Education, Social Studies, History, Civics, Current Issues

Assessment Practices in Democratic Classrooms

Assessment Practices in Democratic Classrooms

Brandon M. Gilliland

Democratic education offers a compelling framework that is grounded in student voice and choice, critical inquiry, and civic engagement. These principles have been increasingly recognized as powerful foundations for meaningful classroom practice and essential components of deeper learning experiences for students. In social studies classrooms, there is a strong rationale for aligning assessment practices with these democratic principles. Traditional assessments, such as multiple-choice exams, too often emphasize recall and student compliance instead of reasoning, participation, or deliberation. This article explores how thoughtfully designed assessments can increase students’ civic awareness, encourage reflective thinking, and promote engagement with diverse perspectives in ways that support a more participatory and student-centered approach to learning.

The role of assessment in a civic-minded classroom

Assessments are more than simply serving as a tool for measuring learning. Assessments can provide students with the ability to take ownership over their education. Classrooms that emphasize collaboration, inquiry, and reflection foster an environment where assessment practices help students consider different perspectives and apply knowledge in civic contexts. An example of this approach includes the use of authentic assessments, which involves performance-based tasks that require students to demonstrate understanding through real-world applications such as debates, mock trials, or policy proposals. Student voice and choice is also embedded by allowing students to select how they demonstrate understanding of concepts whether through research projects, presentations, or inquiry-based investigations. Additionally, peer reviews and self-assessment practices can be integrated to foster metacognition and to allow for structured opportunities for students to reflect on their own learning and provide meaningful feedback to others. Dialogic assessments, such as classroom discussions, Socratic seminars, and oral reflections, encourage students to articulate their thinking and to engage in civil discourse as a form of academic evaluation.

Innovative assessment strategies for social studies classrooms

Social studies educators can use a range of innovative strategies to assess learning while still reinforcing democratic values. One strategy is project-based assessment, where students examine current social or political issues and present actionable solutions supported by historical understanding. For example, in a civic action plan, students may identify and address a local or national concern through advocacy, research, and public engagement. Another strategy involves discussions and debates. These structured dialogues promote listening, reasoning, and civic discourse. In a town hall simulation, students can take on the roles of community stakeholders, exploring differing viewpoints while practicing democratic deliberation. Portfolio-based assessments allow students the ability to compile various artifacts of learning that demonstrate both progress and depth of understanding. A citizenship portfolio might include written reflections, research products, and documentations of civic involvement. Performance-based tasks provide opportunities for students to apply their knowledge in dynamic scenarios. One example is a mock Supreme Court hearing, where students analyze constitutional principles by arguing and deciding landmark cases. This allows students to draw connections between history and contemporary society. Lastly, peer review and self-assessment models empower students to evaluate their own work and offer constructive feedback to classmates. Reflection journals can be particularly effective, allowing students to track their development in civic knowledge, personal responsibility, and academic growth.

Challenges and considerations

While these assessment practices offer valuable opportunities for deeper learning and student engagement, they also present several challenges for educators. One of the most common difficulties is managing the time required to plan and evaluate alternative assessments. Activities such as simulations, projects, and performance tasks often demand more preparation and individualized feedback than traditional assessment methods. This can be particularly demanding for teachers who must manage large class sizes or multiple course preps. Another challenge is ensuring consistency and fairness when evaluating student work that is subjective in nature. Unlike multiple-choice exams with clear-cut answers, open-ended assessments require teachers to interpret student responses which can introduce variability in grading. Developing clear rubrics and engaging in collaborative assessment practices with colleagues can help address this issue. Finally, not all students are equally prepared for self-directed or open-ended assessments. Some students may lack the confidence, organizational skills, or academic background needed to thrive in less structured tasks. To support all students, educators can scaffold assessments by modeling expectations, providing exemplars, and offering feedback throughout the learning process. Professional development, thoughtful planning, and school-level support are essential to ensure these strategies are implemented effectively and equitably.

Conclusion

Even in schools where democratic education is not the dominant framework, assessment practices can still reflect civic values and promote a more participatory learning environment. When teachers implement authentic and reflective assessments, they provide students with opportunities to engage more deeply with the materials and apply their learning to real-world issues. These assessments also encourage students to become more self-aware, responsible, and invested in their academic growth. Moreover, student-centered assessments foster a culture of dialogue and inquiry, where diverse perspectives are respected and studied. Such practices help students develop critical thinking and communication skills that are essential for effective participation in a democratic society. By reimagining assessment as a process that goes beyond grading to include collaboration, reflection, and active engagement, educators can transform their classrooms into spaces of civic learning. These changes can also reinvigorate teaching, making it more responsive and connected to the world students live. Ultimately, democratic assessment is not just a method of assessment; it is a commitment to nurturing informed, thoughtful, and empowered citizens.

Two Sides of the Same Coin: An Observance of the Strategies Utilized in the Women’s Suffrage Movement in 20th Century America

Two Sides of the Same Coin: An Observance of the Strategies Utilized in the Women’s Suffrage Movement in 20th Century America

Cathleen Kane

On a brisk January morning in 1917, a group of one dozen women shifted on aching feet as they stood on hot bricks wrapped in newspapers in order to keep themselves warm. The women were united in front of one of the most important buildings in not only the United States, but the world. With chattering teeth, they held firmly onto their banners that were whipping in the wind and directed them toward the man who held their rights in his hands. Further downtown in the nation’s capital, groups of women worked in cozy offices planning how they would engage with the man in the White House. They worked together to write to members of some of the highest offices of the United States, the United States Congress, as well as devised letters to hand out to civilians advocating for their cause. These women, though separated by mere blocks, displayed just a few of the many strategies utilized by suffragists throughout the United States during the 20^th century. These women worked toward justice and equal rights. These women worked toward winning their right to vote.

With the right to vote as the goal, what were the kinds of strategies utilized by suffragists in 20^th century America, and why did these strategies make the difference? Two suffragist organizations, the National American Woman’s Association and the National Woman’s Party, used various strategies to gain the federal Nineteenth Amendment, granting the vote to women in the United States.^[1] Through the will to push the limits of American society and government, greater access to resources including wealthy individuals supporting the cause, and stronger leadership from both suffrage groups, the 20^th century was undeniably the time for women to gain the right to vote in America.

Historiography

The Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, passed over one hundred years ago in the year 1920, denies states the ability to prohibit citizens from voting based on the account of sex.^[2] However, when discovering how the amendment came to be, historians have primarily observed the beginnings of the women’s suffrage movement in the United States. Historians have discussed major figures including Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and analyzed how it ended – women gaining the right to vote. While limited research has been written about the strategies used and the reasons why the 20^th century was the time women were bound to gain suffrage in the United States, several works address various strategies used by 20th century suffragists and display why the 20^th century was the century for women.

Beginning with Carmen Heider, the article ““Farm Women, Solidarity, and the Suffrage Messenger’: Nebraska Suffrage Activism on the Plains, 1915-1917” depicted a strategy, newspapers, used to keep women up to date and involved in the suffrage movement despite being thousands of miles from Washington D.C. Heider described that the strategy of utilizing suffrage newspapers, specifically The Suffrage Messenger, a Nebraska newspaper under the guidance of NAWSA, appealed to overlooked and underrepresented women of the suffrage movement in the 20^th century, which included farm women.^[3] Similarly to Heider, author James J. Kenneally discussed in his work women who are often overlooked and forgotten by historians, women who were arrested for the sake of suffrage. In his article “‘I Want to Go to Jail’: The Woman’s Party Reception for President Wilson in Boston, 1919”, Kenneally discussed one of the strategies utilized by the NWP, women willingly being arrested and jailed to demonstrate their commitment to the suffrage cause. Kenneally also discussed how NAWSA displayed their commitment to President Woodrow Wilson through their support on the home front during World War I.^[4]

In Joan Marie Johnson’s article, “Following the Money: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”, the author made a bold argument regarding suffrage in America and the passing of the Nineteenth Amendment. Johnson argued that “women’s suffrage passed when it did because of the significant influx of these enormous donations [given by wealthy donors who supported the cause], as well as the leadership and shaped the strategies, priorities and success of the [suffrage] movement”^[5]. In her article, Johnson also argued against the common conception held by historians that the wealthy women were controlling due to being the ones with the funds to give to the national organizations.^[6]

In Jean H. Baker’s work, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, the author depicted the stories of some of the impactful suffragists in American history including Alice Paul with the intention of “recover[ing] the lost lives of these sisters of suffrage and through that development to understand why the suffrage movement developed when it did”.^[7] Focusing on Baker’s fifth chapter, “Endgame: Alice Paul and Woodrow Wilson”, the author described Paul’s life, the strategies she administered during her time in NAWSA and the founder of the NWP, that included parades and picketing^[8].

