Elections and civic
education: the case of Kids Voting USA.
Author: Hall, John Stuart.; Jones, Patricia M. Source:
National Civic Review
v. 87 no1 (Spring 1998) p. 79-84 ISSN: 0027-9013 Number:
BSSI98021938 Copyright: The magazine publisher is the
copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced with
permission. Further reproduction of this article in
violation of the copyright is prohibited.
Elections should bring focus, not closure, to a
democratic polity. This elemental proposition is sometimes
lost in modern commentary about elections being horse races
and political campaigns seeming to rest more on images than
issues. Elections are vital benchmarks of the democratic
process not because they settle issues but because they
generate debate and dialogue, and because elected
representatives anticipate them. Elections educate and
socialize--but not as much as they could, because many do
not fully participate.
Elections today are undervalued. We are reminded
constantly that people are busy, and that cynicism
concerning elections and campaigns runs deep; these
circumstances reinforce the attitude that it does little
good to participate in the political process.
Well-publicized declines in voter turnout are frequently
pointed to as a sure sign of democratic decline. There are
disturbing trends: about one-half the eligible electorate
does not participate in presidential elections, and turnout
for local elections is much lower than that (frequently less
than 20 percent of eligible citizens). Most alarming to
those who value the long-term civic education function of
elections is the fact that the lowest registration and
turnout rates are found among the
eighteen-to-twenty-four-year-old group. If this trend
persists, the national capacity to debate issues, resolve
conflict, and solve public problems may be in jeopardy.
It is not too melodramatic to assert that renewed,
creative attention to civic education is a first and
essential step in revitalizing elections and sustaining
democracy. As dismal as the future appears when
extrapolating from current trends and the type of analyses
that underscore modern isolation and the atomistic society,
there is great promise for responding to these forces in the
future with collaborative, widespread, community-based civic
education. Let us take as an example the simple and
potentially powerful Kids Voting USA effort.
FIRST, THE IDEAThe Kids Voting story begins with a
fishing tale. In 1987, three prominent Phoenix businessmen
and their wives planned a fishing vacation together. The
place they chose for their trip was Costa Rica, a tiny
Central American nation (about the size of Vermont and New
Hampshire combined) sandwiched between Nicaragua to the
north and Panama to the southeast. Its location on the thin
arm of land that connects the North and South American
continents makes it ideal for deep sea fishing, with the
Pacific Ocean on its west coast and the Caribbean Sea on its
northeast coast.
The three couples arrived in Costa Rica, so the story
goes,(FN1) shortly after a particularly problematic election
in Arizona. Each of the men was aware of the rather dismal
voting record of the American populace. It was no surprise,
then, that Max Jennings (who was the editor of the Mesa
Tribune) picked up on the comments of their cab driver about
recent elections in Costa Rica. In the ensuing conversation,
the three fishermen learned more about the tiny republic
than they bargained for. Costa Rica is one of the oldest and
most stable democracies in the Western hemisphere; what is
more, it has consistently recorded some of the highestvoter
participation rates, at times exceeding 90 percent. More
surprising to the three visitors was the long-held tradition
of children voting right along with their parents. In fact,
responsible citizenship is nurtured in Costa Rican children
by encouraging them to discuss political issues with adults
and in their school classrooms, as well as by casting mock
ballots on election day.
Intrigued by what they had learned, the three men
(Jennings; R. R. Evans, CEO of Evans Management; and Charles
A. Wahlheim, president of Joe Woods Development) returned
home at the end of their trip determined to find some way to
improve voter participation in their own community. One year
later, Kids Voting began as a pilot program in the Phoenix
metropolitan area.
Funded through private sector donations and foundation
grants, the three fishermen hired a staff, developed
curriculum materials, and arranged for children to vote with
their parents. In that first year, forty schools and thirty
thousand students from kindergarten through high school
participated in the innovative program. It was so successful
that by 1990 it was offered statewide in Arizona (675,000
students and 18,000 teachers participated, a remarkable 95
percent of Arizona's school population), and in 1991 Kids
Voting was incorporated as a national nonprofit program.
A NEW WAY TO TURN KIDS ON TO POLITICSKids Voting is
designed to address citizen apathy and improve voter
participation by developing a tradition, or habit, of
responsible citizenship--and voting--in future generations
of Americans. The program teaches children the importance of
voting by combining the practice of voting with a school
curriculum package that encourages students to read and
discuss candidates, issues, and ballot initiatives both in
the classroom and at home. In the weeks before elections,
kids study local propositions and referenda, evaluate
candidates' qualifications and campaign platforms, watch
debates, and hold "practice" votes on
school-related issues. Then they fill out special voter
registration forms, and on election day they go with their
parents to the polls and actually cast ballots in special
booths. Their results are published in local newspapers
alongside those of the adult vote.
