NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Statistical Analysis Report April 2001

What Democracy Means

to Ninth-Graders:

U.S. Results From the

International IEA Civic Education Study

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND IMPROVEMENT

NCES 2001–096
		

	



 

What Democracy Means to NinthGraders: U.S. Results From the

International IEA Civic Education Study

Stéphane Baldi

Marianne Perie

Dan Skidmore

Elizabeth Greenberg

American Institutes for Research

Carole Hahn, National Research Coordinator

Emory University

Dawn Nelson, Project Officer

National Center for Education Statistics


	 		
 	 !"#

		

		$ 
%	 	
U.S. Department of Education

Rod Paige

Secretary

National Center for Education Statistics

Gary W. Phillips

Acting Commissioner

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, and reporting data

related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and

report full and complete statistics on the condition of education in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized

analyses of the meaning and significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their

statistical systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries.

NCES activities are designed to address high priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, complete, and accurate

indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and high quality data to the U.S. Department of Education,

the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, practitioners, data users, and the general public.

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a variety of audiences.

You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating information effectively. If you have any comments or

suggestions about this or any other NCES product or report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to:

National Center for Education Statistics

Office of Educational Research and Improvement

U.S. Department of Education

1990 K Street NW

Washington, DC 20006–5574

April 2001

The NCES World Wide Web Home Page is: http://nces.ed.gov

The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/index.asp

Suggested Citation

Baldi, S., Perie, M., Skidmore, D., Greenberg, E., and Hahn, C. (2001). What Democracy Means to Ninth-Graders: U.S.

Results From the International IEA Civic Education Study (NCES 2001–096). U.S. Department of Education, National Center

for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

For ordering information on this report, write

U.S. Department of Education

ED Pubs

P.O. Box 1398

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

or call toll free 1–877–4ED–Pubs.

Content Contact

Dawn Nelson

(202) 502-7414
iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank all those who contributed to the design, writing,

analysis, and production of this report for their thoughtful critique, insightful

suggestions, and creativity.

At the American Institutes for Research, Lorie Twist and Jessica Saltz helped

with the production of tables and graphs, and spent numerous hours checking

their accuracy. Eugene Johnson, Tsze Chan, and Tao Jiang provided valuable

technical advice and expertise. Mark Kutner and Jay Moskowitz gave feedback

at various stages of the project and edited various drafts of the report. Janan

Musa was the creative mind responsible for the graphics and layout of the report.

Holly Baker and Phoebe Farag provided editorial support.

Several members of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

provided valuable advice throughout the project, particularly Valena Plisko and

Eugene Owen of the Early Childhood, International, and Crosscutting Studies

Division. In addition, Shelley Burns, from the same division, and Marilyn

McMillen, the Chief Statistician, provided valuable technical feedback on the

draft manuscript.

Members of the U.S. CivEd Steering Committee gave their time and expertise in

shaping the overall analyses and reviewing the draft manuscript. They include

Gordon Ambach, Council of Chief State School Officers; Patricia Avery,

University of Minnesota; Margaret Branson, Center for Civic Education; Gloria

Contreras, University of North Texas; Sheilah Mann, American Political Science

Association; Pat Nickell, University of Georgia; Richard Niemi, University of

Rochester; Valerie Pang, San Diego State University; Walter Parker, University

of Washington; and John Patrick, Indiana University. In addition, Judith TorneyPurta, the International CivEd Steering Committee Chair, from the University of

Maryland, provided her insight into various drafts of this report.

Finally, invited reviewers who kindly provided expert feedback included Ilona

Berkovits of the Elementary/Secondary and Libraries Studies Division and

Patricia Dabbs of the Assessment Division of NCES, Richard Murnane of the

Harvard Graduate School of Education, Terri Duggan of the Council for Basic

Education, and Patricia Avery of the University of Minnesota.

ON THE COVER: Kind permission to reproduce this artwork was granted by

the artist, Lisa McVicar, and the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs and

International Trade. The Department sponsored a children’s art exhibit called

Human Rights Through the Eyes of Our Youth. This prize-winning drawing was

created for the exhibit by Miss McVicar, a joint Canadian/American citizen,

when she was 11 years old.

v

COMMISSIONER’S STATEMENT

It has been almost 30 years since the International Association for the Evaluation

of Educational Achievement (IEA) conducted its first study of civic education in

nine countries. Much has changed in that time, including the formation of new

democratic governments in several countries. In addition, the world has become

more of a global and multicultural society. Therefore, 1999 was an opportune

time to conduct a second civic education study, referred to as CivEd. An

indication of the interest in such a study at this time was the number of countries

that participated—28 including the United States. The participation of the United

States reflects our historical and ongoing commitment to nurturing democracy

and citizenship at home and abroad. Among the other countries participating are

some of the other industrialized nations with large economies, such as the G-8

countries including Germany, Italy, Russia, and England (but not the United

Kingdom). The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) sponsored the

study in the United States and also contributed funding for the international

coordinating center activities.

It was a challenge to design an assessment of civic knowledge that was not

country-specific, but rather measured an understanding of the fundamental

concepts of democracy and citizenship. It was recognized that students acquire

their knowledge and attitudes on this subject not only in school but also from

influences outside the school. Experts in civic education, as well as authorities in

educational measurement, were involved in developing the study framework and

assessment instruments. Through a concerted effort by the countries to identify

items and then test them, the final assessment is relevant and fair to all.

However, civic education is a subject area where students’ achievement is

important, but not the sole focus. More than half the items were in the areas of

concepts, attitudes, and actions. Through these items, we can see how students

view their national identity, international relations, their society as a whole, and

the individual pieces making up that society. This is one of the major differences

between CivEd and another NCES study, the NAEP Civics study, which does not

address such issues in detail.

This report analyzes the U.S. results in depth, concentrating on the attitudes,

actions, and conceptual views of U.S. students, as well as the school and

classroom context of civic education. It provides only a brief overview of the

civic achievement of U.S. students compared with that of students in the other 27

countries. A subsequent report will cover these types of comparisons in more

detail. Other countries also are analyzing the information for their country and

will be releasing national reports.

The results for the U.S. students are enlightening, and it is interesting to note that

they performed well on the assessment. Although this report does not

recommend policies, it should be useful to education policymakers, researchers,

and the general public who are interested in the way civic education is taught in

our schools. This information can serve as a starting point for discussions about

the future civic education of U.S. students.

Gary W. Phillips

Acting Commissioner

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgments .................................................................................... iii

Commissioner’s Statement........................................................................v

List of Tables ............................................................................................ ix

List of Figures........................................................................................... xi

Executive Summary.................................................................................xv

Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................... 1

Overview of IEA and CivEd ....................................................................... 3

How CivEd differs from NAEP Civics ....................................................... 4

The CivEd framework ................................................................................. 5

The CivEd instruments................................................................................ 7

Description of the school and student samples............................................ 7

Reporting CivEd results .............................................................................. 7

Interpreting CivEd results............................................................................ 8

Organization of the report ........................................................................... 9

Chapter 2: The Civic Achievement of U.S. Students in

International Perspective............................................................................. 11

The civic achievement of U.S. students relative to students

in other countries ....................................................................................... 13

What students were asked to do on the CivEd assessment........................ 16

Examples of content items .................................................................. 16

Examples of skills items...................................................................... 19

Summary.................................................................................................... 21

Chapter 3: The School and Classroom Context of Civic Knowledge..... 23

The school context of civic education ....................................................... 25

The relationship between school factors and civic achievement............... 28

The classroom context of civic education ................................................. 30

Summary.................................................................................................... 35

Chapter 4: The Demographic, Socioeconomic, and

Out-of-School Context of Civic Knowledge............................................... 37

Demographic characteristics ..................................................................... 39

Family context........................................................................................... 41

Student use of time outside of classes ....................................................... 45

Participation in organized extracurricular activities............................ 45

Out-of-school activities....................................................................... 48

Nonschool activities related to academics........................................... 49

Summary.................................................................................................... 50
TABLE OF CONTENTS

viii

Page

Chapter 5: Concepts of Democracy, Citizenship, and Government....... 51

Concept of democracy............................................................................... 53

Rights of citizens................................................................................. 53

Negative influence............................................................................... 55

Concept of citizenship ............................................................................... 58

Importance of conventional citizenship .............................................. 58

Importance of social movement-related citizenship............................ 60

Concept of government ............................................................................. 62

Economy-related government responsibilities .................................... 63

Society-related government responsibilities ....................................... 65

Summary.................................................................................................... 67

Chapter 6: Attitudes of U.S. Students Toward National and

International Civic Issues ............................................................................ 69

Trust in government-related institutions.................................................... 71

Attitudes toward the nation and international relations............................. 73

National identity.................................................................................. 74

International relations.......................................................................... 75

Social cohesion and diversity .................................................................... 78

Support for women’s political rights................................................... 78

Positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights....................................... 80

Summary.................................................................................................... 82

Chapter 7: Current and Expected Activities Related to Politics ............ 83

Participation in discussions of national and international politics ............ 85

Media exposure to current civic issues...................................................... 88

Expected participatory political actions .................................................... 90

Summary.................................................................................................... 92

List of References.....................................................................................93

Appendix A: CivEd Framing Questions.............................................101

Appendix B: The CivEd Student Instrument.....................................107

Appendix C: Overview of CivEd Methods and Procedures .............111

Appendix D: Standard Errors for Tables...........................................121

Appendix E: Standard Errors for Figures .........................................145
ix

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1.1.— Countries participating in Phase 2 of CivEd ........................... 4

Table 3.1.— Percentage of U.S. schools with policies related to

civic education in ninth grade, by policy: 1999 ................... 26

Table 3.2.— Percentage of U.S. schools with a ninth grade participating

in various education programs, by program: 1999............... 26

Table 3.3.— U.S. principals’ reports on the number of class periods

per week that ninth-grade students are required to take

in various civic-related subjects: 1999................................. 27

Table 3.4.— Percentage of U.S. principals who agree or strongly agree

with various statements about how civic education

should be taught: 1999 ......................................................... 27

Table 3.5.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ reports on school activities

related to civic education: 1999 ........................................... 28

Table 3.6.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by school-level characteristics: 1999 ................................... 29

Table 3.7.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by instructional practices: 1999 ........................................... 31

Table 3.8.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

open classroom climate for discussion scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 35

Table 4.1.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by background demographics: 1999 .................................... 40

Table 4.2.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by sex and race/ethnicity: 1999............................................ 41

Table 4.3.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by home literacy: 1999......................................................... 42

Table 4.4.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by expected years of further education and

school absenteeism: 1999..................................................... 44

Table 4.5.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by family and home environment characteristics: 1999....... 44

Table 4.6.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by frequency of participation in organized extracurricular

activities: 1999 ..................................................................... 46
LIST OF TABLES

x

Page

Table 4.7.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students who reported ever

participating in various organized extracurricular activities,

by organization: 1999........................................................... 46

Table 4.8.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by whether they reported participating in various

organizations: 1999 .............................................................. 47

Table 4.9.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by frequency of time spent in various out-of-school

activities: 1999 ..................................................................... 48

Table 4.10.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic achievement scores,

by nonschool activities related to academics: 1999 ............. 49

Table 5.1.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

importance of conventional citizenship scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 60

Table 5.2.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

importance of social movement-related citizenship scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 62

Table 5.3.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

economy-related government responsibilities scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 64

Table 5.4.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

society-related government responsibilities scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 66

Table 6.1.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

trust in government-related institutions scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 73

Table 6.2.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

positive attitudes toward one’s country scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 75

Table 6.3.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

support for women’s political rights scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 80

Table 6.4.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 82

Table 7.1.— Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

expected participation in political activities scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999 ...................... 91
xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 1.1.— Framework for the development of the CivEd items...............6

Figure 2.1.— Relationship of the CivEd content and skills subscales

to the total civic knowledge scale ......................................... 13

Figure 2.2.— Average total civic knowledge achievement of ninth-grade

students, by nation: 1999 .................................................... 14

Figure 2.3.— Average civic knowledge achievement of ninth-grade

students, by subscale and nation: 1999................................ 15

Figure 2.4.— Example content item 1 ....................................................... 16

Figure 2.5.— Example content item 2 ....................................................... 17

Figure 2.6.— Example content item 3 ....................................................... 17

Figure 2.7.— Example content item 4 ....................................................... 18

Figure 2.8.— Example content item 5 ....................................................... 18

Figure 2.9.— Example skills item 1........................................................... 19

Figure 2.10.—Example skills item 2........................................................... 20

Figure 2.11.—Example skills item 3........................................................... 21

Figure 3.1.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that they

studied various topics over the previous year: 1999............. 32

Figure 3.2.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree that they have learned

various issues in school: 1999............................................. 33

Figure 3.3.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting doing

various activities when they study social studies: 1999........ 33

Figure 3.4.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various statements apply sometimes or often to

the climate in their classrooms: 1999 .................................. 34

Figure 5.1.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various citizen rights and freedoms are somewhat good or

very good for democracy: 1999........................................... 54

Figure 5.2.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various citizen rights and freedoms are somewhat good or

very good for democracy, by sex: 1999............................... 55

Figure 5.3.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various citizen rights and freedoms are somewhat good or

very good for democracy, by country of birth: 1999............ 56
LIST OF FIGURES

xii

Page

Figure 5.4.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various types of negative influence are somewhat bad or

very bad for democracy: 1999............................................. 56

Figure 5.5.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various types of negative influence are somewhat bad or

very bad for democracy, by sex: 1999................................. 57

Figure 5.6.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various types of negative influence are somewhat bad or

very bad for democracy, by country of birth: 1999.............. 58

Figure 5.7.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various civic behaviors are somewhat important or

very important for good citizenship: 1999........................... 59

Figure 5.8.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

participation in various social movement-related activities

is somewhat important or very important for

good citizenship: 1999........................................................ 61

Figure 5.9.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various economy-related actions probably or definitely

should be the government’s responsibility: 1999................. 63

Figure 5.10.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

various society-related actions probably or definitely

should be the government’s responsibility: 1999................. 65

Figure 6.1.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they trust various institutions most of the time

or always: 1999 .................................................................. 72

Figure 6.2.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements about

the United States: 1999 ....................................................... 74

Figure 6.3.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations: 1999........................................ 76

Figure 6.4.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations, by sex: 1999 ............................ 77

Figure 6.5.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations, by country of birth: 1999......... 77

Figure 6.6.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements about

women’s political rights: 1999............................................ 79
LIST OF FIGURES

xiii

Page

Figure 6.7.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they agree or strongly agree with various statements

about immigrants’ rights: 1999 ........................................... 81

Figure 7.1.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often have discussions about

national or international politics: 1999................................ 86

Figure 7.2.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often have discussions about

national or international politics, by sex: 1999 .................... 87

Figure 7.3.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often have discussions about national

or international politics, by country of birth: 1999............... 87

Figure 7.4.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often obtain news from

the newspaper, television, or radio: 1999 ............................ 88

Figure 7.5.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often obtain news from

the newspaper, television, or radio, by sex: 1999................. 89

Figure 7.6.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they sometimes or often obtain news from the newspaper,

television, or radio, by country of birth: 1999...................... 89

Figure 7.7.— Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting that

they probably or certainly expect to participate in

various political activities as adults: 1999 ........................... 90

xv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Civic Education Study (CivEd) is a two-phased study sponsored by the

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).