In the next two works, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot authored by Mary Walton, and Alice Paul: Claiming Power written by J.D. Zahniser and Amelia R. Fry, the three authors depicted a biography of one of the most influential and yet forgotten American figures of the 20^th century, Alice Paul. Walton argued the importance of Paul’s theory and practice of political protest. Paul modeled peaceful protest behaviors that influenced others to act in a similar manner throughout the 20^th century. Walton described that Paul established legal precedents that protected future generations during civil protests.^[9] Through Zahniser and Fry’s work, Zahniser intended to finish Fry’s mission to remember Alice Paul who “helped propel the suffrage cause to victory”.^[10]

The final work utilized was Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, authored by Ellen Carol DuBois. In her work, DuBois depicted the women’s suffrage movement during the 20th century, focusing on various individuals including Carrie Chapman Catt. In her work, DuBois argued that suffragism was not a “single issue movement”. DuBois stated that women of various backgrounds and races fought not only for the right to vote, but also for birth control and peace during the 20th century. ^[11]

When the women’s suffrage movement in America is discussed by historians, they tend to focus on the beginnings of the suffrage movement, with events such as the Seneca Falls Convention, or the end of the movement, in which women gained the right to vote. Historians also focus on major figures throughout the movement such as Susan B. Anthony and Lucy Burns. However, this paper takes a deeper look at the women’s suffrage movement and focuses primarily on the strategies utilized during the 20th century that aided women in gaining the right to vote. In addition, this paper recognizes the impact made by the National American Woman’s Suffrage Association and the National Woman’s Party to the suffrage movement and the strategies utilized by the two parties rather than focusing on individual women involved in the movement.

Strategies implemented and utilized in the women’s suffrage movement during the 20th century were the first of their kind to be used by women. Strategies that were utilized included the use of open-air speeches, suffragist newspapers, lobbying, parades, and picketing, all of which will be the main strategies focused on in this paper. The strategies implemented and utilized by the women of NAWSA and the NWP, in which the organizations consisted of mostly white, middle-class women, displayed that American women were not handed the right to vote, rather with these strategies, they fought for the right to vote. Were it not for the brave women sacrificing their time, money, and for some, their freedom, countless women throughout the country would not have the fundamental right given to them as American citizens.

Suffrage in the 20^th century

Before parades of suffragists donned in purple, white, and gold, marched down Pennsylvania Avenue or before open air speeches were shouted to the public, there was the suffrage movement at the beginning of the 20^th century. 1900, a new century for women to make their voices heard had appeared, but the suffrage movement in America had come to a standstill. While there had been some progress in women’s education and work outside of the home, there were not “many changes in the legal status of women”^[12]according to Jean H. Baker. Women were still not allowed to sit on juries during a legal trial, with wages that married working women earned still being controlled by their husbands, and divorce laws favoring men, women needed the vote to change their legal status.^[13] Gaining the vote was also at a standstill when the new century began in the United States as some of the largest organizations for suffrage, including NAWSA, “had run out of ideas”.^[14] While NAWSA did present new committees that would draw groups of women into the suffrage movement, such as the working class with the implementation of the Committee on Industrial Work, the strategies used by NAWSA remained in the 19th century.^[15]NAWSA strategies already established included holding annual conventions, such as the 1906 convention in Baltimore, and testifying before Congress with promises that “women throughout the country will come from generation to generation, just so long as necessary” however, these strategies were aged, overused, and in desperate need for a change.^[16]

A new century did not mean new support for the suffragists either as “many legislators yawned, cleaned their nails, turned their backs, and otherwise displayed their silent contempt for the women” during NAWSA’s yearly lobbying.^[17] The start of the 20^th century also did not place a national amendment for women’s enfranchisement any higher on legislators list of top priorities because, according to Baker, before the debate of a national amendment, “three other amendments – the income tax, direct election of senators, and prohibition – had taken precedence”.^[18] Finally, if matters could not be any more dire for a call to action at the start of the 20^th century, the founders of the suffrage movement in America were meeting their demise as Lucy Stone died in 1893 with Elizabeth Cady Stanton to follow in 1902.^[19] Death came for all of the great leaders as even Susan B. Anthony who promised to continue the fight for suffrage “‘as long as [she was] well enough to do the work’”^[20] passed away on March 13, 1906.^[21] The 20^th century needed new leaders and strategies quickly. Enter two of the most prominent figures of the suffrage movement, Carrie Chapman Catt and Alice Paul, two individuals who would go on to lead two suffrage organizations that embraced various strategies, which included the use of newspapers and picketing, to gain the vote for women in the 20^th century.

Emerging leaders and held beliefs

Being one of the most powerful suffrage organizations in the United States going into the 20^th century, the National American Woman’s Suffrage Association carried forth their traditional strategies established by previous suffragists, including Anthony and Stanton. Carrie Chapman Catt was at the helm of the organization as NAWSA’s President at the beginning of the century, 1900 to 1904, and again at the end of the battle for the ballot, resuming her position as President from 1915 to 1920.^[22] From NAWSA’s founding and throughout Catt’s first term as president, the organization focused on a state-to-state approach.^[23] A state-to-state approach involved NAWSA suffragists traveling the country to advocate for the legalization of women’s enfranchisement in a particular state, such as Colorado, rather than focusing on a federal amendment guaranteeing women across the country the right to vote. NAWSA would continue this state-to-state approach until 1915 when the reinstated President Catt saw how difficult of a task she faced, especially with a state-to-state approach. Catt realized that she would be in charge of “reorganizing the thousands of members of NAWSA into an orderly suffrage army” and “keep state chapters from flying off on their own”, therefore she needed to have a changed viewpoint in how women were to gain suffrage.^[24] Catt also witnessed the failure of a state-to-state approach after attempting to convince the voting men of New York state to enfranchise women in the state.^[25] After countless hours and resources, including advocating suffragists going door to door, New York women were still not able to vote as “only six of the state’s sixty-one counties voted in favor [of women’s enfranchisement]”.^[26] If that were not enough, Catt understood that World War I was raging in Europe with hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children being killed or injured. Catt used these unspeakable strategies to further the cause of a national amendment as she described that with full political rights, including voting, “[women] would find a way to settle disputes without killing fathers, husbands and sons”.^[27]

Catt’s changing viewpoints of a national amendment and the tactics that would follow to gain the amendment would become known as her “Winning Plan”. According to author Joan Marie Johnson, Catt’s “Winning Plan” was to gain the national amendment through campaigning in certain states, such as New York and Oklahoma, as well as lobbying Congress.^[28] Campaigning in certain states and lobbying would give momentum to pass the national amendment while also gaining women in the campaigned states suffrage.^[29] Catt made her “Winning Plan” and viewpoints known throughout her term as President as on December 15, 1915, to a crowd of five hundred suffragists, she explained that “all of NAWSA’s resources would be concentrated on winning a federal constitutional amendment”.^[30]

Besides their belief in the state-to-state approach, and the eventual approach of gaining a national amendment, NAWSA strongly endorsed its members to support the Democratic President standing in their way of the vote, Woodrow Wilson. The women supported the President in multiple ways throughout his time in the Oval Office and during the First World War. From providing First Lady Edith Wilson with flowers during the President’s visit to Boston in 1917 to endorsing women to participate in war efforts during the First World War which included “end[ing] its suffrage efforts and encourag[ing] its members to replace suffrage work activism with war work”, NAWSA supported the President.^[31] As a result of their efforts, President Wilson had “‘great and sincere admiration of the action taken’” by the women of NAWSA, therefore, to the organizations satisfaction, gaining some support to their efforts to win the amendment.^[32]

With a new century calling for new strategies, one young woman from Moorestown, New Jersey by the name of Alice Paul was ready to answer the call and experiment with new strategies to gain women the right to vote in the United States.^[33] After finding her commitment to suffrage when overseas in England, Paul came back to the United States and joined the NAWSA in 1910^[34]. Paul worked with NAWSA for two years as the leader of the Congressional Congress, “a committee of NAWSA responsible for lobbying Congress”.^[35] However, Paul’s commitment to NAWSA began to take a turn when in “mid-April” 1913, “Alice stunned the leadership [of NAWSA] with the news that she had formed a membership organization, the ‘Congressional Union’”^[36]. The Congressional Union, according to author Mary Walton, would “push for a federal amendment”, something that NAWSA did not currently align with in 1913 as they were focused on the state-to-state strategy until 1915.^[37] The Congressional Union that Paul formed was the predecessor of one of the most radical suffragist organizations to have swept the country. With radical tactics that included women picketing in front of the White House and voluntarily being arrested for the cause of suffrage, the Congressional Union would go on to be called the National Woman’s Party, and its leader would become no other than Alice Paul.

Alice Paul and the National Woman’s Party also held certain unpopular and unpatriotic beliefs as well as their belief in the national amendment. Unlike the women of NAWSA who supported President Wilson and the Democratic Party, Paul did not support the President, rather she held great anger against him. According to Baker, Paul “meant to hold Wilson and his Democratic Party responsible for the failure to get a suffrage amendment passed by Congress”.^[38] Paul would hold the President responsible throughout the suffrage movement and the women of the NWP would show their discontent to the President through committing “unpatriotic” acts. These “unpatriotic” acts, included interrupting his speech on July 4, 1916 as Mabel Vernon, executive secretary of the NWP, questioned the President on if he cared about the interest of all people, why did he oppose the national amendment.^[39] This kind of action was met with high criticism including being bashed in newspapers.^[40] Paul remained frustrated that throughout the United States’ involvement in World War I, the President relied on the women back home to aid in the war efforts, something NAWSA did not mind doing, but in return they received nothing. Paul also questioned throughout the war that if Wilson was fighting for the world to be “made safe for democracy”, then why is there still a lack of democracy on the home front considering that women were not allowed to partake in America’s democracy.^[41] Alice Paul had the goal of convincing President Woodrow Wilson that the vote for women needed to be guaranteed across the country, and through the various strategies used by both Paul’s National Woman’s Party and Catt’s National American Woman’s Suffrage Association, the 20^th century would be the century for women.

