Use of Research Evidence within Civics Programming

Civics education can provide young people with critical skills and opportunities to be active change agents within their communities and on a global scale. Yet, civics programming is often underfunded, decentralized, and at-times highly politicized. In the United States, recent mandates require most states to offer civics education within K-12 schooling, yet heightened efforts to censor discussion around social inequality within the classroom begs the question: What type of research evidence is being considered and used to inform such programming?

Mapping the Civics Landscape (Project)

Funded by the William T. Grant Scholars Program (PI Kornbluh), this five-year study explores how political context contributes to the use and promotion of evidence within civics education programming.

We are using mixed methods to examine two major research questions:

What is the role of research evidence in the selection of civics curricula in the current political context?
What strategies do intermediary actors leverage in navigating such politics when promoting research evidence?

To address these questions, we are collecting data via semi-structured interviews with school decision-makers and intermediary actors and will also analyze large-scale web-based data. This information will inform the development of two user-designed tools to support both school decision-makers and intermediary actors in using research evidence to both inform and advocate for civics programming.

Publications and Resources

Kornbluh, M., [1]*Bell, S., *Amador, R., & Lucero, A. (accepted). Learning from their voices: Educators’ strategies for teaching social justice in turbulent times. In Mirra, N., Garcia, A., & Odlum, L. (Eds). Teaching Civic Literacy Learning. NCTE/Routledge.

This book chapter draws from preliminary interviews with school decision-makers and their experiences searching for and implementing civics programming with a focus on social justice. On the “search” side, educators identified the importance of professional networks and “honest” brokers in accessing research to guide their programmatic decision-making. On the “implementation” side, educators stressed the value of local networks as well as tapping into pedagogy that elevates student voice and opportunities for transparency with families.

[1] * = student co-author

Download PDF Preliminary Report

Download Interactive Preliminary Report