“Now Is the Time”: - Specialized Research AI at MIT

“Now Is the Time”:
Civic Learning for a Strong Democracy

Sylvia Hurtado

Cultivating citizens for American democracy has historically been a key purpose
of higher education, yet today’s college students are in contact with more di-
vergent worldviews, increasing demographic diversity sometimes accompanied
by fear of “the other,” and resulting conflict in policies amid rising inequality.
Now is the time to recenter civic learning within and across all institutions and
disciplines, as well as undertake more critical approaches to this work in terms
of pedagogy that prepares students for a diverse and unequal society. Colleges’
collective efforts have already resulted in critical community engagement, cur-
ricula reform, and better ways of articulating and assessing civic learning prac-
tices. Extending civic learning to reflect how we teach will result in more en-
gaged citizens capable of understanding differences, conflict as an oppor-
tunity to learn, and community-building processes characteristic of a strong
democracy.

D uring a time of great civil unrest over racial injustice, Dr. Martin Lu-

ther King Jr. stated, “Now is the time to make real the promises of our
democracy.” Today’s changing demographics, globalization, media,
and technology place young adults in regular contact with diverse cultures,
social movements, and conflicting worldviews that raise important questions
about our democracy and challenge their own perspectives. Now is the time
to foster civic learning to prepare all students for engaging in a democracy em-
bedded in an “increasingly contentious and fractured world, where diversity
is crucial.”1 The contemporary era is divided over key policy issues and rising
inequality, and yet it represents a critical opportunity for the education and
engagement of young adults. The 2018 midterm elections reflected a surge
in voting among the high school senior and college-age population, with 31
percent exercising their right to vote and significant increases in youth po-
litical activism since the 2016 presidential election.2 Increased voter turnout
was attributed, in part, to one of the most contentious presidential candidates
in U.S. history, who had no record of public service. Rather than abandoning

© 2019 by Sylvia Hurtado
Published under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license
https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_01762

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

ideals out of cynicism and growing dismay about democratic processes, youth
surveys suggest a diverse, college-age population with a collective approach
toward positive change. However, voting and activism are not the only be-
haviors to monitor. Engaged citizenship requires development of college stu-
dents’ capacities and habits of mind that include knowledge, skills, and values
to counter misinformation, negotiate conflict, and identify threats to a plural-
istic democracy. Further, although 87 percent performed some type of volun-
teer work during high school, only 19 percent of freshmen entering four-year
colleges score high on civic engagement behaviors.3 That is, civic learning in-
volves more than engaging in charitable service, and many students have yet
to discover what democratic practices feel like in the classroom. How and
what we teach the next generation is critical to building a hopeful vision of an
American society that is more equitable, sustainable, and economically sta-
ble, and is governed by a strong democracy.

The purpose of this essay is to illuminate how inclusive college teaching
based on civic learning goals can model community and democratic princi-
ples to enhance students’ civic skills and dispositions for a diverse and chang-
ing world. To begin, I provide a brief overview of the civic learning landscape
in higher education. I call attention to integrative approaches to civic learn-
ing goals to bring coherence to campus efforts, even as the diversity and civ-
ic engagement movements have evolved separately and oftentimes exist in
separate units on campus.4 Key democratic concepts and pedagogy typical-
ly associated with service learning and intergroup dialogue can be integrated
into many courses and classrooms. The aim is to encourage faculty to take re-
sponsibility to engage diverse classrooms and develop a new generation of cit-
izens willing to enact innovative solutions to the problems of the twenty-first
century.

While primary and secondary education are intended to provide all stu-
dents with education in civics–defined as the rights and duties of citizens
and an understanding of how government works–higher education has his-
torically played a special role in educating citizens for leadership in society.
Cultivating citizenship has been embedded in the purposes of higher educa-
tion from the days of the earliest colleges to the contemporary movements of
civic engagement. It is a key component of a quality education. For example,
accreditation agencies include civic engagement and civic discourse in a di-
verse and multicultural society as a core element in evaluating the quality of
education that many campuses promote in institutional mission statements.
Civic learning is also one of the five identified areas in the “Degree Qualifi-
cations Profile” established to promote the quality of associate’s to master’s
degrees, fostering students’ capacity to “engage with, respond to, and reflect

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

on political, social, environmental and economic challenges at local, nation-
al and global levels.”5 Still, there is the common notion that civic learning is
optional and that we are reaching only students who arrive with open hearts
and minds about their personal and social responsibilities and choose specif-
ic college courses. We need to extend the reach and occasions for civic learn-
ing in college.

