Opinion: Civics classes should teach students how to disagree productively

Arizona defines civic literacy as “the knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary for informed, responsible participation in public life.” Those skills are tested when students have to form a view, explain it, hear a competing argument, and respond.

A new Sandra Day O’Connor Institute survey looked closer at how civic skills are practiced in the classroom. We asked recent high school graduates about their high school civics classes: what they learned, how disagreement was handled, when they spoke up, and when they didn’t.

Fifty-eight percent said they’d self-censored in class from sharing their opinion on a political or civic issue because they were concerned about how others would react.

The most striking finding was whom they were worried about. Among students who held back, 91% cited classmates. Just 41% were concerned about the teacher.

That does not make teachers less important; it clarifies the challenge they face. If students are worried primarily about one another, opening the floor for discussion is not enough. Teachers also have to structure conversations such that students can learn to feel comfortable disagreeing directly and also productively answering one another’s arguments.

That is difficult work, especially because nearly 80% of the civics teachers we surveyed last year said fear of pushback or controversy had led them to censor themselves. The teacher hesitates to even open a hard discussion, and the student hesitates to enter one.

Arizona is helping in part by putting real structure behind its broad definition of civics literacy. The State Seal of Civics Literacy, for example, asks students to do more than pass the civics test: they must complete three civics-learning experiences, 30 hours of civic engagement, and a written reflection. Among the approved experiences is a student civil discourse lab.

In the classroom, teachers can make the practice of civil discourse easier by initially lowering the social stakes. Students can argue assigned positions before being asked to defend their own. First responses can be anonymous, so ideas enter the discussion before everyone knows who holds them. Teachers can also ask students anonymously whether a hypothetical classmate who voices an unpopular opinion deserves respect, then ask whether they think most of their classmates agree. Where students underestimate others’ support for respectful disagreement, the results can make that visible.

The goal is to help young people see disagreement as an opportunity to contribute to a productive conversation. Jose S., who attended high school in Arizona, described it well: “It’s not a big deal if I am wrong. It’s more of a big deal that I brought something productive to the conversation.”

Arizona asks its students to be ready for “informed, responsible participation in public life,” and part of that preparation is learning how to disagree productively with other people. Civics class should not merely invite students to speak; it should teach them the importance of speaking, and listening, even when the person next to them holds a different opinion.