The strategies used by the National American Woman’s Suffrage Association speeches

One of the most powerful tools that a person has is their voice. The human voice can do extraordinary tasks including convince people to join a cause. One of the various strategies that NAWSA used to gain the federal amendment in the 20^th century was the use of speeches. According to historian and editor Susan Ware in the work, American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, NAWSA, after decades of lobbying and gathering petitions, decided to take a new approach to making their suffrage message heard and create new interest in their cause, the use of open-air meetings.^[42]. An open-air meeting required participating women to stand outside of buildings and project their message of suffrage to “the average human being, busy and tired”.^[43] The practice of utilizing open-air speeches was best described by student turned suffragist, Florence H. Luscomb, who recounted in her work, “Our Open-Air Campaign”, the process of openly speaking and campaigning to the general public on the topic of women’s enfranchisement.^[44]Luscomb described that as a member of the VOTES FOR WOMEN COMMITTEE in Boston, she and her fellow suffragists spoke to diverse crowds who might have not been well-informed of the suffrage movement with listeners including children and police officers.^[45] The speakers would travel from town to town across a state to stand outside on the “busiest corner of the town square” with a “borrow[ed] Moxie box” to stand on, and begin to speak on the topic of suffrage to anyone who would listen.^[46] These open-air speeches were modeled after the English suffragettes who had much success with the strategy, and the goal was to “make it [the message of suffrage] picturesque” and to “make it easy” as the general public may already had preconceived thoughts on suffrage or little knowledge on the matter.^[47]

The demonstration of open-air speeches was one of the various strategies utilized that reinforced that the 20th century was undeniably the time for women to gain the right to vote because it aided women in gaining a new audience of potential supporters. In the 19th century, NAWSA mainly focused on projecting their message and gaining the support of politicians, such as Congressmen, through lobbying. However, with the new 20th century strategy of open-air speeches, women were advocating their enfranchisement “not to a small body of lawmakers, but to a large body of the people, those who elect the lawmakers”.^[48] Women were no longer standing in the heart of the Capitol Building having their cries for fulfillment of democracy fall onto the deaf ears of bored Congressmen, rather, they were out in the streets of major cities to express their message to those who might not be aware of the cause. By addressing the public, suffragists were given the chance to inspire others to not only join the movement, even if it just meant supporting the idea of women voting, but to also advocate for the public to use their vote and voice to elect those who do support the women’s cause during the next election.

Newspapers and other readings

Another strategy utilized by NAWSA to gain the federal amendment in the 20th century was through the creation and distribution of newspapers as well as other materials. Throughout the 20^th century NAWSA distributed newspapers nationwide, including the Woman Citizen, and regional newspapers, an example being The Suffrage Messenger, which was published in Nebraska.^[49] Newspapers did not just simply update women around the country or regionally with the latest suffrage news, these newspapers brought women together. According to historian Carmen Heider, suffrage newspapers served a much larger purpose than to be picked up, read, and then tossed aside; rather, through the columns of suffrage newspapers, women who were overlooked in the suffrage movement were represented, an example being the rural farmers of Nebraska. According to Heider, The Suffrage Messenger of Nebraska, “served as the primary means through which Nebraska activists reached out to their audiences”, inviting the women of the grandest cities to the rural plains to write to the newspapers about their suffrage experience and any questions that they may have about the movement.^[50] By reaching out through newspapers in the 20th century, activists were also reaching out to women who may not have been considered to be potential members of the suffrage movement in the previous century, women in rural communities.^[51] Newspapers provided more information to these women who were somewhat isolated from the movement, due to their large distances from cities including New York City or Washington D.C., and with suffrage newspapers, farmer’s wives could be involved in the movement. With more knowledge to a community comes more support, and with more support comes the chance to make a difference sooner.

Newspapers not only brought women together, but they also encouraged women to join the fight, including rural women of the plains, through advocating the raising of funds for the cause. The Suffrage Messenger promoted an interesting fundraising event that involved women from all around Nebraska, including women of rural areas as they could understand and appreciate the so-called “suffrage pig movement”.^[52] According to Heider, the fundraiser began in Louisiana and continued across the West due to farm women wanting to contribute to the suffrage cause, but having no money, so instead, they offered what they did have, pigs.^[53] The Suffrage Messenger ran with the idea and the women of the plains had the opportunity to present their pigs and have the animals featured on the weekly “Suffrage Pig Honor Roll ”, to promote others to donate pigs rather than money.^[54] The pigs presented by the farm women would eventually be sold to the highest bidder with the funds going toward the suffrage cause.^[55] Through bringing women together from all points of the country to write to newspapers and to entice the raising of funds for the suffrage movement in unique ways, the strategy of using newspapers allowed underrepresented women of the suffrage movement to be active participants in the fight toward women’s enfranchisement during the 20^th century.

The Woman Citizen and The Suffrage Messenger were thriving examples of how NAWSA brought citizens of the United States not only news on suffrage, but also various opportunities to participate in the battle to get women to the polls in the 20^th century, such as through fundraising events. However, newspapers were not the only pieces of literature being distributed by NAWSA in the 20^th century as they also distributed other variations of works to be read and understood. According to historian and author Joan Marie Johnson, “They [suffragists] published everything from tracts to weekly newspapers to full-scale books focused on documenting the movement, organizing workers, and converting the public to the cause”.^[56] One of the prime examples of these various kinds of works published by NAWSA was the book, Your Vote and How to Use It, authored by NAWSA member Gertrude Foster Brown.^[57] After the women of New York state received the right to vote in 1917, NAWSA and Brown decided that it was time to publish a work in regards to how to vote. The work would be geared toward the “average” woman, whether she was working or tending to her home as a wife or mother, because it was essential for women to understand how to utilize their vote.^[58]Throughout the work, Brown described major points of information for new voters to learn about including what government was and the business of government, which were topics that women may have had little to no experience with or knowledge about before receiving the right to vote.^[59]

Through the use of other literary materials, including books, NAWSA enlightened women on how to utilize their vote and the importance of voting as the 20th century progressed. NAWSA was emphasizing to New York women that they had the opportunity that very few other women had, therefore, they needed to utilize it in order to display to other voters, especially male, that the decision to give women the vote was the correct one. With more women rushing to the polls on election day, due in part thanks to literature published by NAWSA, women displayed that they were not only enthusiastic about the vote, but women had the ability to vote for representatives that fought for national suffrage.

Lobbying

As the 19^th century progressed into the next, NAWSA, while the organization implemented new strategies to gain the federal amendment, remained true to one of their original strategies, lobbying. The act of lobbying consisted of groups of women seeking support from a politician on the issue of women’s suffrage as this would possibly lead to the politician gaining favor for the issue at the highest level, such as in Congress. During the 19th century, NAWSA’s lobbying efforts relied on the “uncompensated devotion of its adherents”, however, as the United States entered the 20th century, women had the desire to become paid for their efforts, therefore if they were to keep up with lobbying, NAWSA needed to find funds, and fast.^[60] In May 1917, the women’s desires for payment would come true as NAWSA received its first check from a wealthy donor named Mrs. Frank Leslie who left over one million dollars to NAWSA’s suffrage fund to be used any way President Carrie Chapman Catt saw fit.^[61] With the outrageous funds, Catt not only paid some of the women for their time, but with more money now available, she saw that a new century meant a new way to lobby.

Lobbying transformed in the 20th century and helped lead the way for the federal amendment to pass as the practice no longer became a disorganized group of volunteers annoying Congressmen, rather, it became a well-oiled machine. With Maud Wood Park leading NAWSA’s congressional lobbying efforts in March of 1917, the organization soon had twenty-five regular lobbyists, almost all of whom were volunteers.^[62] The twenty-five women lived and worked in Washington D.C. in order to get into contact with 435 members of Congress and 96 senators sitting in Washington D.C. at one time in the year 1917.^[63] The lobbyists also worked with state congressional chairmen who represented NAWSA’s state branches to, according to historian and editor Susan Ware, put the idea of suffrage into the minds of those in the highest positions of power in the country.^[64] Director Maud Wood Park also received guidance on the new, 20th century tactic of “Front Door Lobbying” from Helen Hamilton Gardener, a NAWSA member who had close relationships with powerful Democratic politicians including Speaker of the House Champ Clark and even Woodrow Wilson himself.^[65] Under the leadership of Wood and the guidance of Gardener, the NAWSA lobbyists of the 20th century learned the “delicacies of effective lobbying” which they did not implement in the previous century.^[66] These “delicacies” consisted of methods that were lady-like which included “don’t nag, boast, [or] lose your temper”, but methods that also showed the Congressmen that they were determined with methods that included “overstay[ing] your welcome and allow[ing] yourself to be overheard”.^[67] Working together as one unit, the lobbying women and the state congressional chairmen needed to “compel this army of lawmakers to see woman suffrage, to talk woman suffrage every minute of every day until they heed our plea” as this was to be the woman’s hour and century.^[68]