M uch activity has taken place across the American higher education

landscape in the last thirty years to recenter the role of colleges and
universities in advancing civic learning. Many institutions have
created new roles, initiatives, and centers supporting civic learning as well
as increased their involvement in a broad social movement reflecting an ar-
ray of academic groups and campus consortia concerned with civic learning
and student development, including the initiatives and resources in such or-
ganizations as Campus Compact, Bringing Theory to Practice, and Imagin-
ing America.6 In 2012, the American Association of Colleges & Universities’
(AAC&U) National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engage-
ment released the comprehensive report A Crucible Moment: College Learning &
Democracy’s Future. It was a national call to action for civic learning to acquire
equal footing and integration with educational career and degree-completion
goals. The report helped jump-start and coordinate higher education efforts
in an attempt to reverse a “civic recession” in the country, evidenced by the
relative declines in National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) civ-
ic learning measures for twelfth graders from 1998–2010, and relatively low
voter-participation rates among young adults.7 The report identified the many
ways that higher education institutions have laid pathways to democratic en-
gagement and provided a template that raised the bar for developing the civic-
minded campus, including a focus on the college curriculum as well as the de-
velopment of powerful community partnerships. Momentum surrounding
the report renewed conversation about higher education’s role in cultivating
citizenship and reinvigorated collective campus commitments to developing
programs, serving communities, and reforming curricula.

The U.S. Department of Education funded and supported the work, but
deferred to the National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic En-
gagement to arrive independently at its recommendations for higher educa-
tion. The Department released its own report intended to be priority-setting
for a national agenda of educational goals for civic learning.8 Although mo-
mentum has evaporated at the federal level with the change in staff and ad-
ministration, collective campus activity has not waned and, in several cases,
efforts have been consolidated. The expansion of the reach of civic learning

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

and a commitment to diversity and democracy is evident in AAC&U’s activ-
ities, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities’ American
Democracy Project, and The Democracy Commitment (TDC), which recent-
ly emerged to foster community-college engagement. Campus Compact has
over one thousand campus members, has merged efforts with TDC, and con-
tinues to encourage campuses to commit to developing civic action plans.9
The ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge, a consortia of college campuses
that emerged at the time of the Crucible Moment report, focuses on activities to
increase youth involvement during and between elections and joined efforts
with the nonprofit Civic Nation in 2016 to increase democratic engagement
in the electoral process. ALL IN activities may have played a role in increasing
midterm election turnout of the college-age population, as campuses devised
plans and competed for awards to raise the voter participation rates of their
student bodies. These higher education consortia continue to provide portals,
events, and meetings where change agents share practices and resources to in-
tegrate the educational and civic missions of their institutions.

I nstitution-wide commitment is important, but how does such a commit-

ment reach more students than those already inclined to seek civic learn-
ing activities in college? Educator and activist Parker Palmer has stated
that “students learn not only from what is taught: they also learn from how it
is taught.”10

If students are to be well served and are to serve a democracy well, we need to in-
vite them into a lived engagement with democracy’s core concepts and values.
There are at least two ways to do this: by engaging students in democratic pro-
cesses within the classroom and the school and by involving them in the political
dynamics of the larger community.11

Civic learning requires students to be active participants, as “democra-
cy is not a spectator sport in which citizens can watch the pros at work.”12
Our teaching methods can include aspects of civic learning to give students
an opportunity to learn and practice democratic concepts, engage in dialogue
across difference, and develop projects working alongside diverse communi-
ties. Even in this era of “digital connectedness,” Palmer believes we can en-
gage in teaching to develop students’ 1) understanding that we are all in this
together; 2) appreciation for the value of “otherness”; 3) ability to hold ten-
sion or conflict in life-giving ways; 4) sense of personal voice and agency; and
5) capacity to create community. Civic learning can encompass each of these
“five habits of the heart” and takes place in all types of venues, classrooms,
and fields of study.

