Critical thinking and America’s future: Our series explores paths forward
Public education is essential to a thriving democracy. How can schools help the next generation tackle society’s challenges with open-mindedness and agency?
The role of public education in the United States has shifted dramatically through the years. Once the foundation for creating an informed electorate, it’s now often seen simply as a pathway to secure employment. But amid resource-strained school districts and culture wars that put people at odds with one another, a question arises: What does it mean for democracy if the public education system breaks?
The Monitor has recently published a series of stories exploring this question. Managing Editor Amelia Newcomb says it’s an issue the Monitor cares deeply about, and seeks to cover with fairness and open-mindedness. One reporter involved in the series, Chelsea Sheasley, went to multiple public schools that used different, controversial history curricula. What she saw were not schools divided, but classrooms enriched with critical thinking.
“What Chelsea found was that in both cases, the classrooms were full of thoughtful debate,” Amelia said. “Kids were getting energized. There was disagreement. There was deep learning. And that’s really what education should be.”
Episode transcript
Samantha Laine Perfas: What does it mean for democracy if the public education system breaks?
[MUSIC]
Welcome to Rethinking the News. I’m today’s host, Samantha Laine Perfas.
Over the past couple of weeks, the Monitor published a series about the role of public education in the United States and how it contributes to a thriving democracy. Initially, public education was established to help create an informed electorate, as farmers and tradespeople would be involved in choosing the nation’s leaders and laws. But over time that has shifted, and in some ways education now focuses more on securing employment rather than giving citizens what they need to be educated voters. A recent survey from the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center found that only 56% of Americans could name all three branches of government, with 20% unable to name any branch at all.
Today, we have managing editor Amelia Newcomb in the studio to talk about the series. She was our long-time international editor, and previously edited our education coverage. Here's our conversation.
[MUSIC]
Laine Perfas: So I want to talk a little bit about the series that we did these past few weeks. Both democracy and education have been under strain for a while. But what was it about this moment that you felt it was necessary to do a series on the relationship between the two?
Amelia Newcomb: I'd say it was the pandemic and our current culture wars. You know, in recent years, the Monitor has looked in-depth at the strains democracy is facing in the United States. A lot of our institutions, as we all know, are no longer as trusted as they once might have been. And especially since the pandemic, schools seem to have joined that group. In addition to that, we're seeing a lot of acrimony over curriculum, over issues of parental involvement and access for everyone to good schools. And that's not really new, but it's acute in a lot of areas. And part of that is reflected in the fact that a lot of people have left the public school system. And it strikes at the heart of a long accepted American viewpoint that good public education and universal public education is essential to a thriving democracy. So it seemed to all of us that it was a good moment to look at public education, democracy and the future of America, which is the headline of the first story in the series.
Laine Perfas: You used to be the education editor for the Monitor, and you also used to be an educator yourself. Did that inform the series in any way?
Newcomb: I think it did, and I would note that a number of us have strong interests in education. Our education editor, Kim Campbell, taught for ten years in the public school system. Anyone who has taught knows the power of seeing students open their thought to a new idea or learn to discuss points of view in a thoughtful and very well-informed way. There are really important values associated with that, like fairness, open mindedness, or compassion for other people's points of view and integrity. So I think, yeah, that's had a big influence on the series.
Laine Perfas: You know, you mention open-mindedness and compassion for other viewpoints. Do you think education also helps inform our ability to participate in things like civics or in our democracy as a whole?
Newcomb: Yeah, I really do. It's pretty well borne out that people who have a decent grounding in both history and how the American government works do participate more. They understand the importance of voting, of how they can get engaged with government, even if it's at a very local level. The 2021 report from a group called Educating for American Democracy talked about an erosion in teaching history and government structure over the past 50 years. And they noted at the same time, in that same period, rising partisan and political polarization. One educator put it in a really interesting way in one of the stories we did, noting that: “In prior eras, the fight was about who should be included in our history curriculum. It wasn't about what the story should be. And that's the fight now.”
Laine Perfas: The way that the culture wars are playing out, sometimes it can feel like the two sides are really polar opposites. How did the series attempt fairness?
Newcomb: Our writer Chelsea Sheasley did a really interesting story that focused on two histories from the point of view of what does it mean to be an American? And she looked at one school, or schools, that used the 1619 Project curriculum that looks at American history starting in the year 1619, when slave ships arrived. And she went to other schools that use the 1776 curriculum, one that was started to, in theory, take a more traditional view of America's founding. Supporters of it said it was important to helping build a love of country and so forth. And there's been a lot of controversy around both curriculums. I don't know another story that had both 1776 and 1619 in the same story, looking at both of them together and really examining what was going on in schools that were using these curriculums. What Chelsea found was that in both cases, the classrooms were full of thoughtful debate. Kids were getting energized. There was deep learning. And that's really what education should be.
It's been evident in much of the education debate that people are in their corners. As people pull out of the public school system into religious schools or do homeschooling or come up with different ways to tailor education, it can feel as if, well, maybe kids are only going to get one point of view. And what Chelsea saw in these schools was a lot of analysis going on, a lot of look, not just at the United States, but also world history, looking at values and virtues like respect and so forth. And so in the end, what she said really was so powerful was that these kids were getting a sense of agency. And if you want to connect a value with democracy, that sense of agency is really important.
Laine Perfas: When people read this series, what do you hope they'll walk away with?
Newcomb: Well, my hope is, of course, that they'll see how important widespread access to public education is for the future of our democracy. And I hope they'll also think about not going into their corner, you know, into their particular beliefs, and ask themselves the question as they look at other people, what can I learn from you?
Laine Perfas: Well, thank you so much, Amelia, for sharing your thoughts on the series.
Newcomb: Thanks for having me. It's been really nice to talk with you.
[MUSIC]
Laine Perfas: Thanks for listening. To read the series, visit csmonitor.com/educationanddemocracy. Again that’s csmonitor.com/educationanddemocracy. This episode was hosted by me, Samantha Laine Perfas, and co-produced with Jingnan Peng. Our editor was Clay Collins, and our audio engineer was Jeff Turton. Produced by The Christian Science Monitor, copyright 2022.
[END]
