Americans have always looked to schools to prepare young people for their roles as citizens in our constitutional democracy, and today, 92% of Americans agree that civic education is critical to the country’s success. In other words, even though we struggle to agree on basic facts, we strongly agree that civic education matters—and that K–12 schools are where it should be taught.
But with only five states requiring a middle school civics course and 14 states requiring no civics courses at all, where is this civic education supposed to happen? I asked the guy sitting next to me on the plane on my way home from a civic education symposium in Philadelphia. His cautious response, to my delight and his relief: “In social studies classrooms?”
Correct. Since 1918, K–12 instruction in history, civics, government, geography, economics, and other liberal arts has been encapsulated under the umbrella of “social studies.”
In the ring of social studies instruction in the United States, history is the undisputed heavyweight. Students receive far more instruction in history than in civics, government, economics, or geography—likely to the tune of 50% or more of their total instructional time.
At the same time, society expects schools to foster “civic dispositions,” the habits and hearts of active citizens. Most people assume this happens naturally within those social studies blocks. However, the data tell a different story.
History classes do not, in and of themselves, instill civic dispositions.
As we approach the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, a new evaluation by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) of the iCivics Through Inquiry curriculum offers a reality check. It proves that if we want engaged citizens, we have to stop relying on history to do the work of civics by accident.
Conducted during the 2024–2025 school year across three diverse urban districts, the evaluation found that when history is taught with an intentional civic lens, students changed their behavior. Compared to their peers, students in the iCivics program were:
- Significantly more likely to report interest in politics and current events.
- Significantly more likely to report checking the news multiple times a day.
- Substantially more likely to talk about politics and current events with friends, family, teachers, or other adults at school.
- Noticeably more likely to report valuing their education in U.S. History.
The biggest takeaway? Civic engagement isn’t a byproduct of history instruction; it’s a design choice.
The Through Inquiry curriculum intentionally weaves primary source analysis and civic identity into the historical arc. We can’t expect kids to become responsible citizens simply by sitting in a history classroom for 180 days; we have to integrate a civic ethos that is supported by the instructional activities we know to cultivate civic outcomes.
A curriculum is only as good as the person standing at the front of the room. The study found that 93% of teachers intend to continue using iCivics materials. Moreover, coaching and professional learning were the most critical factors for success.
This couldn’t come at a more important time, because a systemic shift for civics is on the horizon. The National Assessment Governing Board has announced that it will move the voluntary state-level NAEP civics assessment for eighth graders up to 2028, assess twelfth graders for the first time since 2010, and, crucially, report results disaggregated by state. If all 50 states adopt the standards, as we are hopeful they will, a wave of change is about to occur, leading to students having stronger civic knowledge, skills, and attitudes when they graduate from high school.
These are developments that matter more for America’s 250th and our future than any of the pomp, circumstance, or fireworks that we will nonetheless enjoy on the Fourth of July.