Phase 1, begun in 1994, was designed to collect extensive documentary evidence

and expert opinions describing the circumstances, content, and process of civic

education in 24 countries. Phase 2, the assessment phase of the study, conducted

in 1999 and analyzed in this report, was designed to assess the civic knowledge

of 14-year-old students across 28 countries. The assessment items in CivEd were

not designed to measure knowledge of a particular country’s government but

were developed instead to measure knowledge and understanding of key

principles that are universal across democracies. Another key component of the

Phase 2 study focused on measuring the attitudes of students toward civic issues.

Although the study was designed as an internationally comparative one, the data

collected allow individual countries to conduct in-depth, national-level

comparisons and analyses. These national-level analyses are particularly helpful

in furthering our understanding of civic knowledge and attitudes among

adolescents. The results from the national analyses are presented in this report to

inform education practitioners, policymakers, parents, and concerned citizens of

the status of civic education in the United States today.

The civic achievement of U.S. students in international perspective

The civic achievement of students in all 28 countries was measured by a total

civic knowledge scale composed of two subscales: a civic content subscale and a

civic skills subscale. Civic content refers to the content knowledge of civic

principles or pivotal ideas (e.g., the knowledge of what constitutes a democracy),

whereas civic skills refer to the interpretative skills needed to make sense of

civic-related information (e.g., the skills needed to interpret a newspaper article

or a political cartoon).

! U.S. ninth-graders scored significantly above the international average on the

total civic knowledge scale. Furthermore, in no other country did students

significantly outperform U.S. students.

! U.S. students’ average scores on the civic content subscale did not differ

significantly from the international mean. Students in six countries

performed better than U.S. students on this subscale.

! U.S. students performed significantly higher than the international mean on

the civic skills subscale and also performed significantly higher than students

in every other country participating in CivEd.

! Overall, the results indicate that ninth-grade U.S. students performed well

when compared with students in the other 27 participating countries.

The school and classroom context of civic knowledge

This section of the report examines the context in which civic education is

delivered in U.S. schools and the relationship between school and classroom

factors and civic achievement.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xvi

! In 1999, 70 percent of U.S. schools with a ninth grade reported having a

ninth-grade civic-related subject requirement.

! In 55 percent of U.S. schools, principals reported that ninth-grade students

are required to take 5 to 6 periods a week in civic-related subjects such as

social studies, history, or civics.

! Sixty-five percent of students reported studying social studies in school

almost every day. However, 12 percent of students reported never or hardly

ever studying social studies in school.

! The majority of U.S. ninth-graders typically spent less than 1 hour a week on

social studies homework.

! Students who studied social studies in school almost every day had higher

scores on all three civic achievement scales than students who studied social

studies once or twice a week or even less frequently.

! Students in low-poverty schools (with a low percentage of children eligible

for the free or reduced-price lunch program) outperformed students in highpoverty schools.

! Students in U.S. schools were more likely to study domestic civic issues than

international civic issues.

! U.S. students were more likely to report reading from a textbook or filling

out worksheets when studying social studies than engaging in activities such

as receiving visits from leaders or writing letters to give their opinion.

! Eighty-five percent of students reported being encouraged by teachers to

make up their own minds about issues, and about two-thirds reported being

encouraged by teachers to discuss political or social issues about which

people have different opinions.

The demographic, socioeconomic, and out-of-school context of civic

knowledge

This chapter examines the role of demographic, socioeconomic, and out-ofschool variables that other studies have shown are frequently related to the

educational achievement of U.S. students.

! White and multiracial students scored higher, on average, than black and

Hispanic students on the content and skills subscales and the total civic

knowledge scale. In addition, Asian students scored higher than black

students on all three civic achievement scales, and higher than Hispanic

students on the content subscale.

! Female students scored higher, on average, than male students on the skills

subscale, but there were no differences between males’ and females’ average

scores on the content subscale or the total civic knowledge scale.

! Performance on the CivEd assessment was positively related to the number

of books students reported having in their home, as well as to the receipt of a

daily newspaper.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xvii

! Students’ civic achievement was also positively related to their parents’

educational attainment.

! Students born in the United States demonstrated a higher civic knowledge,

on average, than foreign-born students.

! Students who had higher expectations for their own continued education also

did better on the CivEd assessment.

! Students who reported that they were not absent from school at all during the

month prior to the CivEd assessment scored higher on the civic assessment

than students who reported being absent 3 or more days during the month

prior to the assessment.

! Students who participated in meetings or activities sponsored by any type of

organization, even if they participated only a few times a month, had higher

civic knowledge than students who did not participate at all.

! Although participation in extracurricular activities sponsored by a school or

community organization was positively related to civic achievement, the

frequency of participation was not.

! On average, students who engaged in nonschool activities directly related to

academics did better on the CivEd assessment than their peers who did not.

Concepts of democracy, citizenship, and government

The analyses in the last three chapters focus on the results from the survey items.

This chapter examines ninth-grade U.S. students’ opinions on what constitutes

democracy and what defines good citizenship, as well as their concepts of the

responsibilities of our government.

! About 90 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students reported that it is good for

democracy when everyone has the right to express opinions freely.

! Approximately 80 percent of U.S. students reported that voting in every

election and showing respect for government leaders were two important

factors in being good citizens.

! Eighty-nine percent of ninth-grade U.S. students thought that it was

important for a good citizen to participate in activities to help people in the

community.

! Ninth-grade U.S. female students were more likely than their male peers to

report social movement-related activities, such as promoting human rights

and protecting the environment, as important.

! U.S. students reported average scores higher than the international mean on

the importance of conventional citizenship scale and the importance of social

movement-related scale, but lower than the international mean on the

economy-related government responsibilities scale.

! Eighty-four percent of ninth-graders said that the government should be

responsible for keeping prices under control.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xviii

! Fifty-nine percent of U.S. ninth-graders said that it was the responsibility of

the government to provide an adequate standard of living for the

unemployed.

! Asian and black U.S. ninth-graders were more likely than their white peers to

report that the government should be responsible for economy-related issues.

! Between 87 and 92 percent of U.S. ninth-graders said that the government

should be responsible for ensuring equal political opportunities for men and

women, providing free basic education and health care for all, guaranteeing

peace and order within the country, and providing an adequate standard of

living for old people.

Attitudes of U.S. students toward national and international civic

issues

CivEd probed the attitudes of students on many national and international civic

issues. This chapter addresses questions of students’ trust in government-related

institutions, their perceptions of how much citizens can influence government

decisions, and their support for the rights of immigrants and women.

! A majority of ninth-grade students reported that they trust local and national

government institutions in the United States. (In contrast, only 35 percent of

students reported trusting political parties.)

! Female ninth-graders were more likely to report that they trust governmentrelated institutions than their male counterparts.

! Ninety-two percent of U.S. ninth-graders reported that we should always be

alert and stop threats from other countries to the political independence of the

United States.

! Fifty-three percent of male U.S. ninth-graders agreed that we should stop

outsiders from influencing the United States’ traditions and cultures

compared with about 35 percent of females.

! Nine out of 10 students supported women’s political rights and agreed that

women should run for public office and have the same rights as men. A

greater proportion of female ninth-graders supported women’s rights than did

males.

! Hispanic, Asian, and multiracial ninth-graders reported having more positive

attitudes toward rights for immigrants than did their white peers.

! U.S. students reported average scores higher than the international mean on

both the support for women’s rights scale and the positive attitude toward

immigrants’ rights scale.

Current and expected activities related to politics

This last chapter examines U.S. ninth-graders’ reports of current activities related

to politics as well as their expected political actions as adults.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xix

! Ninth-grade U.S. students reported discussing political issues with teachers

and parents, but discussions of U.S. politics were more likely to occur than

discussions of international politics.

! Male ninth-grade students were more likely to report discussing international

political issues with people their own age than were their female

counterparts.

! Students who reported using newspapers as a source of political information

were more likely to read about domestic politics than to read about

international politics.

! Television was the primary source that ninth-grade U.S. students relied on to

obtain information about politics.

! Female and male students as well as U.S.-born and foreign-born students all

reported television as their primary source of political news and radio as their

least likely source.

! U.S. students’ average score on the expected participation and political

activities scale was higher than the international average.

! Female ninth-grade students were more likely than their male counterparts to

expect to be politically active as adults.

! Results indicated no differences in expected political participation by race or

country of birth.

! Students in households containing 100 or fewer books were less likely to

report expecting to participate in political life as adults than students in

households containing more than 200 books.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

3

ublic knowledge of government and civic life has long been considered

central to the endurance of the United States as a democratic republic.

Thomas Jefferson held that an uneducated citizenry was a contradiction in

terms. John F. Kennedy, recalling the old saying that the course of civilization is

a race between catastrophe and education, insisted that in a democracy such as

ours “we must make sure that education wins.”

Learning about citizenship and civic issues does not happen only in school, but is

also acquired in families and social groups and from the media, institutions, and

the wider culture. However, civic education is an indispensable part of educating

U.S. youths to be responsible and active citizens. Results of a recent Gallup Poll

indicate that the public considers preparing students to be responsible citizens to

be the most important goal of public schools, surpassing preparing youths to be

economically self-sufficient, promoting cultural unity, or improving social

conditions (Rose and Gallup, 2000).

A majority of schools in this country provide civic education throughout the

school years. An analysis of transcripts of high school graduates conducted by

the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) determined that in 1994, 78

percent of high school graduates had taken at least one semester of civics or

government (NCES, 1997). Furthermore, students acquire much in terms of civic

education through history lessons, other social studies courses, and the informal

curriculum of the school (Hahn, 1999). The purpose of the IEA Civic

Education Study (CivEd) was to assess U.S. students’ civic knowledge, skills,

concepts, attitudes, and actions in terms that could be compared with

comparable samples of students in 27 other countries.

Although the study was designed as an internationally comparative one, the data

collected allow individual countries to conduct in-depth, national-level

comparisons and analyses. These national-level analyses are particularly helpful

in furthering our understanding of civic knowledge and attitudes among

adolescents. The results from the national analyses are presented in this report to

inform education practitioners, policymakers, parents, and concerned citizens of

the status of civic education in the United States today.

Overview of IEA and CivEd

IEA was founded in 1959 for the purpose of conducting comparative studies

focusing on educational policies and practices in various countries and, as of

2000, consisted of 54 member countries. IEA conducted its first study of civic

education in 1971 (Torney, Oppenheim, and Farnen, 1975). This was the first

IEA study to place equal weight both on attitudinal measures and on measures of

knowledge. In 1993, the Standing Committee of IEA commissioned a proposal

for a possible second IEA study in the area of civic education. Changes in the

world since 1971 had brought urgency to understanding, first, how students view

and define their citizenship identity and, second, how their views are influenced

by the political, educational, and social contexts in countries that are democracies

or striving to become democracies.

The second Civic Education Study was approved by the IEA General Assembly

in 1994 as a two-phased study. The data collected during Phase 1 of the study

P
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

4

consisted of extensive documentary evidence and expert interviews describing

the circumstances, content, and process of civic education in 24 countries

(Torney-Purta, Schwille, and Amadeo, 1999). The Phase 1 study also

summarized what experts in each participating country believed that 14-year-olds

should know about a number of topics related to democratic institutions,

including elections, individual rights, national identity, political participation, and

respect for ethnic and political diversity (see Hahn, 1999; Hahn, Dilworth, and

Hughes, 1998; Hahn et al., 1998; and Hahn, Hughes, and Sen, 1998 for a

summary of Phase 1 results in the United States).

Fourteen-year-olds were chosen as the target population for two reasons. It is a

standard IEA population and the age group that was successfully sampled in

IEA’s first study of civic education. More important, in some countries, testing

an older group would have meant a substantial loss of students who had ended

their secondary education. For sampling purposes, countries were instructed to

select the grade in which most 14-year-olds were enrolled at the time of the

study.

Phase 2, the assessment phase of the study that is analyzed in this report, was

administered in 1999 to a nationally representative sample of 14-year-olds, their

respective teachers, and school administrators in 28 countries. The 28

participating countries included countries with a substantial tradition of

democratic government, some that have experienced recent transitions, Latin

American and Baltic countries, and a number of G-8 countries. CivEd provided

the United States with an opportunity to compare the civic knowledge of its

students with that of students across a wide range of countries. Table 1.1

provides the list of countries participating in Phase 2 of CivEd. (For further

background information on the study, see Torney-Purta et al., 2001.)

Table 1.1.—Countries participating in Phase 2 of CivEd

 Australia Finland Portugal

 Belgium (French) Germany Romania

 Bulgaria Greece Russian Federation

 Chile Hong Kong (SAR) Slovak Republic

 Colombia Hungary Slovenia

 Cyprus Italy Sweden

 Czech Republic Latvia Switzerland

 Denmark Lithuania United States

 England Norway

 Estonia Poland

SOURCE: Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., and Schulz, W., 2001. Citizenship and

Education in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen.

Amsterdam: The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).

How CivEd differs from NAEP Civics

In 1998, the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known

as the nation’s report card, assessed U.S. students’ civics achievement through

NAEP Civics. Several major differences between the NAEP Civics study and
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

5

CivEd prevent comparisons between the two. First and foremost, whereas NAEP

is designed to measure content related to civics and government in the United

States, CivEd measures a more global understanding of civic concepts. CivEd is

not limited to an assessment of civic knowledge and skills, but puts equal

importance on measures of student attitudes and experiences. Because there is

evidence that civic attitudes are related to civic participation (Damico, Damico,

and Conway, 1998; Miller and Kimmel, 1997; Wade and Saxe, 1996), CivEd can

address some questions regarding the role of schools in civic engagement that

cannot be examined through NAEP data.

There are several additional differences between the two studies. NAEP provides

a combination of multiple-choice and constructed-response (i.e., open-ended)

assessment questions. In contrast, all assessment items in CivEd are in the form

of multiple-choice questions. Also, the populations tested were different between

the studies: fourth-, eighth-, and twelfth-graders were assessed in NAEP

compared with ninth-graders in CivEd. Finally, results from CivEd allow

international comparisons across countries in both civic achievement and

attitudes; NAEP Civics results cannot be compared internationally.

The CivEd framework

The CivEd framework was established through an international consensus

process. Because of the international nature of the study, the goal was not to

identify a single best approach to civic education in a democracy. Rather, the

study was premised on a model that would invite the expression and analysis of

many points of view that significant actors and thinkers saw as relevant to civic

education in a democracy. As a result, the assessment items in CivEd were not

designed to measure knowledge of a particular country’s government but were

developed instead to measure knowledge and understanding of key principles

that are universal across democracies.

To reflect the assumption that within every political system are different and

often contrasting views of what constitutes good citizenship, the first step in the

two-phased study was to develop 18 framing questions designed to encourage

countries to reflect the rich diversity of ways in which important groups and

individuals think about civic education. The 18 framing questions were geared at

defining the universe of domains considered relevant to countries, while ensuring

that the participating countries would orient their work around similar topics.

(For a complete description of the 18 framing questions, see appendix A.)

