Shanker Blog

Invest in Democracy: Promote Civic Education

Our guest author is Stan Litow, a professor at Columbia University; author of Breaking Barriers: How P-TECH Schools Create a Pathway From High School to College to Career and The Challenge for Business and Society: From Risk to Reward; a columnist at Barron's; a Trustee at the State University of New York (SUNY); and a member of the the Shanker Institute Board.

The 2024 Election results are behind us. The implications of the vote and its ability to cloud the future are looming larger and larger, and the results and impact on Americans are increasingly looking grim or uncertain. While a majority of Americans support women's rights and access to health care both policies are increasingly at risk. While most Americans believe Climate Change is a real threat, there is a strong likelihood that environmental policy and programs are  also at risk. Most Americans also trust scientists and doctors. As a result of their trust, Americans favor vaccination which are essential to deal with health care crises like measles,  mumps, or Covid, but that too is now at risk, along with the Affordable Care Act, Medicare and Medicaid. And the same is true for gun violence. Most Americans believe that background checks are critically important but that, too, seems unlikely. 

 For those of us who care deeply about our nation’s schools, the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education’s support for students and schools, such as Title I funding and support for private school vouchers, could devastate our entire public education system and disadvantage millions of students, teachers and parents.

 While a majority of Americans voted for a presidential candidate who does not hold the same views as a majority of Americans on these issues, locally, where they had the opportunity on their ballots, Americans largely did vote to support abortion rights, to require paid sick leave, mitigating climate change, and to support our public schools.

Reading Policy, the Wind and the Sun

There is a well-known tale about the Wind and the Sun who once debated who was stronger. They agreed that whoever could make a traveler remove his coat would win. The Wind went first, blowing with all his might, but the harder he blew, the tighter the man wrapped his coat. Exhausted, the Wind gave up. Then the Sun shone warmly on the traveler, and as the air around him grew warmer, the man loosened his coat and eventually removed it entirely.

What does this story have to do with reading policy?

At the Shanker Institute, we have been cataloging literacy laws enacted since 2019. Over the years, we have observed an increase in the prescriptiveness of these laws—for example, states are increasingly banning three cueing -- at least 14 states include such language in their laws. Simultaneously, and perhaps relatedly, opposition to the science of reading seems to be on the rise. I find myself thinking that perhaps these attempts to change instruction with the force of the law are akin to the Wind in the story, causing some educators to feel their professional autonomy is challenged, leading them to rely more heavily on familiar practices. Are there sun-like influences shaping the discourse in ways that might help teachers to lower their fences and become more receptive to new knowledge? I believe so. 

Digital Technology and the Reading Brain: What Reading Legislation Overlooks

The Shanker Institute and Maryland READS recently facilitated a conversation between state and local education leaders in Maryland and literacy expert Dr. Maryanne Wolf to explore the impact of digital technology on students’ reading development. As Maryland joins other states in implementing policy reforms to improve reading instruction, it is essential to recognize and explore additional ecosystemic barriers that might prevent the state from achieving its reading proficiency goals.

A growing number of studies (discussed below) are showing that choosing to read on screens versus using printed materials can be a significant obstacle to acquiring deep reading and thinking skills. This post explores whether and how reading policy – state legislation in particular – is responding to this emerging concern. 
 
The Shanker Institute has been tracking and analyzing the content of reading bills enacted into law since 2019. Technology, broadly defined,^[1] has been one domain whose presence or absence we identified in these laws. This post focuses on mentions of digital media related to students, including its use in instruction, progress monitoring and assessment, as well as in reading interventions. Our analysis reveals that laws in nine states out of 50 that enacted some reading bill and out of 33 with comprehensive reading legislation discuss these uses of technology, as summarized in Table 1 below. 
  

Out of School But in a Book: Leveraging the Socio-Cultural Aspects of Reading

So often, when we talk about reading, we focus on the technical or cognitive side of it – learning how students decode words and understand their meaning. While this makes sense because schools tend to prioritize the technical aspects of reading for beginning learners, the socio-cultural aspect of reading must not be forgotten. 

The socio-cultural aspect of reading refers to how our community, environment, and cultural background influence reading. The way that people learn to read, what they decide to read, and how they interpret what they read is largely influenced by their larger socio-cultural environment (Cartin, 2023). 