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

While a national standards framework exists for K–12 education to guide
teaching and desired outcomes in civics education, no comparable standards
for civic learning outcomes exist across all types of higher education insti-
tutions.13 Campuses establish their own faculty-driven standards that are
adopted in consensual agreement. However, a civic engagement working
group of educators and nonprofit staff, coordinated by the AAC&U, developed
an integrated framework called the Civic Learning Spiral that captures multi-
ple dimensions of civic learning in college. The framework was introduced as
a way to consolidate the three contemporary reform movements of diversity,
global learning, and civic engagement in higher education; identify multi-
ple, interrelated dimensions of students’ capacity for engaged citizenship;
and give guidance on achieving personal and social responsibility as one of
the AAC&U’s Essential Learning Outcomes adopted by many institutions and
campus systems.14 The framework identifies multiple areas of civic learning
that can be incorporated more broadly in college courses, general education
requirements, and campus programs.

At the Spiral’s core lies the notion of interwoven learning across six dimen-
sions or “braids”: self, communities and cultures, knowledge, skills, values,
and public action. Classroom and cocurricular activities can be directed to-
ward outcomes in each of these dimensions. Increasing an understanding of
self in civic learning involves developing one’s own identity, voice, reflective
practice, and sense of purpose. Communities and cultures outcomes include the
development of empathy and appreciation for diverse individuals and com-
munities, the capacity to transcend one’s own embedded worldviews, and the
recognition of inequalities that impact underserved communities. Knowledge
outcomes involve understanding knowledge as socially constructed; informa-
tion literacy in this era of “alternative facts” and misinformation, including
the capacity to understand scientific evidence and critically evaluate sourc-
es of authority; and deep knowledge of key democratic principles, processes,
and debates that inform one’s major or area of study. Skills include conflict res-
olution, deliberation, and community-building, as well as the ability to work
collaboratively and communicate with diverse groups. Values outcomes in-
clude ethical and moral reasoning and democratic aspirations such as equali-
ty, liberty, justice, and interest in sustaining the arts and sciences for the pub-
lic good. Lastly, public action outcomes include students’ participation in dem-
ocratic processes and structures, multiple forms of action and risk-taking
to promote social progress, and ally behaviors such as working alongside com-
munities in need to solve important problems.

These dimensions of development are resonant with Palmer’s notions of
habits of the heart for democracy and are interdependent, but not organized

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

in a stage-like developmental sequence. For example, a greater understand-
ing of self is often achieved in contact with people from different social iden-
tity communities and cultures, skills in deliberation and community-building
are key to leading democratic governance structures in diverse communities,
and self-confidence in one’s voice is critical to participating in various forms
of public action to effect change. Thus, each turn of the spiral represents the
synthesis and integration of inextricably linked facets of civic learning. Rep-
etition of learning across these braids promotes a “routine of integration that
can lead to a lifelong disposition of open inquiry, dialogue across differenc-
es, and practice in public activism.”15 The spiral depicts a framework for civic
learning that is fluid and continuous and that can be applied to assess curric-
ular and cocurricular program goals throughout a student’s career. Mapping
survey measures across these different civic learning dimensions for college
students, we have observed strong associations between diversity experienc-
es, habits of mind for lifelong learning, and civic learning outcomes in lon-
gitudinal assessments.16 Thus, institutions can articulate civic learning out-
comes, invest in intentional practices, and begin to assess elements of each of
these dimensions using student portfolios, course rubrics, surveys, and evalu-
ation of programs or initiatives.