Each country was asked to respond to each of the 18 framing questions in terms

of what its importance was to the country, whether its topic had been addressed

in the official curriculum goals of the country, what sort of public discussion or

controversy (if any) there had been relating to the topic of the question, what

organizations had taken a well-known interest in the question, and what sources

should be consulted. Each country’s expert panel was also invited to submit a

vote designating the most important framing questions. The responses and the

votes were used by the IEA International Steering Committee in reformulating

three international core domains that formed the basis for developing the study’s

instruments.
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

6

The first core international domain has to do with what 14-year-olds have learned

about the meaning of democracy in their national context. More specifically,

“What does democracy mean, and what are its associated institutions and

practices (including constitutions, rights, and obligations of citizens)?” The

second core domain focuses on describing a sense of national identity or national

loyalty among 14-year-olds and how it relates to their orientation to other

countries and to regional and international organizations. The third core

domain is concerned with what 14-year-olds have learned about issues of social

cohesion and social diversity.

From these three core domains, statements of what 14-year-old students might be

able to know and believe about the three domains were developed and used as the

basis for defining the types of items planned to be included in the instruments.

Five types of items were developed for the student questionnaire:

• Civic content items (Type 1) assessed knowledge of key civic principles and

pivotal ideas (e.g., key features of democracies) measured by multiple-choice

items.

• Civic skills items (Type 2) assessed skills in using civic-related knowledge

through multiple-choice items (e.g., understanding a brief political article or

a political cartoon).

• Survey items measured students’ concepts of democracy, citizenship, and

government (Type 3); attitudes toward civic issues (Type 4); and expected

political participation (Type 5).

Additional survey questions assessed students’ perceptions of the climate of the

classroom as well as other background variables.

Intersecting the five types of items with the three domains of the study produces

the matrix shown in figure 1.1, which served as the basis for the test and survey

design.

Figure 1.1.—Framework for the development of the CivEd items

Assessment Survey Domain Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5

I—Democracy

II—National identity and

 international relations

III—Social cohesion and diversity

Source: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

A little less than half of the final testing time was devoted to multiple-choice

cognitive items in the “assessment,” in contrast to the “survey,” which refers to

the items in the areas of concepts, attitudes, and actions.
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

7

The CivEd instruments

The final student questionnaire consisted of a total of 38 cognitive items: 25

civic content items (Type 1) and 13 civic skills items (Type 2). In addition, the

instrument included 52 concept items (Type 3), 70 attitude items (Type 4), and

24 action items (Type 5). As part of the questionnaire, students answered general

background questions that asked them to identify their sex, race/ethnicity, and

socioeconomic background and to supply information on civic-related subjects

studied, participation in student organizations, peer activities, and homework

habits. These background questions were given in separately timed sections.

(Further details on the development of the CivEd student instrument are given in

appendix B.)

In addition, a school questionnaire and a teacher questionnaire were

administered. The school questionnaire, completed by the principal, contained

questions designed to gather information on the school’s general environment,

such as size, length of school year, and characteristics of the student body. The

school questionnaire also asked questions designed to provide a picture of how

civic education is delivered through the school curriculum, and school-sponsored

activities, as well as the number of staff involved in teaching civic-related

subjects.

The teacher questionnaire asked respondents for background information (age,

sex, educational background, etc.) as well as questions about the importance of

civic education, the amount of time they spent teaching civic-related topics, and

the means of assessing students in civic-related courses. However, because the

organization of civic education and the role of civic education teachers in U.S.

schools differ from those of many other countries in the study, results from the

teacher questionnaire were not analyzed in the U.S. report.

Description of the school and student samples

In the United States, CivEd was administered to a representative sample of 2,811

students among 124 public and private schools at the beginning of ninth grade,

the grade in which most 14-year-olds were enrolled at the time of the assessment

(October 1999). The overall sample design was intended to approximate a selfweighting sample of students as much as possible, with each ninth-grade student

in the United States having an approximately equal probability of being selected

within the major school strata.

Thus, the results presented in this report are based on a representative sample of

students. Each selected school that participated in the study, and each student

assessed, represents a portion of the population of interest. As a result, after

adjustments for student and school non-responses, the findings presented are

representative of all ninth-graders in the nation.

Reporting CivEd results

Item response theory (IRT) methods were used to produce the scales presented in

this report. For the cognitive items, a one-parameter Rasch model was fitted to
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

8

the data. For the attitudinal items, the Generalized Partial Credit Model was

applied. (Appendix C provides further details on these IRT models.)

CivEd results are reported for three cognitive scales: a total civic knowledge

scale based on student responses to all 38 cognitive items, and two subscales—a

civic content subscale made up of the 25 Type 1 content items and a civic skills

subscale made up of the 13 Type 2 skills items. The international mean for these

scales was set at 100 with a standard deviation of 20. In addition, results are

presented for 10 attitudinal scales. The international mean for these attitudinal

scales was set at 10 with a standard deviation of 2. For consistency, all titles for

the scales come from the IEA International Release Report (Torney-Purta et al.,

2001).

Furthermore, to be consistent with results reported in the IEA International

Release Report (Torney-Purta et al., 2001), the analyses in the current report are

based on data that have not been imputed for missing responses. In effect, this

procedure is equivalent to substituting the sample mean for missing cases. As a

result of this non-imputation, percentage distributions of various subgroups may

differ across tables. Appendix C provides the list of variables for which 5

percent or more of responses were missing.

Interpreting CivEd results

The average scores and percentages presented in this report are estimates because

they are based on sampling rather than on testing an entire population. As such,

the results are subject to a measure of uncertainty (i.e., sampling error), reflected

in the standard errors of the estimates. Also reflected in the standard errors are

errors of measurement associated with the imprecision of the instruments. The

standard errors for the estimated scale scores and percentages provided

throughout this report are displayed in appendices D and E.

The differences between scale scores or percentages discussed in the following

chapters take into account the standard errors associated with the estimates. The

comparisons are based on statistical tests that consider both the magnitude of the

difference between the group average scores or percentages and the standard

errors of these statistics. Throughout this report, differences are defined as

significant only when they are significant from a statistical perspective. This

means that observed differences are unlikely to be due to chance factors

associated with sampling variability. Hence, the term “significant” does not

reflect any judgment about the absolute magnitude of differences. All

differences reported are statistically significant at the .05 level, with appropriate

adjustments for multiple comparisons. (Appendix C provides further information

on how to compute tests of significance and draw proper inferences from the

results.)

Furthermore, because all the scales presented in this report have identical means

and standard deviations (i.e., the international means and standard deviations),

results cannot be compared across scales in any meaningful way. For example,

one cannot compare the mean score on the trust in government-related

institutions scale with the mean score on the positive attitude toward one’s nation
CHAPTER 1—INTRODUCTION

9

scale and conclude that either is higher, since the scales have no common items.

Hence, such cross-scale comparisons are neither meaningful nor possible.

The reader also is cautioned against using the results in this report to make

simple causal inferences regarding subgroup differences (e.g., x causes what we

observe in y). The focus of this report is descriptive rather than explanatory, and

many of the relationships presented between variables do not reveal the

underlying causes of these relationships, which may be influenced by a number

of additional variables not included in the results. Differences in civic content

knowledge, skills, concepts, attitudes, or actions may reflect a range of

socioeconomic and educational factors not discussed in this report or measured

by the CivEd instruments. Hence all results discussed in this report should be

interpreted in light of this caveat.

Finally, because U.S. students were tested in October 1999, about one month

after the beginning of the school year, readers should use caution when

interpreting the results that examine relationships involving school- and

classroom-level factors. These relationships speak only to the brief time students

had spent in ninth grade at the time of testing.

Organization of the report

This report is organized in seven chapters. Following this introduction, chapter 2

presents a brief overview of the civic achievement of U.S. students on the

assessment component of the student instrument compared with that of students

in the other 27 participating countries. This brief international comparison

should be seen as providing context for the in-depth, national-level analyses that

follow.*

 Chapter 3 examines the school and classroom context of civic

knowledge, with particular emphasis on the status of civic education in schools

and what students learn in civic education. Chapter 4 presents results on the

demographic, socioeconomic, and out-of-school context of civic knowledge.

Chapters 5 through 7 analyze the survey component of the instruments, with

chapter 5 focusing on concepts of democracy, citizenship, and government;

chapter 6 examining the attitudes of U.S. students toward national and

international civic issues; and chapter 7 looking at the current and expected

activities of U.S. ninth-grade students related to politics.

 

*

 Comprehensive internationally comparative analyses are the focus of the IEA International Release Report (Torney-Purta et al., 2001) and a

forthcoming NCES report.

CHAPTER 2

THE CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT OF U.S. STUDENTS

IN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Key Points

U.S. ninth-graders scored significantly above the international

average on the total civic knowledge scale. Furthermore, in no

other country did students significantly outperform U.S. students.

U.S. ninth-graders scored significantly above the international

average on the civic skills subscale and did not score significantly

differently from the international average on the civic content

subscale.

The U.S. international standing was stronger in civic skills than in

civic content, with the performance of U.S. students on the civic

skills subscale higher than that of students in every other country

in the study.

CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

13

ow well are young people prepared to exercise the rights and

responsibilities of citizenship around the world? This is one of the key

questions CivEd was designed to answer. The CivEd assessment was

designed to measure both the knowledge and the skills that students are expected

to need in order to take part as informed citizens in the civic life of their country.

However, because the study is comparative in nature, the questions asked of the

students are not tied to the school curriculum of their respective country. Instead,

they cover the broad concepts of citizenship and government that are vital to the

proper functioning of democratic countries or emerging democracies. As such,

the results provide a glimpse of how well prepared students in different nations

are to function in the political world.

This chapter examines the performance of U.S. students in relationship to

students from other participating countries to provide context for the national

analyses presented in the following chapters. Because precise scores cannot be

determined with perfect accuracy, to fairly compare the United States with other

countries, nations have been grouped into broad bands according to whether

their performance was significantly higher than, not significantly different from,

or significantly lower than that of the United States.

The civic achievement of U.S. students relative to students in other

countries

What is the status of U.S. students in terms of general civic knowledge relative to

students in other participating countries? As discussed in chapter 1, the total

civic knowledge scale is made up of items on two subscales: a civic content

subscale and a civic skills subscale. Civic content refers to the content

knowledge of civic principles or pivotal ideas (e.g., the knowledge of what

constitutes a democracy), whereas civic skills refer to the interpretive and

thinking skills needed to make sense of civic-related information (e.g., the skills

needed to make sense of a newspaper article or a political cartoon). The

relationship of these two subscales to the total civic knowledge scale is

presented in figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1.—Relationship of the CivEd content and skills

subscales to the total civic knowledge scale

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

H

Civic Content

Subscale

(25 items)

Civic Skills

Subscale

(13 items)

Total Civic Knowledge

Scale (38 Items)
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

14

Figure 2.2 presents the results for the performance of students across all 38

assessment items—the total civic knowledge scale. On the total civic knowledge

scale, ninth-grade U.S. students performed significantly above the international

mean. Furthermore, in no other country did students significantly outperform

U.S. students. Students in 11 countries performed similarly to U.S. students

(Poland, Finland, Cyprus, Greece, Hong Kong (SAR), Italy, Slovak Republic,

Norway, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Australia), and students in 16 countries

(Slovenia, Denmark, Germany, Russian Federation, England, Sweden,

Switzerland, Bulgaria, Portugal, French Belgium, Estonia, Lithuania, Romania,

Latvia, Chile, and Colombia) scored significantly below students in the United

States.

Figure 2.2.—Average total civic knowledge achievement of

ninth-grade students, by nation: 1999

Nation Average

(none)

Poland 111

Finland 109

Cyprus 108

Greece 108

Hong Kong (SAR) 107

United States 106

Italy 105

Slovak Republic 105

Norway 103

Czech Republic 103

Hungary 102

Australia 102

Slovenia 101

Denmark 100

Germany 100

Russian Federation 100

England 99

Sweden 99

Switzerland 98

Bulgaria 98

Portugal 96

Belgium (French) 95

Estonia 94

Lithuania 94

Romania 92

Latvia 92

Chile 88

Colombia 86

International average 100

Average is significantly higher than the U.S. average.

Average does not differ significantly from the U.S. average.

Average is significantly lower than the U.S. average.

SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

15

Ninth-grade students’ performance on the two subscales making up the total civic

knowledge scale is presented in figure 2.3. The mean of U.S. students’ average

scores did not differ significantly from the international mean on the civic

content subscale. Students in six countries performed better than U.S. students

(Poland, Greece, Finland, Cyprus, Hong Kong (SAR), and Slovak Republic). In

10 countries, students did not perform significantly differently from U.S. students

(Italy, Norway, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Russian Federation,

Figure 2.3.—Average civic knowledge achievement of ninthgrade students, by subscale and nation: 1999

Civic content Civic skills

Nation Average Nation Average

Poland 112 (none)

Greece 109 United States 114

Finland 108 Finland 110

Cyprus 108 Cyprus 108

Hong Kong (SAR) 108 Australia 107

Slovak Republic 107 Poland 106

Italy 105 Greece 105

Norway 103 Italy 105

Czech Republic 103 England 105

United States 102 Hong Kong (SAR) 104

Hungary 102 Slovak Republic 103

Slovenia 102 Norway 103

Russian Federation 102 Czech Republic 102

Denmark 100 Sweden 102

Australia 99 Switzerland 102

Germany 99 Hungary 101

Bulgaria 99 Germany 101

Sweden 97 Denmark 100

Portugal 97 Slovenia 99

England 96 Russian Federation 96

Switzerland 96 Belgium (French) 96

Belgium (French) 94 Bulgaria 95

Estonia 94 Portugal 95

Lithuania 94 Estonia 95

Romania 93 Lithuania 93

Latvia 92 Latvia 92

Chile 89 Romania 90

Colombia 89 Chile 88

Colombia 84

International average 100 International average 100

Average is significantly higher than the U.S. average.

Average does not differ significantly from the U.S. average.

Average is significantly lower than the U.S. average.

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

16

Denmark, Australia, Germany, and Bulgaria), and students in 11 countries

(Sweden, Portugal, England, Switzerland, French Belgium, Estonia, Lithuania,

Romania, Latvia, Chile, and Colombia) performed below U.S. students.

Ninth-grade U.S. students scored significantly higher than the international mean

on the civic skills subscale and also performed significantly higher than students

in every other country participating in the study. This finding indicates that U.S.

students are able to use analytical skills to process information related to political

and social issues.

Overall, these results indicate that U.S. students performed well when compared

with students in the other 27 participating countries, exceeding the international

average on the total civic knowledge scale and the civic skills subscale and

performing at the international average on the civic content subscale.

What students were asked to do on the CivEd assessment

As discussed in chapter 1, the CivEd assessment was made up of two types of

items: items measuring students’ factual knowledge of civic content (Type 1),

and items assessing students’ skills in using civic-related knowledge (Type 2).

The final assessment consisted of 25 content items and 13 skills items. Below

are examples of both types of items, along with the percentage of students

responding correctly to each example item, both in the United States and across

all participating countries.

Examples of content items

The item shown in figure 2.4 is a relatively easy item requiring students to

identify the function of having more than one political party in a democracy.

Seventy-two percent of U.S. ninth-graders responded to this item correctly. The

international average on this item was 75 percent correct.

Figure 2.4.—Example content item 1

In democratic countries, what is the function of having more than

one political party?

 A To represent different opinions in the national legislature

(Congress)

 B To limit political corruption

 C To prevent political demonstrations

 D To encourage economic competition

Correct answer: A U.S. average: 72% International average: 75%

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

17

The item in figure 2.5, another fairly easy item, especially in the United States,

requires students to identify the purpose of organizations in a democracy.