The strategies used by The National Woman’s Party Parades

Before being expelled from NAWSA and establishing the Congressional Union in 1914, which would become the National Woman’s Party, suffrage leader Alice Paul took part in developing one of the grandest strategies established during the 20th century to gain the federal amendment, parades. Parades were a new concept to women’s suffrage fight and it was a unique way to not only engage women to participate in the ongoing fight, but to also present to the American public the message of the suffragists. With the occurrence of a parade, the possibilities in broadcasting a message to a national audience were great with one of the most famous examples of a parade occurring the day before President Wilson’s inauguration. Wanting to make themselves and their message of suffrage memorable, Alice Paul and the women of NAWSA had the idea of marching down the traditional parade route that the newly inaugurated President would travel on, including Pennsylvania Avenue.^[69] Paul understood the importance of the parade route being down Pennsylvania Avenue as it would send the message that “women stood at the gateway of American politics, willing and able to stand alongside men as full-fledged citizens”, therefore adding to the visual reasoning of the parade.^[70]

On March 2, 1913, the day before President Woodrow Wilson was to be inaugurated, more than eight thousand women marched down the streets of Washington D.C. led by Alice Paul with a crowd of 250,000 onlookers gazing at the spectacle before them.^[71] The parade offered participants from all around the country and from all walks of life including “social workers, teachers, business women, and librarians”, to join the walk for suffrage.^[72] With this 20th century strategy, women were brought together to speak as one voice to demand “an amendment to the Constitution of the United States enfranchising the women of the country”.^[73] Through the display of the parade, the women were also entertaining the public through interesting visual displays, but they were displaying to the American public and government that most women stood united on the issue of suffrage. They showed the crowds that women’s suffrage is no longer just a few hundred women gathering to speak, rather it was thousands of women seeking their enfranchisement.

While the 20th century strategy of parades drew in mass crowds of suffragettes to participate, so too did it draw in large crowds of spectators, including those who were not too happy to see the women marching for suffrage. Shortly after the parade began, “spectators challenged suffragists’ right to the street” as crowds full of rowdy and drunk men began to surround the women on all sides, blocking them from continuing forward on their route.^[74] After storming the streets, the men proceeded to act in rude and dangerous ways as described in the March 3, 1913 issue of the Woman’s Journal and Suffrage News. The front page of the newspaper, published a day after the event occurred, described how “women were spit upon, slapped in the face, tripped up, pelled with burning cigar stubs and insulted by jeers and obscene language too vile to print or repeat”.^[75] Though these actions were disturbing and awful to the women, Alice Paul and the other leaders of NAWSA “recognized that a publicity coup awaited them” as a result of these violent acts.^[76] After these vicious attacks, newspapers, including The Woman’s Journal and Suffrage News, published the accounts of several women including Anna Howard Shaw who not only described the bite that she received but how she was never “so ashamed of our national capital before”.^[77] Through describing their accounts and feelings of what happened during the parade, suffragists drew attention, and more so, sympathy from the American public and government officials in regards to what occurred. With this newfound attention and sympathy, the suffrage movement was not only discussed, but it showed to the American public and government that the women were brave to fight off these men, therefore, they deserved the vote.

Picketing

On January 9, 1917, the women of the Congressional Union, soon to become the National Woman’s Party, gathered in their Washington D.C. headquarters to scheme.After delivering yet another speech to President Wilson that same afternoon about women’s enfranchisement, suffragist Maud Younger expressed her concerns to the group. They already “‘had speeches, meetings, parades, campaigns, organizations’’ to show American society and government that they desired the vote, but she questioned what new method could be utilized by the women to draw attention to their cause.^[78] The new method was created by Alice Paul and Harriot Stanton Blatch, daughter of one of the founders of the suffrage movement in the United States, Elizabeth Cady Stanton.^[79] The 20th century strategy would not only impact the women’s movement moving forward, but the way that Americans protest.^[80] The strategy involved picketing in front of the most important building in America, the White House. The strategy utilized in the 20th century, made headlines as it was the first documented time in American history that a group, male or female, picketed in front of the White House, therefore forcing the attention of President Wilson and making him consider the idea of women suffrage.^[81]

The protest-altering practice of picketing began in the early morning of January 12, 1917, as NWP members braced for the cold with their winter coats, while “their torsos were bisected by purple, white and gold sashes”, the colors of the National Woman’s Party.^[82] Unlike in the past century, the suffragists were not clamoring to meet with the President and speak on the subject of suffrage through speeches or lobbying, rather, the ladies of the 20th century were silent as they allowed for their strongly worded picket signs and banners to do the talking, therefore putting pressure on the President to act. Day in and day out for nearly three months, January to March 1917, the silent sentinels of the National Woman’s Party would stand outside of the prestigious institution with signs that bore messages directly toward President Wilson with phrases including “MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT WILL YOU DO FOR WOMAN SUFFRAGE?”.^[83] With the 20th century strategy of picketing, the women not only attempted to gain the attention of the President, but also the media. After they saw women standing outside of the White House with “unpatriotic” banners and signs, newspapers went on a feeding frenzy, including the New York Times, as they found their new story.

Published on “January 11”, The New York Times claimed that the members of the NWP created “organized harassment of the President” and the newspaper bashed the women by calling their act petty and a monstrosity.^[84] The article continued as The Times tried to influence its readers that if women were given the vote, the government would be overrun with voters who believe that the act of picketing in front of the White House was “natural and proper” for them to do as well, therefore creating “political danger”.^[85] The New York Times was not the only organization to disapprove of the suffragists actions, but so too did NAWSA’s president, Carrie Chapman Catt look on with disdain as she described the picketing as “‘a childish method of appeal” and one that “will never bring a result’”.^[86] Although they were bashed in newspapers across the country and by Catt, the suffragists’ message was out, newspapers across the country were talking about women’s enfranchisement. With more discussions came more support, donations, and supplies to continue the campaign including “thermoses of coffee, and sometimes mittens or fur pieces” from individuals supportive of the cause.^[87] The 20th century strategy of picketing not only drew support and attention to the suffrage cause, but it enhanced the pressure on Woodrow Wilson as he had two options, “he could remove the pickets. Or he could give them the ballot”^[88]. Through the immense pressure put on Wilson and their determination to hold out for as long as possible, the 20th century would end in women gaining the right to vote.

Conclusion

After years of pushing the limits of American society and government, the women’s suffrage movement had a major victory with the Nineteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, being ratified on August 18, 1920. Unfortunately, the fight for suffrage was not over for all women because despite their enormous efforts throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, various groups of women, including African American women, did not immediately receive the right to vote. Due to Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation and through states placing obstacles at the polls, including poll taxes and literacy tests, it became increasingly harder for women of color to vote.^[89] African American women and women of color would continue the fight for women’s suffrage until the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was signed into law on August 6, 1965. The act outlawed discriminatory voting practices, including the imposition of prerequisites including poll taxes or literacy tests, therefore allowing African American women and women of color to enact their right to vote as citizens of the United States without the worry of obstacles standing in their way.^[90]

While the National American Woman’s Suffrage Association and the National Woman’s Party utilized different strategies to gain women the right to vote, these two organizations both held the belief and fought for women’s suffrage, making them two sides of the same coin. Throughout the 20th century, NAWSA and the NWP transgressed the boundaries put in place for women during the century, including the idea that women needed to allow male voters and politicians to decide if and when women’s enfranchisement would be enacted.

While there were great strides and victories made by the suffragists of the 19th century, 20^th century suffragists understood that with changing times came changing strategies and adapted their methods to make their message of suffrage heard. Suffragists of the 20th century had a greater will to push American society and government, greater access to resources including wealthy individuals, and stronger leadership in the forms of Carrie Chapman Catt and Alice Paul. With these ideals along with their strategies of developing suffragist newspapers, new tactics of lobbying, and publicity stunts including parades and picketing in front of the White House, the 20th century was undeniably the time for women to gain the vote in America.

A note for teachers

The work presented above is my senior capstone project in which I developed for the conclusion of my history major. As a secondary education and history major, therefore a future history teacher, I strive to make little known stories of history told, especially in my classroom. Not having had learned about the women’s suffrage movement until my first year of college, I have developed a passion for the history of the movement, not only because I am woman, therefore I owe great thanks to the women who fought for my right to vote, but also because I never learned about the subject in middle school or high school. It is vital that as history teachers, we teach all history, including the history that represents the students in our classroom. Although my work focuses primarily on NAWSA and the NWP, two organizations in which white women were primarily members, there are countless African American women and women of color that were featured in the suffrage movement. I encourage you to look into the suffrage movement and teach your students to research the movement before falling into the preconceived notions of the women’s suffrage movement including that white woman, especially middle-class women, were the only ones fighting for suffrage.

Another preconceived notion to consider and to teach your students the truth about is that women were “given” the right to vote. In my work above I describe the strategies used by women in the 20th century; these strategies were implemented by women for women as they had to fight for their rights, they were not just handed to them. I encourage you to look into other strategies utilized throughout the 19th and 20th centuries as there are countless more including women being arrested for the sake of suffrage and various women developing enthralling speeches. From these strategies, whether you research them or your students research them, countless examples of peaceful protests can be found, and these strategies developed during the women’s suffrage movement inspired other peaceful protest strategies utilized throughout major movements of the 20th century such as the Civil Rights Movement.