I ntentional, engaging pedagogy for coursework and campus programming

is the primary way to develop the different dimensions of civic learning
in college students. Research syntheses have identified at least three ped-
agogies that promote civic learning through meaningful engagement: inter-
group dialogue, service learning, and collective civic problem-solving.17 Stu-
dents often describe service learning and intergroup dialogue as their most
“eye-opening” experiences during college, as they begin to see the world dif-
ferently with greater involvement and develop empathy for others in commu-
nities that may be quite different than their own. Students from underserved
communities are attracted to these pedagogies because they offer a sense of
purpose and an academic pathway to maintain a connection with and advance
their own communities. Collective civic problem-solving permits students to
learn by working on authentic problem-based projects along with peers, fac-
ulty, and community partners; in focusing on the purpose and process, “stu-
dents learn about democracy by acting democratically.”18

These pedagogies share several features. First, the experiential learning
process encourages students to test their assumptions, revise their thinking,
and begin to feel personally and socially responsible. Paolo Freire, an advo-
cate of critical pedagogy, has stated that as students “are increasingly posed
with problems relating to themselves in the world and with the world, [they]

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

will feel increasingly challenged and obliged to respond to that challenge.”19
New challenges evoke new understandings and “gradually the students come
to regard themselves as committed.”20 A second pedagogical feature is that
learning is enhanced by guided self-reflection. Most college students have lit-
tle time to reflect on their experiences, whereas service learning and inter-
group dialogue require student journals that ask students to reflect on their
learning and individual transformation throughout the course experience.
Both Freire and educational theorist David Kolb agree on the importance
of self-reflection: for Freire, it is vital for the development of a critical con-
sciousness, and for Kolb, it is essential for abstract conceptualization in devel-
oping new knowledge.21 Moments of disequilibrium are recorded in student
journals as learning instances in which their experiences contradict previous
knowledge, bias, or beliefs. Instructors follow student reflections to provide
additional content or process activities to help them achieve new understand-
ings. A third common feature is that these pedagogies provide students with
supported pathways to cross boundaries and step outside of their “comfort
zone” to engage with “others” that differ by social identity, culture, power/
social status, education, and worldview. For example, California State Univer-
sity, Monterey Bay, requires all students to take two service-learning courses
that teach “critical civic literacy,” one in the lower division to build awareness
and another in their major. Both courses emphasize the effects of power rela-
tions and social group identities on opportunities and participation in public
life and stress the examination of root causes of systemic social problems in
diverse communities. They define civic literacy as the “knowledge, skills, and
attitudes that students need to work effectively in a diverse society to create
more just and equitable workplaces, communities, and social institutions.”22
While not all service-learning courses take a critical civic literacy approach,
Monterey Bay is integrating service learning in ways that address inequality
as part of civic learning and using many of the principles of identity-based
education.

Intergroup dialogue is unique in that it extends beyond raising awareness
about social identity groups in the context of inequality by addressing key
conflicts and building alliances. Its techniques and principles can be applied to
many other types of courses and it is attentive to group dynamics, improving
students’ skills for a deliberative democracy. The intergroup dialogue model,
developed as an initiative between academic and student affairs units at the
University of Michigan, has been replicated on many campuses and rigorous-
ly assessed.23 There are several important premises that support the design
of a sustained dialogue lasting from ten to fourteen weeks, or a course term.
First, most of the social identity groups that enroll in dialogue have a long

100

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

history of conflict, and the pedagogy operates on the premise that emergent
conflict “should not be avoided, denied, or excessively managed.”24 When fa-
cilitated well, conflict is an opportunity to learn. Second, groups or course sec-
tions are intentionally structured to create equal status in terms of representa-
tion, oftentimes bringing together specific groups in which dialogue is needed
to increase understanding. Using trained peer facilitators, the implementa-
tion of this model at the University of California, Los Angeles, has brought
together men and women from different race/ethnicities, documented and
undocumented students, students from different social class groups, LGBTQ
and heterosexual students, as well as different religious groups for dialogue
on key issues that shape their experiences. Third, much like a “flipped class-
room,” students are provided foundational content for shared understanding
that they read outside of class, and most class time is devoted instead to ac-
tive learning exercises designed to facilitate dialogue and illustrate key con-
cepts. The sustained dialogue includes four stages that focus on building
1) relationships and community, using inclusive group dynamic techniques;
2) students’ awareness about multiple social identities and group-based in-
equality, including systemic forms of privilege and oppression; 3) students’
capacity to discuss controversial topics and anticipate conflict; and 4) allianc-
es and agency to engage in action with others in one’s community.25 It is im-
portant to note that “hot topics” are not discussed until the group has gone
through the initial stages of dialogue together, built some familiarity and
community, and adopted a constructive process for dialogue. The last stage
involves an action project or plan to carry out together on campus or in their
community. Students gain confidence in intergroup relations skills and feel
empowered to play a role in resolving intergroup problems in their campus
or communities. In some cases, service-learning courses have also integrat-
ed intergroup dialogue pedagogy to improve students’ capacities to address
tensions associated with understanding others’ social identities and pow-
er dynamics that affect diverse communities where students are engaged in
service.