Seventy-eight percent of U.S. ninth-graders responded to this item correctly. The

international average for this item was 69 percent correct.*

Figure 2.5.—Example content item 2

In a democratic country, having many organizations for people to

join is important because this provides...

 A A group to defend members who are arrested.

 B Many sources of taxes for the government.

 C Opportunities to express different points of view.

 D A way for the government to tell people about new laws.

Correct answer: C U.S. average: 78% International average: 69%

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

The item presented in figure 2.6 asks students to demonstrate an understanding of

what constitutes discrimination in employment. Eighty percent of U.S. ninthgraders responded correctly to this item. The international average was 50

percent correct. Although internationally this is one of the hardest items, for U.S.

students it was an easy one that allowed them to demonstrate their greater

familiarity with and understanding of discriminatory practices than students in

other countries.

Figure 2.6.—Example content item 3

A woman who has a young child is interviewed for a job at a travel

agency. Which of the following is an example of discrimination? She

does not get the job because...

 A She has no previous experience.

 B She is a mother.

 C She speaks only one language.

 D She demands a high salary.

Correct answer: B U.S. average: 80% International average: 50%

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

 

*

 This and the following statements related to the relative ease or difficulty of items in the U.S. compared with the international mean are based on

the size of the U.S. and international standard errors for the 5 public release items published in the IEA International Release Report (Torney-Purta

et al., 2001). These standard errors range from 1.4 to 1.7 for the U. S. average, and from 0.3 to 0.4 for the international average, suggesting that

they are quite stable. Tests of significance were computed using the average of the 5 standard errors.
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

18

Figure 2.7 presents an item that asks students to demonstrate an understanding of

the role of mass media in a democracy. In the United States, 59 percent of

students responded correctly to this item. Internationally, 57 percent of students

answered this item correctly.

Figure 2.7.—Example content item 4

Which of the following is most likely to happen if a large publisher

buys many of the smaller newspapers in a country?

 A Government censorship of the news is more likely.

 B There will be less diversity of opinions presented.

 C The price of the country’s newspapers will be lowered.

 D The amount of advertising in the newspapers will be reduced.

Correct answer: B U.S. average: 59% International average: 57%

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

The item presented in figure 2.8 requires students to identify what makes a

government non-democratic. Fifty-three percent of U.S. students responded

correctly on this item. The international average on this item was also 53 percent

correct.

Figure 2.8.—Example content item 5

Which of the following is most likely to cause a government to be

called non-democratic?

 A People are not allowed to criticize the government.

 B The political parties criticize each other often.

 C People must pay very high taxes.

 D Every citizen has the right to a job.

Correct answer: A U.S. average: 53% International average: 53%

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

19

Examples of skills items

The item shown in figure 2.9 is an example of a skills item using stimulus

material based on a mock political advertisement. Students are expected to

identify which party is most likely to have issued this advertisement. Eightythree percent of U.S. students answered this item correctly. The international

average on this item was 65 percent.

Figure 2.9.—Example skills item 1

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

We citizens have had enough!

A vote for the Silver Party means a vote for higher taxes.

It means an end to economic growth and a waste of our nation’s

resources.

Vote instead for economic growth and free enterprise.

Vote for more money left in everyone’s wallet!

Let’s not waste another 4 years! VOTE FOR THE GOLD PARTY.

This is a political advertisement that has probably been issued by ...

 A The Silver Party.

 B A party or group running against the Silver Party.

 C A group which tries to be sure elections are fair.

 D The Silver Party and the Gold Party together.

Correct answer: B U.S. average: 83% International average: 65%
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

20

The item shown in figure 2.10 is an example of a skills item based on a political

cartoon. It asks students to identify the message of the cartoon about history

books. Seventy-nine percent of U.S. students answered this item correctly. The

international average on this item was 57 percent. Hence, although this was a

relatively hard item internationally, it was much easier for U.S. students.

Figure 2.10.—Example skills item 2

 SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

HISTORY

ERASER

What is the message or main point of this cartoon? History

textbooks...

 A are sometimes changed to avoid mentioning problematic

events from the past.

 B for children must be shorter than books written for adults.

 C are full of information that is not interesting.

 D should be written using a computer and not a pencil.

Correct answer: A U.S. average: 79% International average: 57%
CHAPTER 2—INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT

21

The item presented in figure 2.11 is an example of a skills item asking students to

identify the difference between fact and opinion, a needed skill when attempting

to analyze political speeches and debates. Sixty-nine percent of U.S. students

answered this item correctly. The international average was 49 percent correct.

Figure 2.11.—Example skills item 3

Three of these statements are opinions and one is a fact. Which of

the following is a FACT?

 A People with very low incomes should not pay any taxes.

 B In many countries rich people pay higher taxes than poor people.

 C It is fair that some citizens pay higher taxes than others.

 D Donations to charity are the best way to reduce differences

between rich and poor.

Correct answer: B U.S. average: 69% International average: 49%

SOURCE: IEA Civic Education Study, Standard Population of 14-Year-Olds Tested in 1999.

Summary

This chapter examined the performance of U.S. students in relationship to the

performance of the students from the other 27 participating countries. Results

were presented for a total civic knowledge scale and two subscales: a civic content

subscale and a civic skills subscale. Overall, U.S. ninth-graders scored above the

international average on the total civic knowledge scale. Furthermore, in no other

country did students significantly outperform U.S. students.

U.S. students’ average scores on the civic content subscale did not differ

significantly from the international mean. Students in six countries performed

significantly better than U.S. students on this subscale. On the civic skills

subscale, U.S. students scored significantly higher than students in any other

participating country. Overall, these results indicate that ninth-grade U.S. students

performed well when compared with students in the other 27 participating

countries.

CHAPTER 3

THE SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

OF CIVIC KNOWLEDGE

Key Points

In 55 percent of U.S. schools, principals reported that ninth-grade

students are required to take five to six periods a week in civicrelated subjects such as social studies, history, or civics.

The majority of U.S. ninth-graders study social studies on almost

a daily basis, although they typically reported spending less than

1 hour a week on social studies homework.

Students who reported studying social studies in school almost

every day have higher civic achievement scores than students

who reported studying social studies once or twice a week or

even less frequently.

Students in U.S. schools were more likely to report studying

domestic civic issues than international civic issues.

In civic-related subjects, U.S. students reported being more likely

to read from a textbook or to fill out worksheets than to receive

visits from leaders or to write letters to give their opinions.

Eighty-five percent of students reported being encouraged by

teachers to make up their own minds about issues.

CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

25

here is no widely agreed upon curriculum for civic education in the United

States. This is reflected by the fact that civic education in school takes

place across a wide range of courses, such as social studies, civics, history,

government, global studies, and geography. Furthermore, in several school

districts across the country, there is no requirement that students take a civics or

government course during their school years. Additionally, little is known about

the school and classroom context in which civic education happens in the United

States or the status of civic education as an explicit goal for schools. Despite

much research documenting a relationship between school and classroom

characteristics and mathematics and science achievement (Arnold and Kaufman,

1992; Chaney, Burgdoff, and Atash, 1997; Raudenbush and Bryk, 1986),

comparatively little is known about the relationship between such school and

classroom characteristics and civic knowledge.

This chapter examines the context in which civic education is delivered in U.S.

schools and the relationship between school and classroom factors and civic

achievement. The first section provides descriptive information on the school

environment in which civic education occurs, answering such questions as how

often do U.S. ninth-grade students study civic-related subjects and what are

principals’ views on how civic education should be taught. In the United States,

civic-related subjects were defined as one of the following: civics, citizenship,

government, problems in democracy, law, political science, political behavior,

U.S. history, state history, social studies, economics, world history, geography,

global studies, anthropology, psychology, sociology, and other social studies.

The second section examines the relationship between various school-level

characteristics and U.S. ninth-graders’ civic achievement. The third and last

section presents data on various characteristics of the classroom context,

addressing issues of what students learn in civic-related subjects, the classroom

climate under which they learn, and the teaching methods through which they

learn.

The school context of civic education

Several studies have found that the context in which civic education occurs in

schools is related to students’ civic knowledge, political attitudes, and political

participation (Ehman and Gillespie, 1974; Hepburn, 1983; Niemi and Junn, 1998;

Patrick and Hoge, 1991). A number of authors reported that a democratic school

environment is necessary for developing democratic ideals in students. For

example, Ehman and Gillespie (1974) argued that the underlying characteristics

of schools make a difference in the attitudes of students toward political

participation. Students are more likely to develop civic skills and positive

political attitudes in schools where they have a voice in how the school is run

(Metzger and Barr, 1978).

Democratic political attitudes are further enhanced in students through

participation in extracurricular activities, especially those related to civic

education (Hepburn, 1983; Patrick and Hoge, 1991). Student involvement in

civic-related activities is positively related to the development of high levels of

political efficacy and involvement in civic activities in contexts other than the

school. A few studies found that community service and other civic-related

programs in schools can have a positive impact on students, including citizen

T
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

26

efficacy and civic understanding (Battistoni, 2000; Hepburn, 2000; Marks, 1994;

Newmann and Rutter, 1986; Torney-Purta, Hahn, and Amadeo, 2001; Wade and

Saxe, 1996).

Table 3.1 presents data on two school characteristics related to the context of

civic education. Seventy percent of U.S. schools offering a ninth grade have a

ninth-grade civic-related subject requirement. Additionally, 81 percent of

schools participate in a special program or project related to civic education.

Table 3.1.—Percentage of U.S. schools with policies related to

civic education in ninth grade, by policy: 1999

Percentage

Require civic-related subject 70.0

Participate in program(s) related to civic education 81.3

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 3.2 presents the percentage of schools participating in each of the 16

programs related to civic education asked about in the school questionnaire.

Close to half of all U.S. schools have service clubs and conflict-resolution or

peer-mediation programs. In addition, about one-third of schools offer

Girls/Boys State or Junior Statesmen, character or values education, and stock

market game programs. In contrast, 10 percent of schools or fewer have a Model

United Nations program or a We the People competition.

Table 3.2.—Percentage of U.S. schools with a ninth grade

participating in various civic education programs,

by program: 1999

Percentage

Service clubs 48.6

Conflict-resolution or peer-mediation program 48.4

Girls/Boys State, Junior Statesmen 39.3

Character or values education program 37.7

Stock market game 36.6

Mock trial competitions 25.1

Project Citizen or other service learning or community service program 24.0

Close Up, Presidential Classroom, or other program that takes students

 to Washington, D.C. 20.4

Program in which students work in state legislature 20.3

History Day 18.5

Debate team or program 18.4

Kids Voting USA or other mock election program 18.2

Junior Achievement 12.0

Model United Nations 8.2

We the People competition 1.4

Other civic education programs or service organizations 15.1

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

27

Principals’ reports on the number of class periods that students are required to

take in various civic-related subjects at grade 9 and how civic education should

be delivered are presented in tables 3.3 and 3.4.

Table 3.3.—U.S. principals’ reports on the number of class

periods per week that ninth-grade students are

required to take in various civic-related subjects*:

1999

Percentage

Less than one period 19.6

One to two periods 10.5

Three to four periods 14.9

Five to six periods 55.0

* Civic-related subjects include social studies, civics, citizenship, history, law, and economics.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 3.4.—Percentage of U.S. principals who agree or

strongly agree with various statements about how

civic education should be taught: 1999

Percentage

Integrated into subjects related to human and social sciences 95.3

Integrated into all subjects taught at school 78.5

Taught as a specific subject 64.0

Extracurricular activity 27.0

NOTE: Multiple responses allowed.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

In 55 percent of U.S. schools, principals reported that ninth-grade students were

required to take five to six periods a week in various civic-related subjects.

However, in 20 percent of schools, principals also reported that ninth-grade

students were required to take less than one period a week in civic-related

subjects. These findings are consistent with a recent analysis of high school

students’ transcripts that indicated that 17 percent of ninth-graders take a course

specifically in civics or government. Another 65 percent of students take such a

course in grades 10 through 12 (Niemi and Smith, in press).

Ninety-five percent of principals agreed that civic education should be integrated

into subjects related to human and social sciences, and 78 percent agreed that

civic education should be integrated into all subjects. About two-thirds agreed

that civic education should be taught as a specific subject (64 percent). About

one-third (27 percent) of principals agreed that civic education should be taught

as an extracurricular activity.

Ninth-grade U.S. students’ reports on activities related to civic education in

school are presented in table 3.5. Sixty-five percent of students reported studying

social studies in school almost every day. However, 12 percent of students

reported never or hardly ever studying social studies in school. Similarly, there
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

28

is variation in the time that students spend on social studies homework in a week.

Thirty-six percent of students reported spending less than one hour a week on

social studies homework. When combined with students who were not assigned

social studies homework and those who reported not doing their homework, this

percentage increases to 60 percent. This is contrasted with 5 percent of students

who reported doing more than 5 hours of social studies homework a week.

Overall, these results indicate that about 65 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students

study social studies on almost a daily basis, and 60 percent reported that they

spend less than one hour a week on social studies homework.

Table 3.5.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ reports on school

activities related to civic education: 1999

Percentage

Time spent studying social studies in school

Never or hardly ever 12.0

Once or twice a month 6.7

Once or twice a week 16.7

Almost every day 64.6

Time spent weekly on social studies homework

Not assigned 17.7

Does not do it 6.4

Less than 1 hour 35.8

1 to 2 hours 25.7

3 to 4 hours 9.8

5 hours or more 4.7

Time spent writing long social studies answers

Never 8.4

Once or twice a year 11.6

Once or twice a month 38.1

At least once a week 41.9

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Students’ reports on how often they write long answers to questions on tests or

assignments involving social studies are consistent with the variation nationwide

in the teaching of social studies and civic education. Although 42 percent of

students reported writing long answers at least once a week, 8 percent reported

never, and an additional 12 percent reported once or twice a year.

The relationship between school factors and civic achievement

Past research has documented the role of such school characteristics as school

size or sector on the achievement of students, especially in the area of

mathematics and science (Lee, Croninger, and Smith, 1997). However, much

less is known about the role of these school-level characteristics on civic

achievement. Metzger and Barr (1978) reported that an inverse relationship

exists between school size and the level of student political activity. In his

review of research on U.S. high schools, Ehman (1980) stated that small schools

foster political efficacy and reduce student alienation. Hepburn (1983) reported

that small schools tend to generate more positive political attitudes by providing
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

29

greater opportunity for student participation in extracurricular activities and

school governance. This section examines the relationship between school-level

characteristics and students’ civic knowledge.

Table 3.6 presents the civic achievement of ninth-grade U.S. students by various

school-level characteristics. In interpreting these results, the reader is reminded

again to use caution. Because U.S. students were tested in October 1999, about

one month after the beginning of the school year, the relationships presented here

speak only to the brief time students had spent in ninth grade at the time of

testing.

