Knowledge of Civics
- In 2022, 22% of all U.S. eighth graders scored at or above the proficient level on the NAEP civics exam, essentially the same share that has scored at that level since 1998 (Indicator I-06a). The share of students who scored at the below basic level in 2022 was 31%, a four percentage point increase from 2018.
- From 1998 to 2010, fourth graders’ achievement improved, with the share demonstrating less than basic achievement on the NAEP civics assessment decreasing from 31% to 23% (Indicator I-06b). This decrease translated into gains not only in the share of students demonstrating at least basic achievement but also in the proportion displaying proficiency in the subject. Twelfth graders’ scores remained largely unchanged from 1998 to 2010, with over a third demonstrating less than basic achievement.
- On the civics skills portion of the IEA, the United States outperformed all of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations—as well as the non-OECD nations—that participated in the 28-country study in 1999 (Indicator I-06c). The United States did not score as well on the civics content knowledge portion of the IEA assessment, coming in behind several other OECD countries in 1999.
- U.S. 14-year-olds ranked fourth in overall civics achievement on the IEA assessment, though the difference between their overall score and that of the three OECD leaders—Poland, Finland, and Greece—was not statistically significant. (Each nation’s overall score is the weighted average of their content and skills scores. Civics content knowledge scores were weighted more heavily than civics skills scores in calculating the average.)
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress Data Explorer, accessed 08/25/2023. Data analyzed and presented by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ Humanities Indicators (www.humanitiesindicators.org).
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) civics scores are reported here by achievement level. For an explanation of the achievement scale and detailed information about the civics competencies associated with each achievement level, see http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/civics/achieve.asp.
The NAEP Data Explorer (NDE) permits analysis of the assessment data by gender, ethnicity, and several other key variables. For both an overview of NDE and tips for its effective use, see http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/naep_nde_final_web.pdf. NDE itself is located at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress Data Explorer, accessed 08/25/2023. Data analyzed and presented by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences’ Humanities Indicators (www.humanitiesindicators.org).
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) civics scores are reported here by achievement level. For an explanation of the achievement scale and detailed information about the civics competencies associated with each achievement level, see http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/civics/achieve.asp.
The NAEP Data Explorer (NDE) permits analysis of the assessment data by gender, ethnicity, and several other key variables. For both an overview of NDE and tips for its effective use, see http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/naep_nde_final_web.pdf. NDE itself is located at http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/.
Two types of explanation can be advanced for the lower levels of achievement in the higher grades. The first of these is a “cohort-based” explanation, which asserts that, in the case of students who took the 2010 NAEP civics examination, those born in the early 1990s are for some reason less receptive to civics instruction than their counterparts born in the early 2000s. The other type of explanation focuses on “age effects.” This explanation asserts that something about late adolescence—perhaps the developmental process or high school education in the United States—is less conducive to civics learning. (A study prepared for the National Assessment Governing Board describes how the timing of the high school assessment may be resulting in an underestimation of 12th graders’ achievement in civics and other areas. These documents also detail the steps that are being taken to boost student engagement in the assessment process.)
The spacing of the NAEP civics assessments permits an investigation of these issues. Because a particular cohort of students can be followed over time (the sample of eighth graders who took the exam in 2006 was drawn from the same cohort as the sample of 12th graders who took the exam in 2010), researchers can “control” for cohort effects (i.e., reduce the possibility that observed differences between younger and older students’ achievement is attributable to differences between grade cohorts). The data provide some support for the second type of explanation; that is, student performance is linked to age. As students in the cohort progressed through their educational careers, the percentage demonstrating at least basic achievement decreased.
* Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. See http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2001096 for results for all 28 countries participating in the study. Countries are ranked by the weighted average of their content and skills scores (this value is provided in parentheses to the right of the country name). Civics content knowledge scores were weighted more heavily than civics skills in determining the average.
** Weighted average of the two scores is statistically significantly lower (p < .05) than that of the United States.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, What Democracy Means to Ninth Graders: U.S. Results from the International IEA Civic Education Study, NCES 2001-096 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001), 14 fig. 2.2, 15 fig. 2.3. “IEA” stands for International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
In 1999, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement assessment consisted of two components. The first focused on civics content knowledge, or theoretical knowledge about democratic institutions and practices, such as the purpose of political parties (25 items). The second component examined students’ civics skills; that is, interpretive abilities important in understanding political material, such as the ability to distinguish between facts and opinions or to critically read a political cartoon or pamphlet (13 items). The two scores were then averaged, with civics content knowledge scores weighted somewhat more heavily, to produce a total civics knowledge score for each nation.