Service learning and collective civic problem-solving also have the unique
pedagogical feature of not only teaching students’ civic responsibility, but also
seeking to strengthen communities through engagement and development of
powerful partnerships. Relationships established with community organiza-
tions or partners require trust, reciprocity in the relationship, mutually ben-
eficial goals, and responsibilities that are often articulated in a memorandum
of understanding with campus participants.26 Many programs have moved
from a deficit view or charitable approach to their practice in favor of advanc-
ing interdependence for the welfare and shared future of their community.

101

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

That is, rather than reinforce privilege, they are working toward helping stu-
dents see that the problems communities face are “not just their problems”
and create the sense that “we are all in it together.” Education scholar Robert
Rhoads proposed that participation in this form of critical community service
“provides a means to foster a sense of connectedness and offers an opportuni-
ty for students to understand themselves and to develop caring selves. . . . Car-
ing selves are critical to the process of democracy and the struggle to build a
more just and equitable society.”27 Thus, in higher education, critical commu-
nity service “should be seen as a key educational vehicle for fostering an ethic
of care and a commitment to democratic citizenship.”28 Consistent effort to
sustain community relationships is also central to this pedagogy and, in many
cases, instructors are assisted with public service or partnership units on cam-
pus who help to seed and maintain these relationships over time.

It is important to note that these pedagogies are not limited to the social
sciences or humanities. There is value in having young scientists anticipate
and learn to develop public trust, to engage with and understand diverse com-
munities who can benefit from responsive innovations in science. Several
campuses have developed signature STEM initiatives that train aspiring scien-
tists to develop these sensitivities and solve real-world problems in local com-
munities and across the globe. For example, University of Alaska-Fairbanks
adopted a One Health initiative that focuses on advancing research on the
interrelationship between the health of humans, the environment, and ani-
mals that is consistent with indigenous worldviews and suited for the many
rural communities that have a close relationship with the natural environ-
ment in the state. Faculty and students are engaged in culturally responsive
relationships with rural communities to study and solve health problems,
which not only required the development of community relations and un-
derstanding of local needs, but also an integrated approach to science train-
ing and the development of an interdisciplinary curriculum. Students are
engaged in experiential learning and reflection in critical research projects
that are vital to the health of communities that rely on a subsistence lifestyle.
Community partners also participate in data collection and practical uses of
research that empower them to improve their quality of life. On a global lev-
el, students at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) participate in a series
of interactive projects as part of their general education curriculum, to solve
real-world science problems in communities locally and around the world.
Beginning with the class of 2022, all first-year students will receive a scholar-
ship to complete a project at one of WPI’s fifty-plus project centers located in
thirty-one countries. As WPI states on its website, “the best way for students
to understand and appreciate societal issues is to experience them firsthand.”