I understand that as teachers we must adhere to the curriculum presented to us, and that curriculum may sometimes leave out topics of historical significance, such as the women’s suffrage movement. However, you can incorporate the suffrage movement and women’s history overall, into your lessons based around the curriculum you were given as I have done it in my own lessons that I have taught so far in my field work. The first way that you can incorporate women’s history into your lessons is by incorporating women into your examples. When I was in my field observations this fall, the class I was observing, United States History I, was learning about the Gilded Age and its philanthropists. My cooperating teacher wanted to dive deeper into history and not just present the well-known names of Rockefeller and Carnegie, rather, she wanted to find new names that could serve as inspiration for our students. This led her to learn about Madam C.J. Walker, an African American philanthropist who became one of the wealthiest female entrepreneurs of the Gilded Age and of all time. This was so simple for her to do; she did some quick research on famous women of the time period, and it made a huge impact on those in the class, therefore I encourage you to take a few minutes and do the same.

Researching for examples of women of the time period is not the only great way to bring women’s history into your classroom as there is another way that I implemented during my field work this fall, creating a lesson around women’s history. While we just finished the Gilded Age and still had a few lessons before we would briefly touch on the women’s suffrage movement, my cooperating teacher encouraged me to develop my own lesson, and he was enthusiastic at the idea of me doing a lesson on women’s history. I decided to do my women’s history lesson not on the women’s suffrage movement, rather I wanted to give myself a challenge and I wanted to give a review to my students. Another way that you could implement women’s history into your lessons is through developing a lesson around women’s history in the time periods that you already covered. For example, in our class, we covered the colonies, the American Revolution, the Civil War, and the Oregon Trail, therefore, I found female historical figures involved during those time periods and developed my lesson around them. I developed my own and utilized others’ worksheets around Phillis Wheatley, women of the American Revolution, Sojourner Truth, women of the Civil War, and women of the Oregon Trail. For all of the subjects I utilized articles from various historical websites as well as primary sources. This lesson only took one class period, and my students, after completing the activities, expressed how much they enjoyed learning about the women of these time periods and some students even expressed that they have never even had the chance to learn about the women I included in the lesson. This lesson can be implemented during any time period in which you are teaching and it is a great, and easy, way to implement women’s history into your classroom.

Women’s history is an often forgotten subject. There are countless women that have made their mark in history, including Alice Paul and Carrie Chapman Catt, but it is up to us, history teachers, to keep their stories alive. The women’s suffrage movement is also a topic that is not discussed in-depth in high school history classes, but this topic provides the opportunity to dive into various subjects including the peaceful protest strategies first developed during the movement, and the various women that worked together to fight for a tremendous accomplishment. I encourage you to take the chance, even if it’s just by implementing women into examples, or by creating a lesson revolving around women’s history to try to implement this little known history, along with many others in your classroom as all stories deserve to be told and these stories can impact and inspire countless students.

References

Primary Sources

Florence H. Luscomb. “Our Open-Air Campaign” in American Women’s Suffrage edited by Susan Ware. United States: Library of America, 2020: 307 – 314.

Gertrude Foster Brown. “From Your Vote and How to Use It” in American Women’s Suffrage edited by Susan Ware. United States: Library of America, 2020: 565 – 568.

Maud Wood Park. “To NAWSA Congressional Chairmen” in American Women’s Suffrage edited by Susan Ware. United States: Library of America, 2020: 520-524.

Retrieved from the Library of Congress. Front page of the “Woman’s journal and suffrage news” with the headline: “Parade struggles to victory despite disgraceful scenes” showing images of the women’s suffrage parade in Washington, March 3, 1913. Washington D.C., 1913. Photograph.

The Library of America. (2020). American Women’s Suffrage. Edited by Susan Ware. United States: Library of America.

The New York Times. “Silent, Silly, and Offensive” in American Women’s Suffrage edited by Susan Ware. United States: Library of America, 2020: 525 – 527.

Secondary Sources

Baker, Jean H. Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists. New York: Hill and Wang: (1^st), 2005.

DuBois, Ellen Carol. Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2020.

Harris & Ewing. Cameron House or “Little White House.” Congressional Union Convention headquarters showing glimpse of Cosmos Club at left, Belasco theater at right and glimpse of U.S. Treasury building in background. United States Washington D.C, 1916. [Jan] Photograph. https://www.loc.gov/item/mnwp000438/.

Heider, Carmen. “Farm Women, Solidarity, and the Suffrage Messenger Nebraska Suffrage Activism on the Plains, 1915-1917”. Great Plains Quarterly (2012). *FARM WOMEN, SOLIDARITY, AND THE SUFFRAGE MESSENGER NEBRASKA SUFFRAGE ACTIVISM ON THE PLAINS, 1915-1917 (unl.edu)

Johnson, Joan Marie. “Following the Money: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”. Journal of Women’s History 27, no. 4 (2015): 62-87. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/605149/pdf

Kenneally, James J. “’I Want to Go to Jail’: The Woman’s Party Reception for President Wilson in Boston, 1919”. Historical Journal of Massachusetts, (Winter 2017): 103-133. https://www.westfield.ma.edu/historical-journal/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/I-Want-to-Go-to-Jail.pdf

National Archives, “Voting Rights Act 1965”, Milestone Documents, February 8, 2022, https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/voting-rights-act.

United States Congress, “The Constitution of the United States: The Nineteenth Amendment”, Constitution Annotated, U.S. Constitution – Nineteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

Walton, Mary. A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Zahniser, J.D. and Fry, Amelia R. (2014). Alice Paul: Claiming Power. The United States of America: Oxford University Press, 2014.

^[1] The National American Woman’s Association and the National Woman’s Party will be abbreviated throughout the work as “NAWSA ” and the “NWP ”, respectively.

^[2] United States Congress, “The Constitution of the United States: The Nineteenth Amendment”, Constitution Annotated, U.S. Constitution – Nineteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

^[3] Carmen Heider, “Farm Women, Solidarity, and the Suffrage Messenger: Nebraska Suffrage Activism on the Plains, 1915 – 1917”, Great Plains Quarterly (2012): 115.

^[4] James J. Kenneally, “‘I Want to Go to Jail’: The Woman’s Party Reception for President Wilson in Boston, 1919”, Historical Journal of Massachusetts 45, no. 1 (2017): 103-127.

^[5]Joan Marie Johnson, ““Following the Money: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”, Journal of Women’s History 27, no. 4 (2015): 63.

^[6] Ibid, 2,3.

^[7] Jean H. Baker. Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists. (Hill and Wang: New York. (1st), 2005), 11.

^[8] Ibid, 183-230.

^[9] Mary Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, (Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 2010), 252.

^[10] J.D. Zahniser and Amelia R. Fry, Alice Paul: Claiming Power, (Oxford University Press: The United States of America, 2014), 4.

^[11] Ellen Carol DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, (Simon and Schuster: New York, 2020), 3-5.

^[12] Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 188.

^[13] Ibid, 189.

^[14] Ibid, 189.

^[15] DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, 161.

^[16] Ibid, 161.

^[17] Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 189.

^[18] Ibid, 190.

^[19] Ibid, 190.

^[20] DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, 165.

^[21] Ibid, 165.

^[22] Johnson, “‘Following the Money’: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”, 66.

^[23] Johnson describes that from the 1880s to the early 1910s, NAWSA focused on a state to state approach to suffrage. (Ibid, 65).

^[24] DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, 205-206.

^[25] Ibid, 202.

^[26] Ibid, 203.

^[27] Ibid, 207.

^[28] Johnson, “’Following the Money’: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”.

^[29] Ibid, 68.

^[30] DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, 206.

^[31] Kenneally, “‘I Want to Go to Jail’: The Woman’s Party Reception for President Wilson in Boston, 1919”, 113. Heider, “Farm Women, Solidarity, and the Suffrage Messenger: Nebraska Suffrage Activism on the Plains, 1915-1917”, 115.

Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 215.

^[32] DuBois, Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote, 223.

^[33] Zahniser and Fry, Alice Paul: Claiming Power, 5.

^[34] Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 197.

^[35] Ibid, 206.

^[36]Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, 84.

^[37]Ibid, 84.

^[38] Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 206.

^[39] Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, 135

^[40] Ibid, 135.

^[41] Ibid, 160.

^[42] Susan Ware, American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 307.

^[43] Ibid, 307.

^[44] Florence H. Luscomb, “Our Open-Air Campaign”, in American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, ed. by Susan Ware (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 307-314.

^[45] Ibid, 308.

^[46] Ibid, 310.

^[47] Ibid, 307.

^[48] Ibid, 307.

^[49] Heider, “Farm Women, Solidarity, and the Suffrage Messenger: Nebraska Suffrage Activism on the Plains, 1915-1917”, 115.

^[50] Ibid, 114, 116.

^[51] Ibid, 114.

^[52] Ibid, 119.

^[53] Ibid, 119.

^[54] Ibid, 119.

^[55] Ibid, 119.

^[56] Johnson, “‘Following the Money’: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”, 69.

^[57]Gertrude Foster Brown, “Your Vote and How to Use It”, in American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, ed. by Susan Ware (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 565.

^[58] Ibid, 565.

^[59] Ibid, 566-67.

^[60] DuBois, “Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote”, 219.

^[61] Ibid, 219-220.

