfput out, it is it just puts an
exclamation point on the needfor civic education, but also
(26:24):
the army of people behind civiceducators who are ready and
willing to say, we have stufffor you, we've got you.
You know, I know foradministrators, for a long time
it feels like they had to theyhad to focus on math in ELA,
right?
Especially in the state ofArizona, because that's where
(26:44):
the state test was.
Um, and then science comes in.
And I want to be very clear thatI don't want to pit any subject
against any subject because Ithink they all have value.
I think that, and your policybriefs speak to this, civics has
just been pushed down.
We just want to come back up andbe on the level of every other
(27:07):
one's.
And we want administrators tounderstand there's a difference
between social studies andcivics.
There's a difference betweenhistory and civics.
They can coexist, but they'renot the same thing.
Right.
One of the things I reallyappreciated about the high
school that I was at, um, andthis actually goes with the
Arizona, uh, there was um civicsawards for schools.
(27:31):
And it has unfortunately, itjust hasn't been a thing in the
past couple of years.
But part of the civic award washow does your school encapsulate
civics?
Like, what are kids doing inSpanish?
What are they doing in band?
And I think people think like,why would they be learning
civics in band?
(27:51):
Well, the way they operate iscivics, right?
And understanding rules and howwe do things and how we interact
with one another is such a bigthing.
So is there anything before wekind of close this out that you
want to say to teachers?
Because I think that, you know,we have a lot of listeners who
(28:14):
are teachers, but any words ofencouragement you have for
teachers going into this 250,going into hopefully what we're
seeing, like you said, is thisupswing of support for teachers
and civic education.
SPEAKER_00 (28:31):
Yeah.
Um, well, I mean, the firstthing would be thank you.
Um you know, as we've talkedabout right now, being a civics
teacher, um, it takes, it takesa lot of courage.
Um, and I would argue that, youknow, it it shouldn't take
nearly as much courage to teachcivics.
But I do think that there arereasons to be optimistic, um, as
(28:51):
you point out.
And I and I think that theperception of uh this subject is
changing in in terms of theimportance of this subject.
And I think that people are alsostarting to come around a little
bit to the idea that, yeah, thatwe can't continue to do things
the same way.
Um, you know, you said aboutcompromise and how sometimes it
(29:12):
has this flowery reputation.
Um, so too does just basiccivility sometimes.
People act as if civility islike a nice to have, oh, it's,
you know, but it's notessential.
And I think that people arewaking up to the fact that
actually it is essential.
Um, it's not a flowery thing,it's a core concrete thing that
(29:33):
that that is absolutely key toany type of productive decision
making.
Um, and so I would say toteachers, you know, you can go
to our policy brief.
We have a section in there whereteachers have sort of talked a
little bit about how they, as Ias I mentioned, how they've sort
of navigated this environment.
There might be some good advicein there, but um, there's a lot
(29:54):
of us, as you point out, Liz,who are trying to do what we can
to support teachers.
And so I'd encourage them.
To to check out yourorganization, of course, and to
see what we've been up to at theO'Connor Institute.
And um and you know, and toreach out, you know, reach out
if they have questions or theywant to share something, or if
they think there's a topic thatwe should look at and study in
(30:15):
our next policy brief.
Um, yeah, because becauseteachers are the ones we should
be listening to.
They're the ones in theclassroom that are on the ground
doing this.
So um, yeah.
SPEAKER_01 (30:26):
Thank you so much.
First of all, for writing thesepolicy briefs, because I think
it shines a light, aneasy-to-read light, because
sometimes we do research andit's not really consumable by
the mass public.
This is short.
I mean, this policy brief, I'mlooking at it online, and the
conclusion is on page 14.
And it is, again, not a bigread.
(30:49):
It would be really great to lookat in PLCs, both for teachers
and administrators, um, andmaybe at the district level with
boards.
But thank you so much for thework you do at the O'Connor
Institute.
Uh listeners, I will be puttingall of these policy briefs,
anything we talk about, in ourshow notes.
But Liam, thank you for yourtime.
Thank you for your expertise,and thank you for what you're
(31:11):
doing for civic education.
SPEAKER_00 (31:13):
Thanks, Liz.
This was fun.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.