102

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

F aculty and instructors have been central to the development and in-

troduction of these pedagogies in the college curriculum. Faculty have
approved campus-wide general education requirements that include
courses addressing service learning and intergroup dialogue. As a result, some
institutions are reporting record numbers of courses that integrate classroom
learning with community partnerships that address social and environmental
issues. Faculty have also expanded the scholarship of teaching and application
to better assess civic learning and evaluate their own impact on students and
communities, respectively. Many departments have approved capstone cours-
es that integrate service projects with local communities to meet major require-
ments. Dialogue training has also been integrated into required courses for pre-
paring resident assistants and graduate programs in student affairs. Even with
these multiple opportunities on campus, not all students have had occasion to
participate in these courses. Civic learning is still optional on many campuses.
What can faculty do in classrooms to promote civic learning? Faculty can
provide students with several tools or strategies that are useful in any kind of
classroom or democratic workspace. Taking a page from the pedagogies de-
scribed earlier, students should learn and practice active listening; ask dif-
ferent types of questions to prevent prejudgment; create an awareness about
power dynamics and co-construct inclusive ground rules for engagement that
empowers others to use their voice; separate positions from interests when
encountering opposing views; and explore commonalities and differences as
they deliberate issues or engage in problem-solving. Faculty-designed exer-
cises and activities have been implemented to address each of these delibera-
tive skill areas. These faculty practices and student behaviors are what doing
democracy looks like in the classroom.

The paradigm shift that is required in faculty mindsets involves inviting
students to serve as cofacilitators of learning, empowering them to use their
voice and creativity to reflect their social concerns, and working with differ-
ence in the classroom instead of ignoring it. By far the most difficult strategy
is to value conflict as an opportunity to learn or, as Palmer has put it, learning
to hold tension creatively to produce citizens “who know how to hold conflict
inwardly in a manner that converts it into creativity, allowing it to pull them
open to new ideas, new courses of action, and each other.”29 Some students,
just like faculty, are averse to any kind of conflict. When anticipating conflict
one day in my class, a Latino student set others at ease by telling them they
cannot plan for conflict or its resolution; in this course, “you learn to trust the
process.” I could not have said it better, and it probably had even more weight
coming from a peer who was a participant in the process. He was talking about
the brave community and the process for open dialogue and respect we built

103

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

together that would ensure we would arrive at a deeper level of understand-
ing by the end of our session. We learned to use strategies such as active listen-
ing, breaking down the conflict to determine the level and type (as not all con-
flict is a crisis), separating positions from interests, asking questions that go a
long way in clarifying or affirming, employing empathy by recognizing mul-
tiple social identities, and acknowledging the privilege and oppression asso-
ciated with these identities. According to political theorist Benjamin Barber,
a “strong democracy transforms conflict. It turns dissensus into an occasion for
mutualism and private interest into an epistemological tool of public think-
ing.”30 As the students provided hope in our capacity to work through con-
flict, we were modeling a strong democracy in a pluralistic society.

This is not to say that all faculty now have the pedagogical knowledge
and skills to make this shift in teaching, but many have the mindset and val-
ues that support the integration of civic learning activities in the classroom.
For example, while only about 17 percent of undergraduate teaching faculty
at baccalaureate-granting institutions report that they have taught a service-
learning course in the past two years, 93.4 percent agree with the statement
that “colleges have a responsibility to work with their surrounding communi-
ties to address local issues.” Over 84 percent agree that their role is to enhance
students’ knowledge of and appreciation for other racial/ethnic groups, but
over half think that “faculty are not prepared to deal with conflict over diver-
sity issues in the classroom.”31 This suggests that many more faculty may ap-
preciate opportunities to learn how to engage students in critical communi-
ty service, employ dialogue techniques, and turn classroom conflict into pro-
ductive mutual learning environments. With clear key values, articulation of
civic learning outcomes, and faculty leadership, we have a much better chance
at helping faculty implement more engaging pedagogies to achieve the goal of
extending the reach of civic learning.

I have described a collective impetus to recenter civic learning within and

across all institutions and disciplines, as well as more critical approaches
to this work in terms of pedagogy that prepares students for a diverse and
unequal society. I have described these civic learning developments in higher
education optimistically, yet each day, I sense our democracy becoming more
fragile. Political theorists have suggested dire consequences if we do not de-
velop a strong democracy that is highly inclusive and also extensively open to
public contestation, in which conflict is resolved through deliberation and re-
spect for differences. A competitive political system that is exclusive in par-
ticipation but also open to public contestation is unable to handle particular
forms of conflict that arise.