Johnson, “‘Following the Money: Wealthy Women, Feminism, and the American Suffrage Movement”, Journal of Women’s History 27, no. 4 (2015): 70

^[62] DuBois, “Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote”, 220.

Maud Wood Park,, “To NAWSA Congressional Chairmen”, in American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, ed. by Susane Ware, (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 520.

^[63]Ware and The Library of America, American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, 520.

^[64] Ibid, 520.

^[65] DuBois, “Suffrage: Women’s Long Battle for the Vote”, 222.

^[66] Ibid, 222.

^[67] Ibid, 222.

^[68] Carrie Chapman Catt. “The Crisis”, ed. by Susan Ware (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 495.

^[69] Zahniser and Fry, Alice Paul: Claiming Power, 135.

^[70] Ibid, 136.

^[71]Baker, Sisters: The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 183-85.

^[72] Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, 72-73.

^[73] Ibid, 72.

^[74] Zahniser and Fry, Alice Paul: Claiming Power, 146.

^[75] Retrieved from the Library of Congress. Front page of the “Woman’s journal and suffrage news” with the headline: “Parade struggles to victory despite disgraceful scenes” showing images of the women’s suffrage parade in Washington, March 3, 1913. Washington D.C., 1913. Photograph.

^[76] Zahniser and Fry, Alice Paul: Claiming Power, 149.

^[77] Ibid, 149.

^[78] Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, 147.

^[79] Ibid, 147.

^[80] Ibid, 147.

^[81] Baker, The Lives of America’s Suffragists, 214.

^[82] Ibid, 148.

^[83] Ibid, 148.

^[84] The New York Times, “Silent, Silly, and Offensive” and “Militants Get 3 Days; Lack Time to Starve”, American Women’s Suffrage: Voices from the Long Struggle for the Vote 1776 – 1965, ed. by Susan Ware (Literary Classics of the United States, Inc.: New York, 2020), 525.

According to historian and editor Susan Ware, the New York Times published an article the day after the women’s first picket in front of the White House, which was on January 12, 1917. The editors were offering a hypothetical situation of a socialist group picketing in front of the White House and that this “impossible piece of news” being printed “tomorrow morning”, indicating that it would be printed on January 12.

^[85] Ibid, 526.

^[86] Carrie Chapman Catt, “Carrie Chapman Catt to Frances M. Lane, 14 February 1917”, in A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, ed. by Mary Walton, (Palgrave Macmillan: New York, 2010), 154.

^[87] Walton, A Woman’s Crusade: Alice Paul and the Battle for the Ballot, 153.

^[88] Ibid, 152.

^[89] National Archives, “Voting Rights Act 1965”, Milestone Documents, February 8, 2022, https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/voting-rights-act.

^[90] Ibid.

Defending Student Rights

Defending Student Rights

Pablo Muriel

For my entire career, I have taught at public high schools in the South Bronx, the poorest Congressional District in the United States. Many of my students come from low-income families, face stressful circumstances outside of school, and have a history of below level academic performance. Most of my students are identified as struggling readers and several are classified with special learning needs.

In my teaching, I employ a version of Critical Social Theory to directly challenge the social reproduction aspect of education that would channel students into lives on the margins of poverty and to empower them to seize control over their lives. Everything about history and society is analyzed, nothing is accepted on face value; everything is dissected by students to uncover the individuals and groups that benefit from the way society is organized. I agree with Lisa Delpit, who defined the structures of power in society as a system of hierarchy that necessitates the participation of some and the exclusion of others. Delpit also argued, “if you are not already a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier.” This means that for students to receive a complete education, they need to be aware of, analyze, and critique all of the forces that shape their education, their communities, and their lives.

Critical theorists argue that education should guide students towards political activism and that teachers should be models for their students of active citizens exercising their democratic duty. As a critical educator, my primary goal in the classroom is to promote critical thinking through political discourse and by encouraging students to translate their ideas into action through some form of activism. My teaching involves the recurrent use of projects, alternative assessments, semi-structured learning, promotion of classroom dialogues, student voice, and the development of classroom community. My approach to teaching even includes the way I structure the physical classroom. Desks are organized into a large square that takes up the entire room. This arrangement removes hierarchy by taking the teacher out of the front and allows students to speak to each other and the teacher on an equal social footing.

While I follow the New York State history curriculum scope and sequence, I begin units with student analysis of current events. That helps them connect themes and issues with the specific historical period they are studying. In their analysis of current events, students already have some familiarity with military conflicts, climate concerns, prejudice and inequality, and government responsibility, so these topics spark student interest and lead to engaged classroom dialogue. Students delve into a topic and connect what they are learning about to their own lives. Content is delivered and then evaluated through student and teacher presentations and an examination of primary and secondary sources. I try to present material as much as possible using different platforms including photographs, artwork, movie clips, music, poetry, charts, graphs, and text. Working individually and in groups, students conduct additional research on topics and formulate theories to explain the historical record. Some topics end with renewed discussion of contemporary issues and ideas for participating in current campaigns to redress inequality and injustice.

According to a survey by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), during the 2015-2016 school year, over 10% of American high schools subjected students to random metal detector searches at school entrances and another 6% conducted airport-style metal detector searches on a daily basis. Most of these schools were in urban areas and a majority of their student population was Black and Latino. Calls for installing metal detectors at schools usually spikes after a mass shooting, although these incidents have not been at urban and minority schools.

New York City pioneered the use of metal detectors in schools in the late 1980s and the 1990s. A majority of the metal detectors currently in use were installed after a series of incidents involving students with weapons. Until recently the policy was rarely revisited and no procedure was in place for ending scanning at a school building once metal detectors were installed. During the 2010s, over 100,000 New York City students, mostly in high schools with overwhelmingly Black and Latino student bodies, lined up to be pass through metal detectors before entering school every day. The New York Civil Liberties Union argued that the metal detectors “criminalize” students in largely minority school. Its advocacy director, Udi Ofer, proposed that the “Metal detectors should be used as a last resort, and for a limited time.”

In 2015, some New York City officials began to question the policy. Councilmembers Vanessa Gibson and Corey Johnson introduced legislation to require the Department of Education to report on the number of schools where scanning took place and the number of students who were being scanned. In support of the bill, Councilmember Brad Lander, argued: “There is an absence, a really embarrassing absence, of a New York City Department of Education policy around metal detectors. Telling our young people that we look to them as potential criminals in the schools that have metal detectors does more harm than good.” Yet five years later in 2020, metal detector placement and policy in New York City was unchanged.

Dennis Belen-Morales, a student at Alfred E. Smith High School, agreed with Councilmember Lander and the NYCLU and decided to launch a campaign to have metal detectors removed from his school. Dennis spent a Christmas vacation researching the Department of Education metal detector guidelines, a research adventure that included a trip to its central headquarters. He also spoke with the principal of one of the city’s new, small, high schools that had a similar student population to Smith but was located in its own building. That school had no metal detectors. The principal told Dennis, “What do we look like? The airport? Our students are already minorities, we don’t want them to feel like criminals too.”

Dennis was startled to discover that there actually was no formal metal detector policy and was furious about the irrationality of the entire system. Following his investigation, Dennis started a Change.org petition that he directed to the city’s Mayor. In the petition, he wrote, “I am always hassled when entering the school facility, I am always told to remove all metal objects from my pockets and place them in my book bag, to remove my belt, and to place my boots through the machine. While entering the school building, I feel like I am entering a penitentiary. I feel as if my high school is preparing me for prison, when it is supposed to be ushering me into adulthood.”

As a follow-up to the petition, Dennis and a classmate organized a forum on metal detectors in schools that was attended by students from other schools and a representative from their local Congressional Representative’s office. At the forum, students talked about the importance of school culture. They felt if a school had a culture of violence, metal detectors might be necessary. But students and teachers at Smith and in other schools had created a climate of caring and concern. They called it a team culture. But the city had no policy in place to remove metal detectors when a school’s culture no longer warranted them. Since Alfred E. Smith is a vocational school, students don’t have to smuggle weapons into the building. If they wanted a weapon, they could find one in the shop classrooms.

The campaign by the Smith high school students stalled in September 2017 when an eighteen-year old student in a different Bronx high school stabbed two students in his class, prompting demands for more airport-like metal detectors in schools. Dennis had a very different reaction to the incident than that expressed in the local media. According to Dennis, “Metal detectors might prevent actual weapons in a classroom, but they cannot prevent a student from doing harm to another. When pushed to their limit, a student can either find a way to bring in a weapon or use something available within the school. Smith is an automotive school and we are in possession of very dangerous equipment every day. All an angry person needed to do was grab something from a shop class.” When they became seniors, Dennis and classmates in a Participation in Government class, decided to make one more effort to have the metal.

Education for Sustainable Democracy

Education for Sustainable Democracy

Brett Levy

This show explores how we can prepare the next generation for informed civic engagement, environmental stewardship, and the development of a more just and peaceful world. Host Brett Levy is a researcher of civic and environmental education and an associate professor at the University at Albany, State University of New York. Episodes feature interviews with leaders, innovators, and scholars in civic and environmental education. You’ll hear about new classroom-based and online practices that generate students’ involvement in public issues, youth-adult partnerships that improve communities, what research tells us about how to broaden young people’s engagement in environmental issues, and more. Please subscribe and tell a friend about the show. For information about upcoming episodes, guests, and more, please visit www.esdpodcast.org.