Table 3.6.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by school-level

characteristics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Total 100.0 106.5 101.9 113.6

Civic-related subject required

Yes 59.2 108.2 103.6 114.9

No 40.8 104.0 99.4 111.9

School participation in programs

related to civic education

Yes 88.8 105.9 101.3 113.3

No 11.2 103.8 100.0 110.2

School type

Public 93.6 106.1 101.6 113.1

Private 6.4 109.9 104.7 118.9

School size

500 or fewer 13.1 101.3 97.6 108.2

501–1,000 20.6 110.7 105.8 117.2

1,001–1,500 21.3 109.2 104.7 115.2

1,501–2,000 25.2 109.0 104.2 115.2

More than 2,000 19.8 104.5 99.4 113.1

Percent of students eligible for

free lunch

1st quartile (0–13) 31.1 111.8 106.6 119.0

2nd quartile (14–25) 30.8 110.7 106.0 116.5

3rd quartile (26–48) 17.4 100.8 96.1 110.2

4th quartile (49–100) 20.7 95.5 92.2 103.0

Class size

20 or fewer 15.8 102.8 97.9 112.1

21 to 25 37.1 109.6 105.1 115.6

26 to 29 27.7 106.8 102.2 113.5

More than 29 19.4 102.2 97.9 109.8

NOTE: The percentages reported here differ from those in table 3.1 because they are based on

student-level data rather than school-level data. Percentages may not add to 100 because of

rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

30

Students in schools with a low percentage of children eligible for the free or

reduced-price school lunch program (first and second quartiles) outperformed

students in schools with a high percentage of children eligible for this program

(third and fourth quartiles) on both the total civic knowledge scale and the civic

content subscale. On the civic skills subscale, students in schools with the

highest percentage of children eligible for the free or reduced-price school lunch

program (fourth quartile) scored lower than their peers in the two quartiles with

the lowest percentage of eligible children (first and second quartiles). Similarly,

NAEP Civics (NCES, 1999) found that at grades 8 and 12, students who were

eligible for the free or reduced-price school lunch programs had lower average

civic scale scores than students who were not eligible. Other school-level factors

presented in table 3.6 appear to have no significant relationship with civic

achievement.

The next table, table 3.7, examines the relationship between civic achievement

and various instructional variables. Students who studied social studies in school

almost every day had higher scores on all three civic achievement scales than

students who studied social studies once or twice a week. Furthermore, students

who were assigned homework but did not do it scored significantly lower than all

other students, except those spending 5 hours or more a week on homework, on

the skills and content subscales and the total civic knowledge scale. The results

also indicate that students who had been asked to write long answers to questions

on tests or assignments that involved social studies once or twice a month or even

more frequently performed better than students who were never asked to write

long answers.

The classroom context of civic education

This section turns to the classroom to understand what is taught in civic-related

subjects to ninth-grade U.S. students and how it is taught. In considering the role

of the classroom, research has underscored how open classroom climates in

which students feel comfortable expressing their opinions in class discussions are

associated with positive political attitudes, including high levels of political

efficacy and low levels of political alienation (Angell, 1991; Ehman, 1980; Hahn,

1998). Classrooms are important, not just in terms of their climate, but also in

terms of classroom practices. Teachers’ approach to teaching civic-related

subjects is of crucial importance in shaping students’ attitudes toward civic issues

and their understanding of civic issues (Hahn, 1996a; Niemi and Junn, 1998;

Parker and Kaltsounis, 1986; Thornton, 1991).

Figure 3.1 presents ninth-grade U.S. students’ reports on the topics they had

studied over the previous year. Ninth-grade students in U.S. schools were more

likely to report studying domestic civic issues than international civic issues.

Among domestic topics, students reported studying the U.S. Constitution
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

31

Table 3.7.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by instructional practices:

1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Time spent studying social studies

in school

 Never or hardly ever 12.0 103.1 98.6 111.4

 Once or twice a month 6.6 99.7 96.0 105.4

 Once or twice a week 16.7 102.5 98.6 109.5

 Almost every day 64.7 109.8 104.8 117.1

Time spent each week on social

studies homework

 Not assigned 17.6 105.4 100.5 113.7

 Does not do it 6.4 95.0 92.1 101.8

 Less than 1 hour 35.9 109.3 104.6 116.3

 1 to 2 hours 25.8 107.2 102.4 114.4

 3 to 4 hours 9.7 111.7 106.9 117.6

 5 hours or more 4.7 104.0 99.4 111.8

Time spent writing long answers to

social studies questions

 Never 8.4 97.7 94.0 106.0

 Once or twice a year 11.6 102.9 98.1 111.5

 Once or twice a month 38.1 110.6 105.8 116.8

 At least once a week 42.0 107.0 102.4 114.6

Time spent each day on homework

 Not assigned 6.6 95.9 92.6 103.5

 Does not do it 5.2 97.1 93.9 103.8

 1/2 hour or less 16.4 102.7 98.4 110.0

 1 hour 28.6 106.7 101.9 114.3

 More than 1 hour 43.2 111.9 106.8 119.0

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,

Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

(79 percent), how laws are made (77 percent), and Congress (75 percent), with

fewer students reporting that they studied the judicial and executive branches.

This is not surprising in light of students’ having been tested in October. Many

students would have studied these topics in eighth-grade U.S. history courses,

and they are often the first topics covered in ninth-grade civics courses (Hahn,

1999; Hahn et al., 1998). Reports from NAEP 1988 and NAEP 1998 also noted

that students reported studying the Constitution and Congress more than the

president and cabinet, courts, and state and local government (Niemi and Junn,

1998; NCES, 1999). Moreover, in those two assessments, students were also

least likely to report studying other countries, governments, and international

organizations.
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

32

Figure 3.1.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they studied various topics over the previous

year: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

When asked about their perceptions of what they had learned in school (figure

3.2), students were significantly more likely to agree that they had learned about

cooperating in groups of students and understanding people with different ideas

than about being a patriotic and loyal citizen, the importance of voting,

contributing to solving community problems, protecting the environment, or

being concerned about events in other countries.

What students do when studying social studies is reported in figure 3.3. Students

were more likely to report reading from textbooks and filling out worksheets than

any other instructional activities when studying social studies. Students were

least likely to report that they received visits from leaders (31 percent) or wrote

letters to give their opinion (27 percent).

43.2

48.7

65.6

67.7

69.9

71.3

75.4

76.6

79.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

International

organizations

Other countries'

governments

President and the cabinet

State and local

government

Court system

Political parties, etc.

Congress

How laws are made

U.S. Constitution

Percentage
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

33

Figure 3.2.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree that they have

learned various issues in school: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 3.3.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

doing various activities when they study social

studies: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

26.8

30.6

39.7

44.9

60.5

70.9

73.3

74.7

77.0

77.4

87.7

88.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Write letters to give their opinion

Receive visits from leaders

Role play, mock trials, etc.

Debate and discuss

Read extra material

Discuss television/videos

Memorize reading material

Discuss current events

Write reports

Watch television/videos

Fill out worksheets

Read from textbook

Percentage

67.7

72.8

72.9

75.4

76.5

88.6

91.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

To be a patriotic and

loyal citizen

The importance of voting

To contribute to solving

community problems

To be concerned for

events in other countries

To protect the

environment

To understand people

with different ideas

To cooperate in groups of

students

Percentage
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

34

Ninth-grade U.S. students’ perception of their classroom climate was measured

by a six-item scale. These items are presented in figure 3.4. The majority of

students answered that they thought that each statement applied sometimes or

often to the climate in their classroom. More students reported being encouraged

to make up their own minds about issues than any of the other five statements

applied to their classrooms. Overall, 85 percent of students reported being

encouraged to make up their own minds about issues, and about two-thirds

reported being encouraged by teachers to discuss political or social issues about

which people have different opinions.

Table 3.8 shows U.S. students’ classroom climate score by selected student

background characteristics. This score is computed through an item-responsetheory (IRT) model combining students’ responses to the six items making up the

open classroom climate for discussion scale (see appendix C for further details on

IRT models). This scale has a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 2. U.S.

students’ report on open classroom climate for discussion is significantly higher

than the international mean for all 28 countries. Furthermore, ninth-grade U.S.

female students reported a more positive perception of classroom climate for

open discussion than did their male counterparts. However, there were no

differences in reported perceptions of classroom climate by either country of

birth or race/ethnicity. Finally, students in households with 10 or fewer books

had lower perceptions of their classroom climate than students in households

with 11 or more books.

Figure 3.4.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various statements apply sometimes or often

to the climate in their classrooms: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

68.7

73.1

78.0

79.3

79.3

85.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Teachers encourage us to

discuss political or social issues

about which people have

different opinions

Students feel free to disagree

openly with their teachers about

political and social issues during

class

Students feel free to express

opinions in class even when their

opinions are different from most

of the other students

Teachers present several sides

of an issue when explaining it in

class

Teachers respect our opinions

and encourage us to express

them during class

Students are encouraged to

make up their own minds about

issues

Percentage
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

35

Table 3.8.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

open classroom climate for discussion scale, by

selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.5

Sex

 Male 48.2 10.3

 Female 51.8 10.8

Race/ethnicity

 White 65.1 10.6

 Black 11.9 10.2

 Hispanic 13.2 10.2

 Asian 4.0 10.4

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.1 10.6

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.7 10.5

 Foreign-born 10.3 10.3

Number of books in the home

 0–10 7.9 9.6

 11–50 20.9 10.5

 51–100 22.1 10.6

 101–200 20.2 10.5

 More than 200 28.8 10.8

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than

the international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Summary

This chapter examined the context of civic education in U.S. schools as well as

the relationship between school and classroom factors and civic achievement.

The majority of ninth-grade students reported studying social studies on almost a

daily basis, although they typically spent less than one hour a week on social

studies homework.

Several school-level variables showed a significant relationship with civic

achievement, including the percentage of children eligible for the free or

reduced-price lunch program (negative relationship), the frequency of studying

social studies in school, and the frequency of doing social studies homework

(both positive relationships).

U.S. students reported being more likely to study domestic civic issues than

international civic issues, and more likely to read from a textbook or to fill out

worksheets than to receive visits from leaders or to write letters to give their

opinion.
CHAPTER 3—SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

36

Finally, in terms of the climate in their classrooms, students reported a more open

classroom climate for discussion in the United States when compared with the

international mean. More students reported that they were encouraged to make

up their own minds about issues than students who reported being encouraged by

teachers to discuss political or social issues about which people have different

opinions, or students who reported feeling free to disagree openly with their

teachers about political and social issues during class.
CHAPTER 4

THE DEMOGRAPHIC, SOCIOECONOMIC,

AND OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT OF

CIVIC KNOWLEDGE

Key Points

The results support recent findings from the 1998 NAEP Civics

assessment indicating that sex differences in civic achievement

have either disappeared or shifted in favor of females.

Students who have high expectations for their own educational

attainment did better on the CivEd assessment than their peers

with comparatively low expectations.

As in many other studies, the student’s home literacy background,

such as parents’ education and the number of books in the home,

is related to his or her achievement.

Students who actively participated in school and community

organizations had higher civic achievement than students who

never participated.

Participation in extracurricular activities sponsored by a school or

community organization had a positive relationship with civic

achievement, but the frequency of participation did not.

Watching television 5 or more hours a day and spending time in

the evening outside of home with one’s peers almost daily are

both negatively related to civic achievement.

CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

39

very student arrives at school with characteristics that influence the way

she or he reacts to a particular school setting. These characteristics

include the demographic groups to which the student belongs, the family

environment in which the student is raised, and the ways the student spends his

or her time when not in school or at home. Policymakers and educators often

assert that although what goes on in schools is important, other influences are

equally important, or even more important, in determining a child’s academic

success.

This chapter examines out-of-school characteristics that other studies have shown

are frequently related to educational opportunities and, ultimately, to student

achievement. The chapter is divided into three sections. The first section

explores the relationship between various demographic characteristics, including

sex, race/ethnicity, country of birth, mobility, and region of the country, and

CivEd achievement. The second section examines the family context for civic

achievement, reporting on the relationships between civic achievement and the

number of books in the home, receipt of a daily newspaper, parents’ education,

students’ expected educational attainment, student absences from school, number

of parents living in the home, language spoken in the home, and family size. The

final section of the chapter looks at the relationship between civic achievement

and how students spend their time when not in class, including time spent

participating in various school and community organizations, time spent outside

of school doing things not related to academics, and time spent outside of school

engaged in activities related to academics.

Demographic characteristics

Past research has shown that there is frequently a strong association between

certain demographic characteristics and student academic achievement. Two

demographic characteristics that have been associated with lower levels of

academic performance among U.S. students include being a member of a

minority group and being born in a country other than the United States. For

example, the 1988 and 1998 NAEP Civics assessments found an achievement

gap between black or Hispanic and white students, with white students scoring

higher (NCES, 1999; Niemi and Junn, 1998).

Table 4.1 shows the relationship between various student demographic

characteristics and student performance on the CivEd assessment. Minority

group status, country of birth, and school mobility are all significantly related to

student achievement on this assessment.

White and multiracial students scored higher, on average, than black and

Hispanic students on the content and skills subscales and on the total civic

knowledge scale. In addition, Asian students scored higher than black students

on all three civic achievement scales, and higher than Hispanic students on the

civic content subscale. Students born in the United States did better, on average,

than foreign-born students on both subscales and the total civic knowledge scale.

Students who did not change schools as a result of moving during the two years

prior to the CivEd assessment also scored higher on average than students who

changed schools during the two years prior to the assessment on both subscales

and the total civic knowledge scale.

E
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

40

Table 4.1.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by background

demographics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Sex

 Male 49.0 105.6 101.7 111.1

 Female 51.0 107.5 102.3 116.3

Race/ethnicity

 White 63.4 111.6 106.5 118.4

 Black 12.8 92.7 89.8 100.2

 Hispanic 13.7 97.1 92.9 106.0

 Asian 3.9 109.4 104.5 116.2

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial 3.5 109.1 104.4 115.5

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.5 107.6 102.9 114.8

 Foreign-born 10.5 97.9 94.4 104.8

Region

 Northeast 23.2 109.7 105.7 114.5

 Southeast 20.3 102.7 98.3 110.7

 Central 26.2 109.3 104.5 115.8

 West 30.4 104.2 99.2 113.1

Frequency of changing

schools in past 2 years as

a result of moving

 Never 77.7 108.8 104.0 116.2

 Once 12.1 102.5 98.3 109.7

 Twice or more 10.1 99.4 96.1 104.8

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

The sex of the student is also associated with academic achievement in some

subjects. However, the relationship between sex and performance in civic

education is somewhat ambiguous. Historically, males have scored higher than

females on assessments of civic achievement. In the 1971 IEA civic education

study, U.S. males outperformed U.S. females (Torney, Oppenheim, and Farnen,

1975). In the 1988 NAEP Civics study, Anderson et al. (1990) found that males

in grades 8 and 12 were more likely than females to reach the higher levels of

proficiency. However, females scored higher than males on the items that

required students to read and interpret text material (Niemi and Junn, 1998).

When NAEP last assessed civics achievement in 1998, females in grades 8 and

12 had higher overall average scores than males (NCES, 1999).

On the CivEd assessment, females scored higher on average than males on the

skills subscale, but there were no differences between males’ and females’

average scores on the content subscale or the total civic knowledge scale. Thus,
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

41

the results from this study support the findings of recent NAEP Civics

assessments and indicate that sex differences in civic achievement have either

disappeared or shifted in favor of females on items measuring skills of analysis

and interpretation.

Table 4.2 looks at students’ scores by their sex for race/ethnicity categories.

Within racial groups, there were no differences in achievement based on sex.

However, for males and females, there were differences based on their

race/ethnicity. On all three civic achievement scales, male white students had

higher average scores than male Hispanic or male black students, and female

white students had higher average scores than female Hispanic or female black

students.