Integral to the success of Kids Voting is the close
association of actual political experience with formal
classroom learning. Member schools receive comprehensive
curriculum packages that combine classroom lessons with
targeted activities for all grades, K-12. The lesson plans
and activities are developed by leading civic education
experts across the country and reflect new developments in
cooperative and service learning techniques, performance
assessment, and technology. Along with the necessary
materials to implement a Kids Voting program, the curriculum
packages are provided free of charge to any interested
school. The curriculum is active, rich in content and skills
development, and sometimes fun. Importantly, the curriculum
models democratic practice at the classroom level, through
cooperative learning structures, group problem solving, and
active student-centered experiences. Depending on their ages
and stages, students engage in such citizenship-related
activities as role playing, holding classroom elections,
constructing policy options, solving policy problems, and
participating in formal debates.
Individual schools and teachers have latitude to expand
and enrich the curriculum with experiential efforts such as
field trips and guest panels of candidates invited into the
classroom. It is not just the kids who learn from such
interactions; one Wisconsin candidate concluded his remarks
to a class and was calmly asked by a third grader, "Can
you explain your position on abortion?" That's the most
important thing, says James van der Klok, president and CEO
of Kids Voting USA: "It's our ability to raise kids who
will be adults who look at issues critically and
analytically."(FN2).
BUILDING COMMUNITY WHILE BUILDING KIDS VOTING USAKids
Voting USA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit corporation
headquartered in Tempe, Arizona. It is supported entirely
through grants and contributions from public, nonprofit, and
private sector sources and is staffed primarily by
volunteers. Member organizations in each state are led by
statewide boards of civic and business leaders who involve
schools, local newspapers, parents, and community volunteers
to implement the program. The John S. and James L. Knight
Foundation is the organization's original funder; the
national organization and each of the state affiliates
receive support from a wide variety of sponsors. According
to the Kids Voting USA office, corporate sponsorship has
been a win-win process for both sponsors and kids. S. Martin
Taylor, vice president of Detroit Edison, summed up the
attitude of sponsors:.
(Supporting Kids Voting is) one of the few things that a
company can do in a community where, I daresay, there will
not be one negative view to come from this. Who is opposed
to the elective process that we have in this country? Who is
opposed to kids and parents becoming closer? Who is opposed
to kids learning the election process so that they can be
responsible adults? Who can be opposed to kids relating what
they are learning in school of the real world? It's one of
the best gifts to a community that a company can give.(FN3).
The program has received extensive national media
coverage in its few years of existence. Articles have
appeared in Parade Magazine (the Sunday paper supplement),
USA Today, Kids Today, both Parents and Parenting magazines,
and Family Fun (a Disney publication), among others. Kids
Voting has been featured on NBC's "Nightly News,"
"Today," and "NBA Inside Stuff"
television shows, as well as on CNN's "Inside
Politics" and "Court TV," CBS's "Up to
the Minute," and FOX TV's "Not Just News"
show for children. They have also received radio coverage
from CBS Radio Network, UPI Radio, BBC Broadcasting, the
Mutual Broadcasting System, and the Independent Broadcasters
Network.(FN4).
The growth of Kids Voting has been striking. By 1992,
Kids Voting USA included eleven states and involved 1.5
million students.(FN5) By 1994, participation doubled to
include twenty states and the District of Columbia,
involving 2.3 million students, one hundred thousand
teachers, three thousand schools, eight thousand voter
precincts, and fifty thousand volunteers. By 1996, it
doubled again, to forty states and D.C., 4.5 million
students, two hundred thousand teachers, six thousand
schools, about sixteen thousand voter precincts, and eighty
thousand volunteers. Kids Voting hopes to reach every
community in the country by the year 2000, going statewide
in all fifty states.
IMPACTS, INCLUDING SOME UNEXPECTED RESULTSThere is much
anecdotal evidence concerning positive impacts of Kids
Voting. According to one story, a skeptical newspaper
publisher in Boulder spent several hours conducting his own
exit polls one election day. After interviewing many
students about who and what they voted for, he ran up to a
Kids Voting volunteer exclaiming, "It works! It really
works! We need this for adults!"(FN6).