When you reflect on your experience learning to read, did just learning how to sound out words make you a strong reader? Or, did your environment play a role? Did learning how to sound out words in collaboration with your peers or the pride and joy from finishing your first book inspire you to keep reading? 

Only recently have some states – such as Minnesota, Michigan, and Florida – begun to include initiatives incorporating the community and environmental dimension of reading into their legislation. For example, Minnesota’s HF 2497 bill established a grant to support eligible after-school organizations in providing culturally affirming and enriching​ after-school programming that promotes positive learning activities, specifically including community engagement and literacy. Similarly, Michigan’s HB 4411 bill established an innovative community library fund to aid in furthering reading skills and address early childhood literacy gaps through the engagement and connection of students. Another example is Florida’s SB 2524 bill, which established a partnership with Just Read, Florida! to help distribute books at no cost to families to help instill a love of reading in students. Such initiatives can play a significant role in promoting childhood literacy and encourage young readers to view reading as a leisure and social activity. However, we need more states to adopt similar efforts to truly meet the needs of all students.

The Tales Are Phantasms, But the Victims Are Real: The Trumpian Crucible in Springfield, Ohio

Our guest author is Leo Casey, Special Assistant to the President of the AFT, and Executive Director Emeritus of the Albert Shanker Institute.

In January 1952, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) subpoenaed the well-known American stage and film director Elia Kazan to testify behind closed doors. There he told the Committee about his own participation in the Communist Party, but declined to name others. In April, he was called back for public hearings. Caving in to threats from HUAC and pressure from the Hollywood studios, Kazan named eight individuals who, with him, had been part of a Communist Party cell in the Group Theatre during the1930s.

Lives were shattered by Kazan’s testimony. The eight named individuals were themselves called before HUAC. The actor J. Edward Bromberg defiantly refused the committee’s demand to name names, but the stress of the ordeal took a terrible toll: he would die young of a heart attack in a matter of months. Others of the eight who resisted HUAC, such as Morris Carnovsky and Phoebe Brand, would never work in film again. Only those who would join Kazan in naming names, such as Clifford Odets and Lewis Leverett, would be able to avoid the Hollywood blacklist and save their film careers.

Angered in equal measures by HUAC’s star chamber and by Kazan informing on one-time friends and comrades, the distinguished American playwright Arthur Miller decided that it was time to mount a forceful public critique of the McCarthyism that lay behind the HUAC hearings. But rather than comment directly on the events of his day, Miller would take the unusual approach of using the late 17^th century witch trials in Salem, Massachusetts as his subject matter.

Valuing Teachers’ Voices on World Teachers’ Day—and Every Day

Our guest author is Julie Vogtman, Senior Director of Job Quality, National Women’s Law Center.

Did you know that Saturday, October 5th was World Teachers’ Day? According to Unesco, one of the day’s convenors, this year’s theme is “Valuing teacher voices: towards a new social contract for education,” which is meant to “underscor[e] the urgency of calling for and attending to teachers’ voices to address their challenges” and “most importantly, to acknowledge and benefit from the expert knowledge and input that they bring to education.”

This is a vital mission—one that merits far more than a day to honor. And it’s particularly important in this moment, when teachers in many U.S. school districts feel that the “expert knowledge and input that they bring to education” is being disregarded more than ever. When at least 18 states have enacted laws restricting K-12 public school teachers' instruction on topics related to race, gender, sexuality, and other so-called “divisive concepts”—and PEN America has documented more than 10,000 instances of book bans in the 2023-24 school year alone—many teachers across the country lack the autonomy and respect for their profession that they want and deserve.

A Legislator’s Lessons From Fifth Graders

Our guest author is Massachusetts State Senator Becca Rausch.

Earlier this year, I walked into one of the elementary schools in my district to visit with the fifth grade –- all 300 of them. (For those who might not work with young people routinely, that is a lot of fifth graders.) School visits and engaging with students is one of my favorite parts of serving in the Massachusetts Senate. Presently, I am the only mother of elementary school aged children or younger in our chamber, and I’ve worked with children for as long as I can remember, so the fact that I love and dedicate real time and energy to youth outreach is unsurprising. But this particular visit sticks with me because of the enormity of its embedded power.

