Civics education in the United States is failing, and the problem runs deeper than low test scores or student disengagement. The real failure is that schools have stripped classrooms of controversy and real political discussion, replacing education with avoidance. Students graduate without ever debating power, authority, or constitutional limits, and are then expected to vote and participate in a democratic republic they do not understand.

It is easy to blame teachers, and in some cases, that criticism is fair. But the larger issue is structural. Teachers are increasingly discouraged — sometimes explicitly — from addressing controversial topics at all. School boards and administrators often treat controversy as dangerous rather than educational. When disagreement is framed as a threat, classrooms become quiet. Students memorize terms but never engage with ideas.

One of the last conversations I had with Charlie Kirk before his murder centered on this exact problem. If students are not taught how to think — through open, honest debate — they will never make informed decisions.

I actually enjoy debating communist students my age because, at minimum, they have read the material and seriously considered their views. The most dangerous person in this country is not someone with strong beliefs, but someone who never questions anything at all.

According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 22% of eighth graders score at or above proficient in civics. Nearly four out of five students lack a solid understanding of how the U.S. government works, and one-third fall below even the “basic” level. Unlike reading and math, which at least show signs of improvement, civic literacy is getting worse. NAEP civics scores declined between 2018 and 2022, erasing what little progress had been made.

Part of the problem is neglect by design. Fewer than half of the states require a full, standalone civics course for graduation. In many states, civics is buried inside broader social studies classes, rushed at the end of the year, or treated as secondary. Only a small minority of states require a civics exam tied to graduation, meaning students can earn a diploma without ever being tested on how Congress, the courts, or federal agencies actually operate.

This ignorance does not end at graduation. A national survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center found that only 26% of Americans could name all three branches of government.

Young Americans are the least civically informed demographic, despite being among the most politically vocal online. Surveys consistently show Americans under 30 scoring lower on questions about checks and balances and institutional authority. High political emotion combined with low institutional knowledge produces activism that is loud but often misdirected.

Schools share responsibility for this mismatch. Many districts promote “civic engagement” before civic instruction. Students are encouraged to participate in walkouts, demonstrations, and advocacy projects before learning how laws are written, which institutions hold power, or where protest pressure is constitutionally effective. When students do not understand how power is structured, they protest the wrong institutions and demand changes from actors who lack the authority to deliver them.

The failure becomes clearer when compared to peer nations. International assessments show that American students trail Western Europe, Canada, and Australia in democratic understanding. Students abroad are more likely to understand the separation of powers, the role of courts, and the distinction between lawmaking and law enforcement. This is an embarrassment for the United States.

Controversy is not a threat to education. It is the foundation of it. If students are never challenged to argue, disagree, and defend their views in a structured academic setting, they will do so later without the ability to think critically. Without discourse, there is no civic education. And without civic education, there will be no country.