104

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

Any dispute in which a large section of the population of the country feels that its
way of life or its highest values are severely menaced by another segment of the
population creates a crisis in a competitive [political] system. . . . The historical
record argues that the system is very likely to dissolve into civil war or to be dis-
placed by [an exclusive] hegemony or both.32

Although this thesis is based on the history of political systems through-
out the world, it seems to be hauntingly relevant in America today. If the dem-
ocratic purpose of higher education is to protect against the threat of tyran-
ny, now is the time for institutions to advance civic learning and safeguard
our democracy.33 The levers appear to be increasing participation of diverse
groups and opportunities for public contestation, with deliberative process-
es in place and individuals capable of productively handling tension in such a
democracy. Facilitated by civic learning pedagogies that include diverse com-
munities on- and off-campus, today’s students and their change-agent incli-
nations are our best hope in making real the promises of our democracy.

about the author

Sylvia Hurtado is Professor of Education at the University of California, Los
Angeles. She is the editor of Hispanic-Serving Institutions: Advancing Research and
Transformative Practice (with Anne-Marie Núñez and Emily Calderón Galdeano,
2015) and The Magic Key: The Educational Journey of Mexican Americans from K–12 to
College and Beyond (with Ruth Enid Zambrana, 2015).

endnotes

1 Commission on the Future of Undergraduate Education, The Future of Undergraduate
Education, The Future of America (Cambridge, Mass: American Academy of Arts and
Sciences, 2017).

2 Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE),
“Young People Dramatically Increase Their Turnout to 31%, Shape 2018 Midterm
Elections,” November 7, 2018, https://civicyouth.org/young-people-dramatically
-increase-their-turnout-31-percent-shape-2018-midterm-elections/.

3 Kevin Eagan, Ellen Bara Stolzenberg, Hilary B. Zimmerman, et al., The American Fresh-
man: National Norms Fall 2016 (Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute,
University of California, Los Angeles, 2017).

105

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado

4 Sylvia Hurtado, “ASHE Presidential Address: Linking Diversity with the Educational
and Civic Missions of Higher Education,” Review of Higher Education 30 (2) (2007):
185–196.

5 Degree Qualifications Profile, “Organization of the DQP,” http://degreeprofile.org

/read-the-dqp/organization-of-the-dqp/.

6 See an extensive description of this social movement in Lee Benson, Ira Harkavy,
John Puckett, et al., Knowledge for Social Change: Bacon, Dewey, and the Revolutionary
Transformation of Research Universities in the Twenty-First Century (Philadelphia: Tem-
ple University Press, 2018). For initiatives, see Campus Compact, https://compact
.org/who-we-are/; Bringing Theory to Practice, https://www.bttop.org/about;
and Imagining America, https://imaginingamerica.org/about/.

7 See National Center for Education Statistics, The Nation’s Report Card: Civics 2010
(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2011), https://nces.ed.gov/
nationsreportcard/pubs/main2010/2011466.aspx. NAEP measures civics content
knowledge. Only 24 percent of high school students scored at the proficient level,
for example. The only anomaly to test declines were increases for Hispanic stu-
dents at all assessed grade levels across this time period. More recent NAEP data on
eighth graders show a flat line from 2010 to 2014, whereas updated data on twelfth
graders were not obtained in 2014 due to NCES resource constraints. Data were as-
sessed in 2018 and reported in 2019.

8 U.S. Department of Education, Advancing Civic Learning and Engagement in Democracy:
A Road Map and Call to Action (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education,
2012).

9 The “Presidents’ Declaration on the Civic Responsibility of Higher Education” was
first signed in July of 1999 by fifty-one U.S. college and university presidents and
now has 564 signees committing their campuses to a civic action plan.

10 Parker Palmer, Healing the Heart of Democracy: The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of

the Human Spirit (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011), 132.

11 Ibid., 129–130.
12 Ibid., 133.
13 National Council for the Social Studies, College, Career & Civic Life: C3 Framework for So-
cial Studies State Standards (Silver Spring, Md.: National Council for the Social Stud-
ies, 2013).