Podcasts:

Helping Youth Become Critical News Consumers, with John Silva and Miriam Romais (News Literacy Project)
Contained Risk-Taking in Context: Tradeoffs, Constraints, & Opportunities, with Judy Pace (University of San Francisco)
Integrating History and Current Events & Creating an Open Classroom Climate, with Amber Joseph (East Side Community School, NYC)
Voice from the Classroom: Teaching the Capitol Riot in a Politically Diverse High School (with Lauren Collet-Gildard, Arlington High School)
Guiding Productive Political Discussions, with Diana Hess (University of Wisconsin-Madison)
Teaching Elections & Modeling Political Tolerance, with Wayne Journell (University of North Carolina at Greensboro)
Engagement & Equity in Civic Education, with Professor Jane Lo (Michigan State University)

This is What Democracy Really Looks Like

This is What Democracy Really Looks Like

David Edelman

I want to share the most transformational experience I’ve had during my teaching career. It started in 2017 at the end of the school day when my students were given a letter to take home to their parents. This notice detailed how our school building tested positive for lead in its drinking water. Some of the fountains were so highly elevated that they tested over one thousand parts per billion (ppb) when the action limit set by the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) is 15 ppb. This “backpack letter” meant for school administrators and parents’ eyes, sent my students and I down a path of several years of service based learning and student led activism which transformed my role as a classroom teacher. We not only fought for student appropriated funding to install two new water fountains with filtration systems in our school, but we also analyzed our water quality at home with free New York State testing kits. From there, since one didn’t exist, we expanded our work by creating an interactive map of all the schools in NYC illustrating their water quality and used the information to lobby our elected officials to improve access to clean, lead free drinking water. You can learn more and see examples of my students’ activism including videos and speeches students developed to express their concerns about water quality with the President as part of inauguration events at my teaching website www.cagebustingclassrooms.com.

Perhaps this is the type of global education you want students to be engaged in as well but don’t know where to start? I am happy to share that my students’ activism and others like them across the country have been developed into an online curriculum to help other educators interested in this work. The U.S. Department of State has launched Solving Global Problems, a free, self-paced online course, funded by the U.S government and developed by IREX, to help educators prepare to ignite students’ critical thinking and creativity through a focus on tackling global problems.

During the course, participants hear from elementary, middle and high school teachers about how they successfully engaged students to apply knowledge and skills to complex problems and how it empowers students to make a difference in the world. Global competence equips students with the skills, knowledge, and attitudes to be successful in today’s interconnected world. Through the course educators will be equipped with an understanding of what problem-driven learning is and how to apply it in their classrooms, whether that is in person or virtually. Educators will explore how global problems can be introduced across content areas and grade levels.

One of the most challenging parts can be getting started. This course will provide practical ideas for connecting problem-driven learning to standards and resources to apply in your practice and is designed for busy professionals who are motivated to engage their students with real challenges. Educators who successfully complete the course will receive a U.S. Department of State Global Problem-Solving Educator badge and certificate noting 4.5 hours of independent professional learning and a great step towards becoming a Fulbright Teacher for Global Classrooms.

Almost four years later, during remote learning, my students and I have been parsing President Biden’s infrastructure bill and discussing his ambitious pledge to replace 100% of the water pipes and service lines across America. The New York State Constitution guarantees every student in the state the right to education defined in terms of preparation for civic participation yet far too many schools, particularly schools especially those that serve black and brown students, are ill equipped to provide this type of education. Let’s make sure all our students are @DemocracyReady by equipping teachers with the agency and experiences necessary to help young people recognize their civic roles and exercise their civic powers to work for meaningful social change.

The Return of Civics

New Jersey’s Path to a Required Course in Civics for Students

Arlene Gardner, New Jersey Center for Civic Education

“An educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.“ “…if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is…to inform their discretion by education” – Thomas Jefferson, 1820

Background: Short History of Civic Education

Public schools were established with the goal of creating informed citizens. Civic literacy was seen as essential to maintaining a representative democracy and the schools were viewed as the place for young people to learn about their government. In a multiethnic, multi-religious country based on the shared secular ideas of liberty and justice rather than the “blood and soil” nationalism of European countries, a common understanding and appreciation of these fundamental American values was seen as critical.

Until the 1960s, it was common for schools to have civics courses in upper elementary and middle school classes, as well as a separate, required course in civics and government in high school.[1] This pattern broke down in the 1960’s and 1970’s, when social unrest over civil rights, the war in Vietnam and other issues weakened the agreement about core values and put democratic institutions on the defensive, leading to multicultural and other approaches to teaching history and the elimination of civics course in many states, including New Jersey.[2]

By the 1980s, the civic mission of schools was basically abandoned in favor of preparing a new generation of skilled workers. The focus was shifted towards “core” testable subjects like math and reading. The No Child Left Behind Act in 2001 accelerated this push with the hope that test scores in reading and math would predict and improve college and workplace performance.[3] Time spent on social studies was reduced in many schools.[4] In 2011, all federal funding for civics and social studies was eliminated.[5]

Meanwhile, national assessments have shown how little our young people know about government or the role of a citizen in a democracy. While math and reading skills have improved since 1998, less than a quarter of students demonstrated proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in Civics in 1998, 2006, 2010, 2014 or 2018.[6] The questions are basic and include multiple choice responses. Yet, for example, in 2018, only 50 percent of eighth grade students understood that the U.S. Congress has the primary legislative power to pass bills.[7] African American and Hispanic students were twice as likely as white students to score below proficient on national assessments.[8] The level of proficiency is related to the amount of instructional time allocated to civics. While only 24% of eighth grade students demonstrated proficiency in civics on the most recent assessment in 2018, eighth graders whose social studies teachers spent at least three hours per week on the subject significantly outperformed their peers who had less instructional time in civics.[9]

With funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York, a nationwide coalition to study and reinvigorate the civic mission of schools was formed in 2003.[10] The Carnegie Corporation follow-up study in 2010 conducted by the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, the National Conference on Citizenship, the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University, and the American Bar Association Division for Public Education, found that students who receive effective education in social studies are more likely to vote, four times more likely to volunteer and work on community issues, and are generally more confident in their ability to communicate ideas with their elected representatives.[11] “Effective education” included explicit instruction regarding government, law and democracy; discussions of current events and controversial issues; participation in simulated democratic processes and service learning. [12]

The NJ Coalition to Support the Civic Mission of Schools

By 2004, thirty states had a required civics course. But, there was no requirement for civics at any grade level in New Jersey. It was left to local discretion. With funding from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Fund for New Jersey, a New Jersey Coalition to Support the Civic Mission of Schools (the Coalition)–a statewide partnership of educators, parents, school administrators, business leaders, legislators and others interested in the future of our civic education and our democracy–was created. Several statewide conferences were held resulting in the recommendation that all New Jersey public school districts be required to have a course of study in civics.

An Inventory of Civic Education in New Jersey conducted in the fall of 2004 disclosed that only 39% of New Jersey school districts required all of their students to take a civics course in any grade.While those students taking an American government elective (10 to 20% of the student body of any given high school) might have the opportunity to participate in a class that requires an understanding of American constitutional democracy and the responsibilities and role of the citizen, students in most New Jersey school districts were exposed to one week to one month of civic content knowledge as part of U.S. history, with little emphasis on the importance of citizen action. The inventory also revealed that less than 35% of school districts had offered a professional development program in civics or government over the prior five years, and the vast majority of school districts indicated that up-to-date, inexpensive classroom materials and professional development would be an effective way to improve civic education.^[13]

Following the financial crisis and recession in 2008, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine sought to have financial literacy taught in New Jersey’s schools. Only three states (Utah, Missouri and Tennessee) required a semester of financial literacy at the time, while 18 other states required that personal finance be incorporated into other subjects.[14] While the issue was being discussed by the New Jersey State Board of Education, the New Jersey Center for Civic Education at Rutgers University (the Center) testified on behalf of the Coalition that a semester of financial literacy should be accompanied by a required semester of civics. The New Jersey School Boards Association, the New Jersey Principals and Supervisors Association, and others protested that there were already too many high school requirements. The State Board of Education added a semester of financial literacy to the high school requirements but did not include a semester of civics.[15]

The Quest for a Civics Requirement in Middle School

After further discussion, the Coalition concluded that perhaps the better place for a required civics course was in middle school. Current New Jersey law required a course in New Jersey history, geography and community civics in an upper elementary grade (NJSA 18A:35-3) and two years of United States history in high school (NJSA 18A:35-1) but nothing was required in middle school. By age 11 or 12 (sixth or seventh grade), students have the ability to do the higher order thinking necessary for a rigorous, relevant, reflective course in civics, and students at this age are more open to attitudinal changes than at older ages.[16] A required civics course in middle school would help to ensure that all New Jersey students (even those who may drop out of school at age 16) have the opportunity to gain the knowledge and skills for informed, active citizenship.