Table 4.2.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by sex and race/ethnicity:

1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Males

 White 30.7 111.2 106.7 116.4

 Black 6.1 90.1 87.7 96.7

 Hispanic 6.7 95.6 92.3 102.0

 Asian *** *** *** ***

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial *** *** *** ***

Female

 White 32.7 112.0 106.4 120.4

 Black 6.7 95.2 91.8 103.6

 Hispanic 7.0 98.7 93.7 110.0

 Asian *** *** *** ***

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial *** *** *** ***

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Family context

Multiple studies have shown a relationship between student academic

achievement and home and family characteristics, including the availability of

educational resources in the home, parents’ educational attainment, the number

of parents in the home, the language spoken in the home, and the educational

expectations that parents communicate to their children. In particular, other

researchers have found that students who had college educated parents, two

parents living at home, a variety of reading materials at home, and only English

spoken at home tended to have higher civics achievement than students from

homes without those characteristics (Anderson et al., 1990). Similarly, in the

1998 NAEP Civics, levels of parental education correlated with students’
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

42

performance for eighth- and twelfth-graders (NCES, 1999). However, it is likely

that rather than direct influences on student achievement, the home and family

characteristics discussed in this section are proxies for the factors that actually

influence student academic performance. For example, rather than parents’

educational attainment directly influencing student achievement, parents with

higher education levels may be more likely to interact with their children in ways

that improve their academic performance. Parents with higher education levels

may also be more likely to have the means to choose where they live on the basis

of the quality of the schools.

Table 4.3 shows the relationship between home literacy and performance on the

CivEd assessment. Performance on the CivEd assessment was positively related

to the number of books students reported having in their home, as well as to the

receipt of a daily newspaper, two frequently used measures that serve as proxy

for socioeconomic status. On the content and skill subscales, as well as on the

total civic knowledge scale, students who reported having 200 or more books in

their home had higher average scores than students who reported having 100 or

fewer books in their home. Conversely, students who reported having 10 or

fewer books in their home did worse on average on the content and skills

subscales and the total scale than students who reported having 11 or more books

in their home. Students whose parents received a daily newspaper also scored

higher on average on the content and skill subscales and the total scale than

students whose parents did not receive a daily newspaper at home.

Table 4.3.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by home literacy: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Number of books in the home

 0–10 8.6 90.7 88.0 97.4

 11–50 21.6 99.0 94.6 108.3

 51–100 22.2 104.9 100.2 113.2

 101–200 19.6 111.5 106.3 118.6

 More than 200 28.0 115.3 110.5 120.1

Receives a daily newspaper

 Yes 58.0 109.7 104.8 116.3

 No 42.0 102.5 98.3 110.3

Parents’ highest level of education

 Elementary or less 4.7 91.0 88.2 98.1

 Some high school 6.1 94.5 90.2 105.1

 Finished high school 19.6 101.4 97.0 109.9

 Some vocational/technical education 7.8 107.4 102.2 116.1

 Some college 27.0 108.9 104.0 116.3

 Completed a bachelor’s degree 34.9 118.7 113.4 123.1

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

43

Students’ civic achievement was also related to their parents’ educational

attainment. Students who had at least one parent who finished high school had

higher average scores on the content and skill subscales and the total civic

knowledge scale than students whose parents stopped their schooling at the end

of elementary school; students who had at least one parent who completed a

bachelor’s degree at a college or university had higher average scores on the

content subscale and the total civic knowledge scale than students who did not

have at least one parent who was a college graduate.

Students who had higher expectations for their own continued education also did

better on the CivEd assessment (table 4.4). Students who expected to complete

at least an additional seven or more years of school (that is, students who

expected to finish college) had higher average scores on the content and skills

subscales and the total civic knowledge scale than students who expected to

complete fewer than an additional seven years of schooling (that is, students who

expected to end their schooling before completing high school or at the

completion of high school). This finding is consistent with results from the 1988

NAEP assessment; students who planned to attend college had higher civics

achievement than students who did not aspire to college (Niemi and Junn, 1998).

School absentee rate is often used as a proxy for educational commitment.

Students who are more concerned about doing well in school will often make an

effort to come to school when they are feeling slightly ill or have other demands

on their time. Similarly, parents who are concerned about their children’s

education may make more of an effort to encourage their children to attend

school. As shown in table 4.4, students who reported that they were not absent

from school at all during the month prior to the CivEd assessment scored higher,

on average, on the content and skills subscales and the total civic knowledge

scale than students who reported being absent three or more days during the

month prior to the assessment.

Other family and home environment characteristics that showed a relationship to

student performance on the CivEd assessment include the number of parents a

student lived with, the number of people living in a student’s home, and the

language spoken in a student’s home (table 4.5). Students who lived with two

parents had higher average scores on all three civic achievement scales than

students who lived with only one parent or no parents. Students who had more

than six people living in their home had lower average scores on the content and

skills subscales and the total civic knowledge scale than students who had three,

four, or five people living in their home. Students who always spoke English at

home had higher average scores on all three scales than students who sometimes

spoke English at home.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

44

Table 4.4.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by expected years of further

education and school absenteeism: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Expected years of

further education

 0–2 3.1 89.0 88.0 92.1

 3–4 13.2 91.3 88.2 99.4

 5–6 16.2 98.5 94.3 107.9

 7–8 43.1 110.5 105.4 118.1

 9–10 14.4 117.0 111.6 122.0

 More than 11 10.0 113.2 108.4 118.2

Number of days absent

from school last month

 0 54.6 109.2 104.4 116.2

 1–2 30.4 107.3 102.5 115.0

 3–4 8.5 100.5 97.0 107.1

 5–9 3.7 100.0 96.2 106.1

 More than 10 2.7 93.2 89.9 101.5

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 4.5.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by family and home

environment characteristics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Number of parents in the

home

 Two parents 75.9 109.2 104.3 116.5

 One parent 21.6 99.3 95.8 106.0

 No parents 2.4 96.1 92.8 103.3

Total number of people in

the home

 1 or 2 4.0 102.5 98.8 109.3

 3 15.8 107.5 103.0 113.7

 4 34.2 108.7 103.9 116.0

 5 25.4 107.2 102.8 114.1

 6 10.8 105.8 100.4 115.2

 More than 6 9.8 99.4 95.6 106.1

Frequency of English

spoken in the home

 Never *** *** *** ***

 Sometimes 7.3 96.2 93.2 103.1

 Always or almost always 91.4 108.0 103.2 115.1

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

45

Student use of time outside of classes

Various studies have shown a relationship between the way students spend their

time when they are not in academic classes and their civic knowledge and beliefs.

The 1996 National Household Education Survey found that students who

regularly participated in community service demonstrated higher levels of civic

knowledge than students who did not regularly participate in these types of

activities (Niemi and Chapman, 1998). Wade and Saxe (1996) found that when

community-service experiences accompany a systematic study of relevant issues,

students become more aware and active citizens as adults. One of the reasons

high schools in the United States emphasize extracurricular activities is that

school administrators believe that participating in a rich associational life in high

school will prepare students to become active citizens later in life (Hahn,

Dilworth, and Hughes, 1998).

Many studies of student participation in extracurricular activities have focused on

average grades or other general measures of academic achievement rather than

on specifically civic-related courses. For example, Cooper et al. (1999)

administered questionnaires to 424 students and their parents and obtained the

students’ grades from their schools. They found that participation in

extracurricular activities offered through the school fostered positive

identification with the school and was positively associated with students’ levels

of academic achievement as measured by their grades. They also found a

positive relationship between after-school activities that are directly related to

achievement, such as doing homework, and students’ average grades.

Researchers have also found that at-risk students who participate in

extracurricular activities are less likely to drop out of school before high school

graduation than other at-risk students (Mahoney and Cairns, 1997). However,

activities that displace schoolwork (such as television watching) or replace

school identities with other identities (such as being a paid employee) were

negatively related to academic achievement.

The negative relationship between hours spent viewing television and academic

achievement has been found in multiple studies, including those based on NAEP

data (Clarke and Kurtz-Costes, 1997; Fetler, 1984; Ridley-Johnson, Cooper, and

Chance, 1983). Cooper et al.’s (1999) findings of a negative relationship

between paid employment and academic achievement are contradicted by some

other studies. Steinberg et al. (1988) suggested that employment might have a

positive effect on academic achievement up to a threshold, at which point it

begins to interfere with time for schoolwork and negatively influences student

achievement.

Participation in organized extracurricular activities

Students were asked whether they had ever participated in any of a list of

organized extracurricular activities. Tables 4.6, 4.7, and 4.8 show the

relationship between students’ participation in organized extracurricular activities

and their performance on the CivEd assessment. Students who participated in

meetings or activities sponsored by any type of organization, even if they

participated only a few times a month, scored higher on the content and skills

subscales and the total civic knowledge scale than students who did not
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

46

participate at all. However, the frequency of students’ participation was not

related to their civic achievement level as measured by the CivEd assessment.

Students who participated at least weekly did not score any higher than students

who participated only a few times each month. This finding indicates that any

participation in extracurricular activities sponsored by a school or community

organization is related to civic achievement, not the frequency with which

students participate.

Table 4.6.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by frequency of participation

in organized extracurricular activities: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Never or almost never 17.0 98.6 95.1 105.7

A few times each month 22.4 108.0 103.2 114.9

Several days a week 30.7 109.2 104.4 116.2

Almost every day 29.8 109.2 104.1 116.9

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 4.7.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students who

reported ever participating in various organized

extracurricular activities, by organization: 1999

Percentage

Student council or student government 33.0

Youth organization affiliated with a political party or union 10.1

School newspaper 20.8

Environmental organization 24.1

United Nations or UNESCO club 2.1

Student exchange or school partnership program 11.7

Human rights organization 5.9

Group conducting voluntary activities to help the community 50.0

Charity collecting money for a social cause 39.9

Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts 39.3

Cultural organization based on ethnicity 9.1

Computer club 15.9

Art, music, or drama organization 61.5

Sports organization or team 80.6

Organization sponsored by a religious group 44.7

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

47

Table 4.8.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by whether they reported

participating in various organizations: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Student council or student government

 Yes 33.0 111.8 106.9 118.1

 No 67.0 104.8 100.2 112.4

School newspaper

 Yes 20.8 110.5 105.6 117.4

 No 79.2 106.4 101.8 113.7

Environmental organization

 Yes 24.1 108.3 103.5 115.9

 No 75.9 106.8 102.2 114.0

Group conducting voluntary activities to

help the community

 Yes 50.0 110.9 105.8 118.0

 No 50.0 103.6 99.2 111.1

Charity collecting money for a social

cause

 Yes 39.9 109.7 104.6 117.6

 No 60.1 105.6 101.2 112.4

Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts

 Yes 39.3 110.9 106.0 117.4

 No 60.7 104.8 100.2 112.7

Art, music, or drama organization

 Yes 61.5 109.5 104.6 116.6

 No 38.5 103.6 99.2 111.0

Sports organization or team

 Yes 80.6 108.5 103.7 115.6

 No 19.4 101.5 97.3 109.1

Organization sponsored by a religious

group

 Yes 44.7 112.4 107.1 119.7

 No 55.3 103.2 99.0 110.5

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

The CivEd questionnaire did not ask students whether activities were sponsored

by the school or another organization. However, students who participated in

one activity that presumably was sponsored by a school, student council or

student government, scored higher on the content and skills subscales and the

total civic knowledge scale than students who did not. Students who participated

in the four activities with the highest levels of participation—sports, arts,

community volunteer work, and religious organizations—also scored higher on

all three civic achievement scales than students who did not. Results were mixed

for participation in other types of organizations. The percentage of ninth-grade

students who reported participating in voluntary activities to help the

community—50 percent—was the same percentage of twelfth-graders who had

reported such experiences in the 1998 NAEP (NCES, 1999).
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

48

Out-of-school activities

Table 4.9 shows the relationship between “hanging out” with friends, television

viewing, and civic achievement. There is no relationship between the frequency

of time students spent after school talking or hanging out with friends and their

civic achievement. However, students who spent time during the evening with

their friends outside their home almost every day did worse on all three civic

achievement scales than students who spent several days a week, or only a few

times each month, with friends outside their home. On the content subscale and

the total civic knowledge scale, students who spent time during the evening

almost every day with friends outside their home also did worse than students

who never or almost never spent time with friends in the evening outside their

home. However, there was no difference between these two groups on the skills

subscale.

Table 4.9.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by frequency of time spent in

various out-of-school activities: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Time spent after school talking

or “hanging out” with friends

 Never or almost never 8.2 103.4 99.1 110.6

 A few times each month 10.9 107.8 102.9 114.8

 Several days a week 25.4 108.8 104.0 115.4

 Almost every day 55.5 106.4 101.8 113.9

Time spent outside the home

with friends in the evening

 Never or almost never 9.2 106.1 101.9 112.0

 A few times each month 19.9 111.3 106.3 117.9

 Several days a week 41.7 110.0 104.9 117.0

 Almost every day 29.2 99.8 95.9 108.1

Time spent watching television

or videos on school days

 No time 5.8 108.7 104.5 114.5

 Less than 1 hour 20.9 111.3 106.0 118.4

 1–2 hours 38.2 107.7 103.0 115.2

 3–5 hours 23.1 106.7 102.1 113.5

 More than 5 hours 12.0 96.5 92.9 104.1

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Frequent television viewing was negatively related to civic achievement.

Students who reported watching more than 5 hours of television a day scored

lower on the content and skills subscales and the total civic knowledge scale than

students who watched fewer hours of television or no television each day.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

49

Nonschool activities related to academics

Table 4.10 shows the relationship between student participation in various

nonschool activities directly related to academics and civic achievement. These

nonschool activities were using a computer at home for schoolwork, doing

homework, and discussing topics studied in school with someone at home. On

average, students who engaged in nonschool activities directly related to

academics did better on the CivEd assessment than nonparticipating students.

Students who reported using a computer at home for schoolwork once a month or

more did better on both subscales and the total civic knowledge scale than

students who did not have a computer at home to use for schoolwork or who had

a computer at home but never or hardly ever used it. Students who did over an

hour of homework a day did better on average on all three achievement scales

than students who did one-half hour or less of homework a day. Finally, there

was no relationship between frequency of discussion of school-related topics

with someone at home and civic achievement.

Table 4.10.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average civic

achievement scores, by nonschool activities

related to academics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Frequency of computer use at home

for schoolwork

 No computer in the home 16.1 99.0 95.2 107.1

 Never or hardly ever 11.4 97.9 93.7 106.6

 Once or twice a month 21.2 107.3 101.6 116.7

 Once or twice a week 26.3 111.9 107.2 117.9

 Almost every day 25.1 111.3 106.8 116.5

Time spent on homework each day

 Not assigned 6.6 95.9 92.6 103.5

 Does not do homework 5.2 97.1 93.9 103.8

 1/2 hour or less 16.4 102.7 98.4 110.0

 1 hour 28.6 106.7 101.9 114.3

 More than 1 hour 43.2 111.9 106.8 119.0

Frequency of discussing things

studied in school with someone at

home

 Never or hardly ever 22.9 102.8 98.6 110.5

 Once or twice a month 14.6 104.4 99.4 113.6

 Once or twice a week 30.4 110.0 105.1 116.6

 Almost every day 32.1 108.6 104.1 115.1

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 4—OUT-OF-SCHOOL CONTEXT

50

Summary

This chapter examined the role of demographic, socioeconomic, and out-ofschool variables related to educational achievement of U.S. students. Female

ninth-graders scored higher, on average, than male ninth-graders on the skills

subscale, but there were no differences between males’ and females’ average

scores on the content subscale or the total civic knowledge scale. White and

multiracial students in the United States scored higher, on average, than black

and Hispanic students on the content and skills subscales and the total civic

knowledge scale. In addition, Asian students scored higher than blacks on all

three civic achievement scales, and higher than Hispanic students on the content

subscale. Students born in the United States demonstrated a higher civic

knowledge, on average, than foreign-born students.