14 Caryn McTighe Musil, “Educating Students for Personal and Social Responsibility:
The Civic Learning Spiral,” in Civic Engagement in Higher Education: Concepts and Prac-
tices, ed. Barbara Jacoby (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2009).

15 Ibid., 60.
16 Sylvia Hurtado, Adriana Ruiz, and Hannah Whang, “Advancing and Assessing Civic
Learning: New Results from the Diverse Learning Environments Survey,” Diversity
& Democracy: Civic Learning for Shared Futures 15 (3) (2012): 10–12.

17 Ashley Finley, Making Progress? What We Know about the Achievement of Liberal Educa-
tion Outcomes (Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universi-
ties, 2012); and Ashley Finley, “Civic Learning and Democratic Engagements: A

106

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

Dædalus, the Journal of the American Academy of Arts & SciencesCivic Learning for a Strong Democracy

Review of the Literature on Civic Engagement in Post-Secondary Education,” pa-
per prepared for the U.S. Department of Education, 2011.

18 John Saltmarsh and Matthew Hartley, “To Serve a Larger Purpose”: Engagement for De-
mocracy and the Transformation of Higher Education (Philadelphia: Temple University
Press, 2011).

19 Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, thirtieth anniversary ed. (New York: Continu-

um Books, 2005), 81.

20 Ibid.
21 David Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development

(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1984).

22 Seth Pollack, “(Social) Justice for All (Undergraduate Degree Programs): Institu-
tionalizing Critical Civic Literacy in the Undergraduate Curriculum,” in Civic Teach-
ing and Learning: A Bridge to Civic Life and a Life of Learning, ed. Ashley Finley (Washing-
ton, D.C.: Bringing Theory to Practice, 2014).

23 Patricia Gurin, Biren A. Nagda, and Ximena Zúñiga, Dialogue across Difference: Prac-
tice, Theory, and Research on Intergroup Dialogue (New York: Russell Sage Foundation,
2013).

24 Monita C. Thompson, Teresa Graham Brett, and Charles Behling, “Educating for
Social Justice: The Program on Intergroup Relations, Conflict, and Community at
the University of Michigan,” in Intergroup Dialogue: Deliberative Democracy in School,
College, Community, and Workplace, ed. David Schoem and Sylvia Hurtado (Ann Ar-
bor: University of Michigan Press, 2001).

25 Ximena Zúñiga, Biren A. Nagda, Mark Chesler, and Adena Cytron-Walker, Intergroup
Dialogue in Higher Education: Meaningful Learning about Social Justice (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 2007).

26 Douglas Barrera, “Examining Our Interdependence: Community Partners’ Motiva-
tions to Participate in Academic Outreach,” Journal of Higher Education Outreach and
Engagement 19 (4) (2015): 85–113.

27 Robert Rhoads, Community Service and Higher Learning: Explorations of the Caring Self

(Albany: SUNY Press, 1997), 95.

28 Ibid., 222.
29 Palmer, Healing the Heart of Democracy, 15.
30 Benjamin R. Barber, Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age (Berkeley and

Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984), 151.

31 Ellen Barra Stolzenberg, M. Kevin Eagan, Hillary B. Zimmerman, et al., Undergraduate
Teaching Faculty: The 2016–2017 HERI Faculty Survey (Los Angeles: Higher Education
Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, 2019).

32 Robert Dahl quoted in Ricardo Blaug and John Schwarzmantel, eds., Democracy: A

Reader (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 201.

33 Amy Gutmann, Democratic Education (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,

1999).

107

D
o
w
n
o
a
d
e
d

f
r
o
m
h

t
t

:
/
/

d
i
r
e
c
t
.

i
t
.

e
d
u
d
a
e
d
a
r
t
i
c
e
–
p
d

f
/

1
4
8
4
9
4
1
8
3
1
3
5
3
d
a
e
d
_
a
_
0
1
7
6
2
p
d

b
y
g
u
e
s
t

o
n
0
7
S
e
p
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
2
3

148 (4) Fall 2019Sylvia Hurtado
Download pdf