By 2012, forty other states had a required course in civics.[17] The Center drafted a bill requiring civics in middle school, which was introduced in the New Jersey Legislature with bipartisan support. Unfortunately, Governor Chris Christie, following the advice of his Education Commissioner Chris Cerf, believed that the New Jersey Student Learning Standards for Social Studies were sufficient and a civics requirement was not necessary. The Center argued that the social studies standards were written within a chronology, and that many basic civic concepts (such as the purpose of government, the basis of authority and its abuse, privacy, judicial review, the common good, and enlightened self-interest) were not included within the historical framework of standard 6.1 and were not being taught.[18] Although standard 6.3 outlined specific activities that students should take at various grade levels, it failed to offer a broad understanding of how our constitutional democracy functions and the role of the citizen.[19] The Center, with support from the League of Women Voters of New Jersey, stressed that only a fully articulated civics course, along with professional development and resources for teachers, could ensure that every New Jersey student would participate in an engaging, critical thinking and content-rich course of study in civics. However, once it was clear that Governor Christie did not support the idea, the bill was no longer pursued by its legislative sponsors.

Meanwhile, as the center in American politics seemed to split into two warring factions and faith in government plummeted, the momentum to promote and reinvigorate the civic mission of schools as a response was building both nationally and in New Jersey, with numerous articles in newspapers and law and policy reviews.[20] For a better understanding of what a robust civic education can do, in 2019 the Center invited several legislators, as well as Governor Phil Murphy’s Attorney General, Gurbir Singh Grewal, and Secretary of State, Tahesha Way, to the statewide simulated legislative hearings for We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution so thatthey could see first-hand how well-informed, quick thinking and articulate students can be when they participate in an engaging civic education program.

In 2019, Senator Shirley Turner introduced a bill to require a course of study in civics in middle schools. Other legislators were concerned that civic education should not end in middle school. Senator Troy Singleton had introduced a bill to require that civics be taught in high school. The Center noted that N.J.S.A. 18A:35-2 already mandated that civics, economics and New Jersey history and government be taught as part of the required two years of U.S. history in high school, although many social studies supervisors and teachers indicated that this was not happening. To address both the middle and high school concerns, the two bills were merged into a substitute bill, S-854, sponsored by Senators Turner, Singleton and numerous other cosponsors, to require a course in civics in middle school beginning with the 2022 school year and directing the Center to provide professional development and resources for middle AND high school teachers. Titled “Laura Wooten’s Law” after a Mercer County African American woman who served as a poll worker for 79 years, S-854 was unanimously passed by the New Jersey Senate on January 28, 2021, and an identical bill, A-3394 was unanimously passed by the New Jersey Assembly on May 20, 2021.[21]

By directing the New Jersey Center for Civic Education at Rutgers, The State University, to provide the necessary professional development and resources, the legislation recognized that the Center works with national civic organizations as well as the New Jersey Social Studies Supervisors Association and the New Jersey Council for the Social Studies; has been providing professional development and resources for New Jersey’s teachers for 30 years; and has the expertise and experience to offer professional development to teachers from all over the state efficiently and effectively.[22]

Civics must be more than how government functions

Civic education is seen by Americans of all political stripes as the most positive and impactful lever to strengthen national identity.[23] High quality, school-based civics for all learners is foundational to our shared civic strength. However, while 42 states (New Jersey will make it 43) require at least one civics course, few incorporate proven pedagogical principles like classroom-based deliberation and decision-making, critical discussion of current events, simulations of democratic processes, guided debates and deliberations, project-based learning, service learning or media literacy.[24]

S-854 requires the middle school civics course to broadly include “the principles and ideals underlying the American system of constitutional democracy, the function and limitations of government, and the role of a citizen in a democratic society”.[25] Following the legislation, the course should provide explicit and coherent knowledge about how the American system of constitutional democracy functions. The goal, however, is not simply content knowledge about how government works, but also an understanding of the values and ideals that underlie our system of government, and, probably most importantly, the role of the citizen in a democratic society. The focus is on developing critical thinking skills and civic dispositions in addition to civic knowledge, consistent with many of the student performance expectations in the New Jersey Student Learning Standards, which are also to go into effect starting in September 2022.[26]

One of the primary reasons our nation’s founders envisioned a substantial system of public education system was to prepare youth to be active participants in our system of self-government. The responsibilities of each citizen were assumed to go far beyond casting a vote: protecting the common good would require developing students’ critical thinking and communication skills, along with civic virtues. If the goal is for our young people to become informed, active citizens, they need instruction about how government functions and about the role of the citizen, political participation and deliberation, democratic principles, and civic mindedness. Our young people need to develop critical thinking skills so that they know how to examine and evaluate evidence to determine what supports fact-based truth. They need to develop communication skills so that they are able to civilly discuss controversial issues and to influence public policy. Our future citizens need to develop civic dispositions so that they appreciate WHY they should be involved in influencing public policy for the common good.

To achieve this goal, the Center has prepared an Inquiry Framework of questions to guide the development of a middle school civics curriculum. Links to suggested lessons, classrooms activities and resources are being added over the summer, with professional development to begin in August 2021 and continue through 2022 and into the future. Developing a suggested curriculum guide integrating civics, economics, and New Jersey history and government into the required U.S. History course in high school will begin in the fall of 2021. A robust civics education program that provides the skills for every student to be able to negotiate life, work and government offers the best promise for equality and justice for all. New Jersey can be at the forefront of reimagining civic learning for the 21^st century. Join us in this endeavor!

[1]Forgotten Purpose: Civic Education in Public Schools, NEA News (2017) at https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/forgotten-purpose-civics-education-public-schools

[2]Edward B. Fiske, The New York Times, June 7, 1987 at https://www.nytimes.com/1987/06/07/us/with-old-values-and-new-titles-civics-courses-make-a-comeback.html

[3]No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 at h ttps://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/1

[4]“Bring Back Social Studies,” The Atlantic, Sept. 23, 2013, at https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/bring-back-social-studies/279891/

[5] Congressional Record, 112^th Congress, at https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/112th-congress/senate-report/84/1

[6] National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/civics/

[7] NAEP at https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/civics/results/scores/

[8] NAEP at https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/civics/results/groups/

[9] Heafner, Tina. 2020. “The Sky Is Not Falling, But We Need to Take Action.” Social Education 84 (4), pp 250–260) at https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/default/files/view-article-2020-08/se-840420250.pdf

[10] The Civic Mission of Schools, 2003, at h ttps://www.carnegie.org/publications/the-civic-mission-of-schools/

[11] Guardians of Democracy, 2011, at https://www.csuchico.edu/iege/_assets/documents/susi-guardian-of-democracy-the-civic-mission-of-schools.pdf

[12] Ibid.

[13] Inventory of Civic Education in New Jersey, 2004, at http://civiced.rutgers.edu/ADVOCACY/Inventory_Report_11-04.pdf

[14] President’s Advisory Council on Financial Literacy, 2008 at https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Domestic-Finance/Documents/PACFL_Draft-AR-0109.pdf

[15] N.J.A.C. 6A:8-5.1(a)1v r: Graduation Requirement for Financial, Economic, Business and Entrepreneurial Literacy, NJ State Board of Education at https://www.state.nj.us/education/aps/cccs/career/FLClarification.pdf.

[16]Piaget, “Four Stages of Cognitive Development” at https://www.verywellmind.com/piagets-stages-of-cognitive-development-2795457

[17] Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/state-laws-standards-and-requirements-k-12-civics

[18] New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards for Social Studies, 2009 at https://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2009/6.pdf

[19] Ibid.

[20] See, E.g., Fred Islam and Ed Crego, “Why are Parkland Students So Articulate? Because They Were Taught Civics in Middle School,” Washington Monthly, Mar. 5, 2018 at https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/03/05/the-civic-education-program-that-trained-the-parkland-student-activists /; Timothy Egan, “Actually, You can Fix Stupid,” The New York Times, Mar. 30, 2018, at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/30/opinion/protests-democracy-teens.htm l; Thomas Friedman, “The Two Codes Your Kids Need to Know,” The New York Times, Feb. 12, 2019 at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/opinion/college-board-sat-ap.html; Sarah Shapiro and Catherine Brown, The State of Civics Education, The Center for American Progress (Feb. 21, 2018) at https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2018/02/21/446857/state-civics-education/; Adam Terragnoli. “The Crisis of Civics Education: A Case for Mandated Civics Assessments,” Cornell Policy Review, January 18, 2019 at h ttp://www.cornellpolicyreview.com/crisis-of-civics-education/

[21] S854 at https://www.njleg.state.nj.us/bills/BillView.asp

[22] See, e.g., the Center’s online-lessons about New Jersey history and government at http://civiced.rutgers.edu/njlessons.html.

[23] Guardians of Democracy; CivXNow. 2020. “Civic Education Has Massive Cross-Partisan Appeal as a Solution to What Ails Our Democracy.” at https://www.civxnow.org/ sites/default/files/resources/CivXNow%20infographic%20-%20Luntz%20polling%20-%20FINAL.pdf

[24] Hansen, Michael, Mann Levesque, Elizabeth, Valant, John, and Diana Quintero. 2018 Brown Center Report on Civic Education: An inventory of state civics requirements. (2018) at https://www.brookings.edu/research/2018-brown-center-report-on-american-education-an-inventory-of-state-civicsrequirements/

[25] S-854/A-3394

[26] NJ Student Learning Standards for Social Studies 2020 at https://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/2020/2020%2 0NJSLS-SS.pdf