The socioeconomic variables also demonstrated some association with students’

performance on the CivEd assessment. Performance was positively related to the

number of books that students reported having in their home, as well as to the

receipt of a daily newspaper. Students’ civic achievement was also positively

related to their parents’ educational attainment. Students who had higher

expectations for their own continued education also did better on the CivEd

assessment.

Students who reported that they were not absent from school at all during the

month prior to the CivEd assessment scored higher, on average, on the civic

assessment than students who reported being absent 3 or more days during the

month prior to the assessment. Students who lived with two parents had higher

average scores on all three civic achievement scales than students who lived with

only one parent or no parents.

Students who engaged in nonschool activities directly related to academics did

better on the CivEd assessment than their peers who did not, and frequent

television viewing was negatively related to civic achievement.

Finally, participation in activities both sponsored by and held outside of school

was associated with CivEd achievement. Students who participated in meetings

or activities sponsored by any type of organization, even if they participated only

a few times a month, had higher civic knowledge than students who did not

participate at all. In addition, students who engaged in nonschool activities

directly related to academics did better on the CivEd assessment than their peers

who did not.
CHAPTER 5

CONCEPTS OF DEMOCRACY,

CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

Key Points

According to ninth-grade U.S. students, voting in every election

and showing respect for government leaders are two important

factors in being good citizens.

U.S. ninth-graders are aware of the importance of social

movement-related citizenship and are particularly concerned with

activities to help people in the community.

U.S. ninth-graders had average scores higher than the

international mean on both the importance of conventional

citizenship and the importance of social movement-related

citizenship scales.

Over half of all U.S. ninth-graders believe that the government

should be responsible for economy-related issues, such as

keeping prices under control, guaranteeing jobs for everyone who

wants one, and providing an adequate standard of living for the

unemployed.

Asian and black students are particularly sensitive to the

government’s responsibility for ensuring equality through

economy-related issues.

Most U.S. ninth-graders think the government should be

responsible for society-related issues, including ensuring equal

political opportunities for men and women, providing free basic

education and health care for all, guaranteeing peace and order

within the country, and providing an adequate standard of living

for old people.

CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

53

ivic education is more than teaching factual knowledge of key laws,

governing bodies, and historical documents. It is also about developing

students’ attitudes toward their government, their concept of rights and

responsibilities, and the meaning of democracy in their country. In a

democratic society, such as the United States, it is important to understand how

students view and define citizenship and how their views are influenced by their

educational and social context. A central goal of civic education is to prepare

students to participate in the political processes of the nation by influencing,

evaluating, responding to, and implementing civic decisions (Angell, 1991;

Hahn, 1999; Patrick and Hoge, 1991; Hahn, Dilworth, and Hughes, 1998). An

understanding of students’ attitudes toward citizenship and government will help

educators, parents, and policymakers prepare young people for future citizenship.

Research on U.S. students’ conception of democracy and citizenship has shown

that today’s students are “fundamentally loyal and supportive—but not rabidly

patriotic” (Branson, 1988, p. 7). In previous studies, U.S. students were found to

have a favorable attitude toward the Constitution, the U.S. system of government,

and the nation (Hahn, 1999; Hahn et al., 1998; Patrick and Hoge, 1991). Branson

(1985) explains that even when U.S. students have hostile feelings toward the

way the government is run, they continue to view the system as a whole in a

positive light.

Up to this point in the report, the focus has been on examining students’ civic

achievement. Starting with this chapter, the remainder of the report presents the

results from the survey items. This chapter focuses on concepts of democracy,

citizenship, and government. Ninth-grade students’ opinions on what constitutes

democracy and defines good citizenship, as well as their concepts of the

responsibilities of our government, are as important as their knowledge of civic

education.

Concept of democracy

In the 1971 IEA study of civic education, young people thought that democracy

had a particular role in “giving people a chance to write or say what they think”

and in “helping people to make important decisions about their lives.” Ten years

later, Sigel and Hoskin (1981) asked 1,000 U.S. twelfth-grade students in an

interview to imagine that they had to explain to a student from a nondemocratic

country what makes a country democratic. The most prevalent themes stressed

having individual political freedoms or having a voice in government through

elections. CivEd again asked students about their concepts of what is good and

bad for democracy.

Rights of citizens

Figure 5.1 shows the six items relating to democratic rights of citizens and the

percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students who reported that these actions or ideas

were somewhat or very good for democracy.

C
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

54

Figure 5.1.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various citizen rights and freedoms are

somewhat good or very good for democracy:

1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

About 90 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students reported that it is good for

democracy when everyone has the right to express opinions freely. A large

majority (88 percent) also thought that when citizens have the right to elect

political leaders freely, it is good for democracy. Slightly fewer ninth-grade U.S.

students reported that people protesting peacefully against a law they feel is

unjust and changing laws that women claim are unfair to them are also good for

democracy (78 and 73 percent, respectively). Approximately 85 percent of U.S.

ninth-graders said that it is good for democracy when many different

organizations are available for people who wish to belong to them and when

political parties have rules that support women to become political leaders.

Figure 5.2 shows the percentage of male and female U.S. ninth-graders who

reported that each item is somewhat or very good for democracy. A greater

percentage of ninth-grade U.S. females reported that four of the items, two of

which were related to women’s rights, are good for democracy than did their

male peers. About 88 percent of female ninth-grade U.S. students reported that it

is good for democracy when political parties have rules that support women to

become political leaders compared with 80 percent of their male peers.

Likewise, 78 percent of ninth-grade U.S. females said that when laws that

women claim are unfair to them are changed, that is good for democracy,

whereas only 66 percent of males thought that this was good for democracy. In

addition, more females than males thought that citizens having the right to elect

political leaders freely and many different organizations being available for

people who wish to belong to them were good for democracy.

72.5

77.9

84.4

85.6

87.7

90.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Laws that women claim are

unfair to them are changed

People peacefully protest

against a law they believe to

be unjust

Political parties have rules

that support women to

become political leaders

Many different organizations

are available for people who

wish to belong to them

Citizens have the right to elect

political leaders freely

Everyone has the right to

express their opinions freely

Percentage
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

55

Figure 5.2.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various citizen rights and freedoms are

somewhat good or very good for democracy, by

sex: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 5.3 shows the percentage of U.S.- and foreign-born U.S. ninth-graders

who reported that each item is good for democracy. For half of the items, there is

no statistical difference between the two groups. However, a greater percentage

of U.S.-born ninth-grade students said that it is good for democracy when many

different organizations are available for people who wish to belong to them than

did their foreign-born peers. In addition, 74 percent of U.S.-born ninth-grade

students said that it is good for democracy when laws that women claim are

unfair to them are changed, whereas 60 percent of foreign-born ninth-graders

thought that this was good for democracy. More U.S.-born than foreign-born

ninth-graders also reported that it was good for democracy when political parties

have rules that support women becoming political leaders.

Negative influence

Although students appreciate the rights guaranteed in a democracy, they also

seem to recognize that unlimited power is bad for democracy. Figure 5.4 shows

the percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students who reported that five items relating

to negative influence and unchecked power were bad for democracy.

The majority of students thought that all five examples of political power would

be bad for democracy. Eighty-one percent of ninth-grade U.S. students indicated

that it is bad for democracy when wealthy business people have more influence

on government than others. Fewer students, 72 percent, thought that courts and

judges being influenced by politicians was bad for democracy.

78.3

79.1

88.1

88.6

90.1

91.7

66.5

76.6

80.3

82.6

85.3

88.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Laws that women claim are

unfair to them are changed

People peacefully protest

against a law they believe to

be unjust

Political parties have rules

that support women to

become political leaders

Many different organizations

are available for people who

wish to belong to them

Citizens have the right to

elect political leaders freely

Everyone has the right to

express their opinions freely

Percentage



 Male

Female
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

56

Figure 5.3.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various citizen rights and freedoms are

somewhat good or very good for democracy, by

country of birth: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 5.4.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various types of negative influence are

somewhat bad or very bad for democracy: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

71.5

74.0

74.0

78.2

80.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Courts and judges are

influenced by politicians

Political leaders in power give

jobs in the government to

members of their family

All the television stations

present the same opinion

about politics

One company owns all the

newspapers

Wealthy business people

have more influence on

government than others

Percentage

59.7

71.6

74.8

75.2

82.9

82.9

74.1

78.6

85.5

86.9

88.3

91.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Laws that women claim are

unfair to them are changed

People peacefully protest

against a law they believe to

be unjust

Political parties have rules

that support women to

become political leaders

Many different organizations

are available for people who

wish to belong to them

Citizens have the right to

elect political leaders freely

Everyone has the right to

express their opinions freely

Percentage

U.S.-born

Foreign-born
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

57

Figure 5.5 shows how ninth-grade U.S. males and females responded to these

same items. The responses were relatively similar between males and females

for two of the items. The other three items, however, showed differences

between males’ and females’ opinions on what is bad for democracy. More

female ninth-grade U.S. students (79 percent) than their male peers (69 percent)

thought that it was bad for democracy when all television stations present the

same opinion. More female than male ninth-graders also thought that one

company owning all the newspapers was bad for democracy (81 and 75 percent,

respectively). Finally, 85 percent of females thought that it was bad for

democracy for wealthy business people to have more influence on government

than others, compared with a smaller percentage of male ninth-graders (76

percent).

Figure 5.5.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various types of negative influence are

somewhat bad or very bad for democracy, by sex:

1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 5.6 shows that, again, there are no differences between U.S.-born and

foreign-born students on three of the items. However, more U.S.-born students

agreed with two of the items than their foreign-born counterparts. Seventy-six

percent of U.S.-born ninth-graders responded that it is bad for democracy when

political leaders in power give jobs in the government to members of their

family, compared with 61 percent of foreign-born ninth-graders. In addition, a

greater percentage of U.S.-born than foreign-born students agreed that it is bad

for democracy when wealthy business people have more influence on

government than others. It is important to keep in mind while analyzing the

results by country of birth that no data are available on how long these foreignborn students had been in the United States. Thus, students who had been here

since infancy are considered with those who immigrated the previous year.

74.5

79.2

77.3

80.9

85.4

68.5

68.8

70.8

75.2

76.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Courts and judges are

influenced by politicians

All the television stations

present the same opinion

about politics

Political leaders in power

give jobs in the government

to members of their family

One company owns all the

newspapers

Wealthy business people

have more influence on

government than others

Percentage

Male

Female
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

58

Figure 5.6.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various types of negative influence are

somewhat bad or very bad for democracy, by

country of birth: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Concept of citizenship

There are diverse opinions about what constitutes “good” citizenship. Some

people emphasize citizen duties, such as voting and obeying laws; others

emphasize exercising one’s rights to express opinions and dissent (Hahn,

Hughes, and Sen, 1998). In the past, studies that have examined citizenship

found that U.S. youth focused more on rights than on responsibilities (Niemi and

Junn, 1998; Hahn, 1999). This section addresses how students define and

understand the concept of citizenship, and whether this conception differs by sex,

race/ethnicity, country of birth, or socioeconomic status.

The concept of citizenship was measured by two scales: an “Importance of

conventional citizenship” scale and an “Importance of social movement-related

citizenship” scale. Ninth-grade U.S. students were given a list of activities,

attitudes, and actions on each scale and asked to report how important they

believed each one was for explaining what a good citizen is or does.

Importance of conventional citizenship

A six-item scale measured ninth-grade U.S. students’ perceptions of conventional

citizenship. These items ranged from voting and understanding the history of the

country to discussing politics. Figure 5.7 shows the percentage of students

reporting that each item on the conventional citizenship scale is somewhat

important or very important in relation to being a good citizen.

62.5

69.2

60.5

77.4

70.8

72.6

74.9

75.7

78.2

82.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Courts and judges are

influenced by politicians

All the television stations

present the same opinion

about politics

Political leaders in power

give jobs in the government

to members of their family

One company owns all the

newspapers

Wealthy business people

have more influence on

government than others

Percentage

 U.S.-born

Foreign-born
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

59

Figure 5.7.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various civic behaviors are somewhat

important or very important for good citizenship:

1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Overall, most students thought that voting in every election and showing respect

for government leaders were the two most important factors in being good

citizens. Three-quarters or more of all ninth-grade U.S. students indicated that

these two activities were somewhat or very important in demonstrating good

citizenship. These results seem at odds with the fact that a relatively low

percentage of adults typically do vote in elections in the United States, but could

bode well for future generations of voters. These findings also match a previous

study on attitudes of high school students, in which a majority of students

emphasized respect for authority and obedience to the law as central to good

citizenship (Jennings and Niemi, 1974; Johnson, 1986).

Next, two-thirds or more of ninth-grade U.S. students also thought that knowing

about the country’s history and following political issues in the news were

important for good citizenship. Approximately one-half of the students said that

it was somewhat or very important for an adult who is a good citizen to join a

political party.∗

 

∗

 This item on joining a political party was taken from the international survey and may be more relevant to other countries than to the United States.

In the United States, people are usually affiliated with political parties, but do not necessarily join them.

47.6

58.2

65.7

72.7

79.5

83.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

To join a political party

To engage in political

discussion

To follow political issues

in the newspaper, on the

radio, or on television

To know about the

country's history

To show respect for

government leaders

To vote in every election

Percentage
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

60

Table 5.1 reports results on the importance of conventional citizenship by a set of

selected student background characteristics. The mean for U.S. students on the

conventional citizenship scale is significantly higher than the international mean.

Furthermore, the results indicate no differences between males and females,

U.S.-born or foreign-born, or among different racial/ethnic or socioeconomic

groups (as defined by the number of books in the home) in their reports of what

is important for good citizenship.

Table 5.1.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

importance of conventional citizenship scale, by

selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.3

Sex

 Male 48.8 10.2

 Female 51.2 10.4

Race/ethnicity

 White 63.4 10.3

 Black 13.2 10.5

 Hispanic 13.5 10.2

 Asian 4.0 10.2

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.5 10.2

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.5 10.3

 Foreign-born 10.5 10.5

Number of books in the home

 0–10 8.4 10.0

 11–50 21.5 10.4

 51–100 22.2 10.4

 101–200 19.8 10.3

 More than 200 28.0 10.4

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than

the international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Importance of social movement-related citizenship

A three-item scale measures the concept of social movement-related citizenship.

On this scale, U.S. students were significantly higher than the international mean.

As seen in figure 5.8, over 80 percent of students thought that all three items

were somewhat or very important.
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

61

Almost 90 percent of U.S. ninth-grade students thought that it is important for a

good citizen to participate in activities to help people in the community. More

students thought that these activities were somewhat or very important compared

with activities that promote human rights and protect the environment.