More systematic evaluation, including a study of a panel
of students who have gone through the entire K-12
curriculum, is under way.(FN7) Since Kids Voting went
nationwide in 1991, the program has been studied by scholars
around the country, among them Steven Chaffee of Stanford
University, Jack McLeod at the University of Wisconsin, and
Bruce D. Merrill of Arizona State University. Merrill's
research, which includes postelection surveys of teachers,
students, and parents conducted for Kids Voting since 1988,
has revealed a startling, unanticipated consequence: adult
turnout in areas having an active Kids Voting presence also
increases! "Since 1988 ... the results have been
astounding: Kids Voting USA indeed achieves its goals. It is
an effective system to energize democracy from the bottom
up--beginning with youth that reaches adults, too. Time and
again, statistics from the research have demonstrated ... a
level of increased communication among youth, educators, and
family and much more. Most of all, Kids Voting is found to
increase adult voter turnout by virtue of its participatory
element with students, a legacy of enhanced participatory
democracy which the organization helps ensure will
endure."(FN8).
In his 1994 postelection study, Merrill found that in
communities with Kids Voting programs, adult turnout
increased by an average of 3 percent (amounting to more than
eighty thousand adults). In Georgia and Washington state,
the increase was as high as 9 percent. The 1996 postelection
survey results (which sampled registered voters in five
cities: Phoenix; Buffalo; Salem, Oreg.; Wausau, Wis.; and
Greensboro, N.C.) showed 5-10 percent of the respondents
indicating the Kids Voting program as a factor in their
decision to vote. Nationwide, this means about six hundred
thousand adults were persuaded to vote by the Kids Voting
program.(FN9).
Research that includes responses from children revealed
that 75 percent reported watching broadcasts about elections
on television, 49 percent reported reading about the
election in newspapers, and 29 percent read about elections
in magazines. More important, 60-70 percent of the children
said they went home and asked their parents about the
election. McLeod's findings echoed Merrill's: "(Kids
Voting) has strong effects on election and civic knowledge
and in general voting participation."(FN10) Similarly,
Chaffee and colleagues found that Kids Voting serves as the
catalyst for political socialization: "Students exposed
to Kids Voting talked more at home about politics, and this
appeared to stimulate ... family communication, which in
turn is associated with increased levels of political
participation."(FN11).
KIDS VOTING AND THE FUTUREKids Voting is a successful
experiment, but it is not a panacea. Although there is more
to learn about the experiment's impacts, we know that civic
education cannot be limited to voting and to the decisions
made on election day. In addition, the program's leaders and
proponents are quick to point out that even though Kids
Voting is presently found in forty states, it is normally
limited to selected communities and schools within each
state.
Yet this experiment shows great promise. Kids Voting can
expand and have even greater impact through promotion and
development in many new communities (with increased
attention to building bottom-up community support and
connections) and more intensive evaluation. The organization
is currently looking at development of a CD-ROM for
interactive work at home and in school. This particular
innovation, as well as the broader learning package and
process, fits with what we know about socialization,
learning, and positive peer pressure. At a time when many
families and adults seem to lack the time or inclination to
provide civic education at home, schools and community
organizations can use Kids Voting to help fill a very
dangerous vacuum of civic knowledge and action.
Added material.
John Stuart Hall is professor of public affairs and
public service at Arizona State University in Phoenix. The
author of numerous books, articles, and research reports on
domestic policy and politics in the United States, he is a
member of the National Civic League board of directors.
Patricia M. Jones is a faculty associate in the School of
Public Affairs and the Center for Environmental Studies at
Arizona State University. She edits the Recycling Review, a
quarterly sponsored by the Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality.
FOOTNOTES1. Ryan, M. "When Kids Go to the Polls, So
Do Their Parents." Parade Magazine, Oct. 30, 1994, pp.
8-9.
2. Interview with James van der Klok, president and chief
executive officer of Kids Voting USA, Phoenix, Ariz., Nov.
5, 1997.
3. Information provided in Kids Voting promotional
package, supplied by Kids Voting USA Headquarters, 398 S.
Mill Ave. Suite 304, Tempe, AZ 85281; tel. (602) 921-3727,
fax (602) 921-4008.
4. Kids Voting promotional package.
5. Statistics on participation provided by Kids Voting
USA.
6. Kids Voting promotional package.
7. Van der Klok interview.
8. "Kids Voting USA: 1996 Post-Election
Research." Unpublished report for Kids Voting USA by B.
Merrill, Arizona State University, Tempe.
9. Kids Voting promotional package.
10. "Learning to Live in Democracy: The
Interdependence of Family, Schools, and Media." Report
by J. McLeod, Mass Communications Research Center,
University of Wisconsin, Apr. 1994.
11. Chaffee, S. H., Moon, Y., and McDevitt, M.
"Stimulation of Communication: Reconceptualizing the
Study of Political Socialization." Report by S. H.
Chaffee, Y. Moon, and M. McDevitt, for Communication Theory
and Methodology Division of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communications convention, Mar. 1995.
|