When I speak with students, I always aim to enhance the existing civics education curriculum. I talk about my path to the State Senate through prior elected service in local government. I present students with an interactive “government tic-tac-toe” grid that shows the three branches of government as implemented within the three levels of government systems. Usually, students know most of the federal branches. Fewer know the state branches. Very few know the local government structures.

What are Third Places and Why Do They Matter?

When I was 10 years old, my mom and dad dropped me off at our local YMCA skatepark, hoping I would make friends. Over a decade later, I am still skateboarding. But, more importantly, I can confidently say that at the YMCA skatepark, I was transformed into the woman, scholar, and advocate that I am today.

Sociologist Ray Oldenburg first introduced the concept of “third places” in his 1989 book The Great Good Place. Oldenburg advocates that to live a balanced, happy life, people need engagement in three realms – at home, work, and in third places. Third places act as a core setting for informal public life, offering connection, community, and sociability (Oldenburg, 1989). For adults, examples include cafes, parks, gyms, and other places centered around a common interest that fosters community and civic engagement. Very simply, third places can be thought of as societal glue. They bind people together to construct communities (Low, 2020). 

For children, third places are places they regularly frequent outside of their home and school environments that are child-centered, such as after-school programs, extracurricular activities, sports, public libraries, clubs, and my personal favorite, skateparks. As is the case for adults, children’s third places provide the same sense of community. They help children develop a sense of self and consciousness of the greater world, allowing them to appreciate life and be enriched by its diversity (Oldenburg, 1989). 

The Threat of Technology to Students' Reading Brains

As Maryland’s state leaders join their peers across the country to push forward with policy reforms grounded in the science of reading, we asked ourselves: by focusing primarily on instruction, are we addressing the full scope of challenges that impact reading proficiency? While improving the teaching of reading with evidence-based practices is critical, a significant issue remains underexplored: the impact of our digital culture on children’s ability to develop and maintain the capacity for sustained, focused, and reflective reading.

Some might question whether this type of reading is feasible in today’s fast-paced, distraction-filled digital world. However, as Maryanne Wolf persuasively argues, this level of deep engagement is both attainable and essential for developing critical thinking, empathy, and insight. Wolf describes deep reading as a journey into the "innermost sanctuary" of our hearts and minds. In that space, we don't just comprehend or absorb the author's words; we actively reflect on their ideas, going beyond them to develop our own. Deep reading nurtures the intellectual and emotional capacities that make us human. So, why is this form of reading most at risk today?

Reading science has shown that learning to read is not a natural process; it requires explicit, systematic instruction and practice (also here and here). Unlike spoken language, which humans instinctively acquire through exposure and interaction, reading is a skill that our brains are not biologically wired for. In other words, humans do not learn to read simply by being exposed to books or observing others reading. Therefore, the reading brain must be intentionally built repurposing and connecting areas of the brain; science of reading policy aims to ensure that all children receive the best instruction to achieve this goal. Yet, we are learning that structured literacy instruction in elementary school is not a one and done. To sustain and grow our reading capacity, we must actively nurture, use, and protect this magnificent infrastructure that is the reading brain. Because, as Wolf argues, the brain's plasticity is its greatest strength but also its Achilles' heel; what is built can be unbuilt. And that’s what our digital culture might be doing.

“e pluribus unum” Now is the Time for Educators to Build a New Foundation for Excellence in History and Civics Education

Our guest author is Danielle Allen, the James Bryant Conant University Professor at Harvard University, Director of the Democratic Knowledge Project at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and of the Allen Lab for Democracy Renovation at the Harvard Kennedy School, and a Board Member of the Shanker Institute.

Once again, on this Constitution Day, we find ourselves in a nation under stress– with a polarized electoral landscape and high levels of disconnection from our constitutional democracy among young people who see our political system as not responsive to the challenges of our times–school shootings, climate change, stalled social mobility. The classroom cannot alone change these dynamics, but it can help.

Yet teaching American history and civics is particularly challenging right now, precisely because of that polarized landscape. As educators, how do we share our nation’s story and help students develop the skills to consider other people’s perspectives so that today’s students are civically engaged and can work together to sustain our constitutional democracy in the future?