Specifically, 84 percent and 83 percent, respectively, thought that taking part in

activities promoting human rights and protecting the environment were also

important for good citizens to do. Other studies of U.S. youth aged 16 to 24 also

found that young adults associated good citizenship with helping activities in the

community (Hepburn, 2000; National Association of Secretaries of State, 1999;

People for the American Way, 1989).

Figure 5.8.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that participation in various social movementrelated activities is somewhat important or very

important for good citizenship: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Subgroup differences on the importance of social movement-related citizenship

are presented in table 5.2. The mean for U.S. students on the social movementrelated citizenship scale is significantly higher than the international mean.

Ninth-grade U.S. female students were more likely than their male peers to report

social movement-related activities as important. This is consistent with an earlier

study that showed that female students tend to indicate an interest in a greater

number of social issues than do their male peers (Hahn, 1996b). There were no

differences among any racial/ethnic groups, between U.S.-born and foreign-born

ninth-graders, or among those reporting various numbers of books in their

homes.

83.0

83.9

88.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

To take part in activities

to protect the

environment

To take part in activities

promoting human rights

To participate in activities

to help people in the

community

Percentage
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

62

Table 5.2.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

importance of social movement-related citizenship

scale, by selected background characteristics:

1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.3

Sex

 Male 48.7 10.0

 Female 51.3 10.6

Race/ethnicity

 White 63.5 10.2

 Black 13.1 10.6

 Hispanic 13.5 10.2

 Asian 4.0 10.3

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.4 10.4

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.5 10.3

 Foreign-born 10.5 10.2

Number of books in the home

 0–10 8.3 9.9

 11–50 21.5 10.5

 51–100 22.3 10.3

 101–200 19.8 10.3

 More than 200 28.0 10.2

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than

the international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Concept of government

Understanding the rights of an individual and the responsibilities of both the

individual and the government is a key component of civic education. However,

past research has shown that students are more familiar with their rights than

with their responsibilities (Hahn, 1999; Niemi and Junn, 1998). Potential

responsibilities of the government can range from providing universal health care

to controlling pollution to guaranteeing peace. Students’ opinions on the

responsibilities of government can also show their concepts of the ruling forces

in their country and their views on their own responsibilities. CivEd included

two scales measuring distinct concepts of government responsibilities: an

economy-related scale and a society-related scale.
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

63

Economy-related government responsibilities

Five items make up the economy-related government responsibility scale. Figure

5.9 lists these five items and shows the percentage of students who thought that

the government probably or definitely should be responsible for each.

Figure 5.9.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that various economy-related actions probably or

definitely should be the government’s

responsibility: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

A majority of ninth-graders thought that the government should be responsible

for keeping prices under control. This was higher than the rest of the items, the

next three of which showed no differences in the percentage of students who

thought that they were the responsibility of the government. Approximately 65

percent of ninth-grade U.S. students reported that the government should be

responsible for providing industries with the support they need to grow,

guaranteeing a job for everyone who wants one, and reducing differences in

income and wealth among people. Furthermore, fifty-nine percent of U.S. ninthgraders said that it was the responsibility of the government to provide an

adequate standard of living for the unemployed.

In the area of government responsibility, a key interest for social policy is

whether differences exist between males and females, among racial/ethnic

groups, between U.S.-born and foreign-born people, or among socioeconomic

58.6

63.5

65.4

66.2

84.2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Providing an adequate

standard of living for the

unemployed

Reducing differences in

income and wealth

among people

Guaranteeing a job for

everyone who wants one

Providing industries with

the support they need to

grow

Keeping prices under

control

Percentage
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

64

groups in their views on what falls under the purview of the government. Table

5.3 shows the average scores for different subgroups of students on the economyrelated government responsibility scale. Overall, the average score for U.S.

students on this scale was below the international mean.

Table 5.3.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

economy-related government responsibilities

scale, by selected background characteristics:

1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 9.2

Sex

 Male 48.7 9.1

 Female 51.3 9.3

Race/ethnicity

 White 63.7 9.1

 Black 13.0 9.5

 Hispanic 13.3 9.3

 Asian 4.0 9.7

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.5 9.1

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.7 9.2

 Foreign-born 10.3 9.2

Number of books in the home

 0–10 8.3 9.3

 11–50 21.6 9.3

 51–100 22.3 9.2

 101–200 19.9 9.3

 More than 200 27.9 9.0

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly lower than the

international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Asian and black ninth-graders in the United States were more likely than their

white peers to report that the government should be responsible for economyrelated issues. This finding is consistent with the literature on this issue, which

suggests that racial minorities think that the government should play a greater

role in equalizing economic circumstances (Vanneman and Cannon, 1987).

There are no differences among other racial/ethnic groups, among students with

varying numbers of books in their household, or between U.S.-born or foreignborn students.
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

65

Society-related government responsibility

The scale measuring society-related government responsibility includes the seven

items shown in figure 5.10, which relate to social concerns. Three-quarters or

more of ninth-grade U.S. students reported that the government should be

responsible for all seven of these issues.

Figure 5.10.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students

reporting that various society-related actions

probably or definitely should be the

government’s responsibility: 1999

 SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Between 87 and 92 percent of U.S. ninth-graders said that the government should

be responsible for ensuring equal political opportunities for men and women,

providing free basic education and health care for all, guaranteeing peace and

order within the country, and providing an adequate standard of living for old

people. Seen as slightly less important was the government’s responsibility to

control pollution. And three-quarters of ninth-graders agreed that promoting

honesty and moral behavior among people should be the responsibility of the

government.

Table 5.4 examines how ninth-grade students differ on the society-related

government responsibility scale by sex, country of birth, race/ethnicity, and

number of books in the household. The U.S. mean on this scale was the same as

the international mean.

76.5

81.7

86.5

87.6

89.4

91.0

91.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Promoting honesty and

moral behavior among

people in the country

Controlling pollution of the

environment

Providing an adequate

standard of living for old

people

Providing basic health care

for everyone

Guaranteeing peace and

order within the country

Providing free basic

education for all

Being sure there are equal

political opportunities for

men and women

Percentage
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

66

Table 5.4.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

society-related government responsibilities scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.0

Sex

 Male 48.6 9.8

 Female 51.4 10.2

Race/ethnicity

 White 63.9 10.0

 Black 12.9 9.7

 Hispanic 13.2 9.7

 Asian 4.0 10.3

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.4 10.1

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.7 10.0

 Foreign-born 10.3 9.7

Number of books in the home

 0–10 8.2 9.4

 11–50 21.5 9.9

 51–100 22.2 9.9

 101–200 20.0 10.1

 More than 200 28.0 10.2

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding. The international mean for this

scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean does not differ significantly from the international mean.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Ninth-grade U.S. females were more likely than their male counterparts to report

that the government should be responsible for society-related issues. In contrast

to the previous scale on economy-related responsibilities, black ninth-graders fell

lower on this scale than their white and Asian peers, indicating that they were

less likely to state that these issues are the responsibility of the government.

Also, U.S. students with 10 or fewer books in their household were less likely to

report that these society-related issues were the responsibility of the government

than students from households with more than 100 books. The finding that

higher SES students were more likely to expect the government to take

responsibility for society-related issues supports previous research showing that

individuals who already have a basic standard of living (e.g., food, housing, jobs)

can afford to focus on broader issues, such as protecting the environment and

providing for the elderly (Piven and Cloward, 1977). There were no differences

among racial/ethnic groups or between U.S.-born and foreign-born ninth-graders.
CHAPTER 5—DEMOCRACY, CITIZENSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT

67

Summary

This chapter examined ninth-grade U.S. students’ opinions on what constitutes

democracy and what defines good citizenship, as well as their concepts of the

responsibilities of government. Most U.S. students agreed that voting in every

election and showing respect for government leaders were two important factors

in being good citizens. Almost 90 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students agreed

that it is important for a good citizen to participate in activities to help people in

the community. Female students were more likely than their male peers to report

social movement-related activities such as promoting human rights and

protecting the environment as important.

Ninth-grade U.S. students had varying perceptions regarding the responsibilities

of the government. On the society-related scale, between 87 and 92 percent of

U.S. ninth-graders said that the government should be responsible for ensuring

equal political opportunities for men and women, providing free basic education

and health care for all, guaranteeing peace and order within the country, and

providing an adequate standard of living for old people. On the economy-related

scale, approximately 80 percent of ninth-graders reported that the government

should be responsible for keeping prices under control. Fifty-nine percent of

U.S. ninth-graders said that it was the responsibility of the government to provide

an adequate standard of living for the unemployed. Overall, the average score

for U.S. students on the economy-related scale was lower than the international

mean. Asian and black U.S. ninth-graders were significantly more likely than

their white peers to report that the government should be responsible for

economy-related issues.

CHAPTER 6

ATTITUDES OF U.S. STUDENTS TOWARD

NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL CIVIC ISSUES

Key Points

Close to 70 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students report that they

trust local and national government institutions in the United

States.

Female ninth-graders were more likely than their male

counterparts to report that they trust government-related

institutions. Additionally, white ninth-graders were more likely

than their black peers to report trusting government-related

institutions.

Most U.S. ninth-graders, particularly white students, black

students, and those born in the United States, report very positive

feelings toward the nation.

Nine out of 10 students support women’s political rights and agree

that women should run for public office and have the same rights

as men.

Hispanic and Asian ninth-graders report more positive attitudes

than their white peers toward immigrants’ rights.

CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

71

arly research on student political attitudes found that U.S. students’ levels

of political efficacy, confidence, and interest increased over the course of

the school years. However, at the high school level, political trust

declined (Ehman, 1980; Hahn, Dilworth, and Hughes, 1998; Jennings and Niemi,

1974; Merelman, 1971). Early political socialization researchers, such as Hess

and Torney (1967), reported that most young children in the United States held

positive feelings toward their country and its system of government before they

had much detailed knowledge about the government or its civic heritage. Later

research also showed that high school students continued to have positive

feelings toward government institutions (Patrick and Hoge, 1991) and have a

strong sense of national identity regardless of their background (Barton and

Levstik, 1998; Hahn, 1999). Numerous studies have also addressed students’

perceptions of societal diversity, particularly in regard to the rights of women,

minority groups, and immigrants. In general, students spoke positively of

diversity at both the ninth- and eleventh-grade levels (Dash and Niemi, 1992;

Hahn et al., 1998).

CivEd probed the attitudes of students about a variety of national and

international civic issues, in addition to assessing civic knowledge. Attitudes

were measured across three domains: democracy and democratic institutions,

national identity and international relations, and social cohesion and diversity.

This chapter examines students’ trust in government-related institutions, their

attitudes toward the United States and other nations, and support for the rights of

minorities and women.

Trust in government-related institutions

Research about democracy and democratic institutions emphasizes the extent to

which students trust political institutions, believe that citizens can influence

government decisions, and possess political tolerance. A study of political

attitudes and beliefs of adolescents in the United States found that students had

low levels of political trust; that few students had met any elected government

officials; and that they rarely heard adults talking about good, hard-working

representatives (Hahn, 1998).

A six-item scale measured ninth-graders’ trust in a variety of government-related

institutions. Figure 6.1 shows the percentage of students reporting that they

trusted these institutions either most of the time or always on each of the six

items.

U.S. students had more trust in the local council or government of their towns or

cities than they did in the national government in Washington, D.C. Similar

findings have been obtained in surveys of U.S. adults, with 74 percent reporting

confidence in the local government and 60 percent reporting confidence in the

national government (Rose and Gallup, 1998). The proportions of students

trusting local councils or governments did not differ from those trusting courts,

Congress, or the police. Furthermore, approximately two-thirds of ninth-grade

U.S. students reported trusting each of these government-related institutions. Far

fewer students—about one-third of U.S. ninth-graders—said that they trusted

political parties either most of the time or always.

E
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

72

Figure 6.1.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they trust various institutions most of the

time or always: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 6.1 provides the analysis of the six-item scale, showing the amount of trust

U.S. ninth-graders placed in several government institutions by various

subgroups. On average, U.S. students scored higher on the trust in governmentrelated institutions scale than their international peers. This table shows that

female students were more likely to report that they trusted government-related

institutions than did their male counterparts. This finding differs from previous

research that found no differences between males and females in issues of

political trust (Hahn, 1998; Hahn, Dilworth, and Hughes, 1998; Jennings and

Niemi, 1974). In addition, white ninth-grade students were more likely to report

trusting government-related institutions than did their black peers on these

indicators of trust. Although it appears that Asian students also reported higher

scores than blacks and Hispanics on this scale, the differences were not

statistically significant. There were no differences among other racial/ethnic

groups or between U.S.-born students and foreign-born students. Students also

reported similar levels of trust across various socioeconomic groups as indicated

by the number of books in the home.

35.1

65.1

65.7

67.2

69.8

72.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Political parties

The national government

in Washington, D.C.

The police

Congress

Courts

The local council or

government of your town

or city

Percentage
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

73

Table 6.1.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

trust in government-related institutions scale, by

selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.4

Sex

Male 48.7 10.3

Female 51.3 10.5

Race/ethnicity

White 63.8 10.5

Black 12.8 10.1

Hispanic 13.3 10.1

Asian 4.0 10.5

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

Multiracial 3.5 9.8

Country of birth

U.S.-born 89.6 10.4

Foreign-born 10.4 10.4

Number of books in the home

0–10 8.3 10.0

11–50 21.5 10.4

51–100 22.3 10.6

101–200 20.0 10.4

More than 200 27.9 10.4

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than the

international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Attitudes toward the nation and international relations

Previous studies analyzing students’ national identity have reported that this

identity appeared to be rooted in a sense of the nation’s progress and historic

commitment to freedom and individual rights (Barton and Levstik, 1998; Hahn et

al., 1998). For example, in a study of middle school students’ perceptions of

historical significance, students talked about the American Revolution and the

Bill of Rights by using pronouns such as “our” and “we” regardless of their

economic background or sex or how recently their families had immigrated to the

United States (Barton and Levstik, 1998).

In addition to researching student attitudes toward the United States, studies have

also been conducted that analyze student perceptions of other countries. Lambert

and Klineberg (1967) conducted a study of U.S. children’s perceptions of their

own and other countries. The study found that by age 14, U.S. students in the

sample were less open to positive views of foreign nations than were students at

age 6 and age 10. A decade later, Pike and Barrows (1976) conducted a survey

to investigate how children in the United States viewed foreign nations and

peoples. They found that students in fourth grade held a “we-they” orientation,

viewing the United States as the most desirable, richest, strongest, and largest
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

74

country. The eighth- and twelfth-graders in the study, however, saw the United

States as more a part of the world, sharing characteristics with other countries.

National identity

CivEd measured students’ attitudes toward national identity through a three-item

scale. The percentages of students who agreed or strongly agreed with the

statements of those three items are shown in figure 6.2.

Figure 6.2.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree with various

statements about the United States: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

The U.S. mean on the positive attitudes toward one’s country scale was no

different from the international mean. Approximately 90 percent of ninth-grade

U.S. students agreed that the United States should be proud of what it had

achieved, demonstrating a positive feeling toward the nation. Fewer, but still a

majority of students, agreed that they have a great love for the United States and

that the U.S. flag was important to them. Although overall the percentages were

high for positive attitudes toward the United States, table 6.2 shows that there

were some differences among subgroups.

Although whites and blacks did not differ in their attitudes toward the nation,

white ninth-graders were more likely than their Hispanic peers to agree with the

positive statements about the United States. In addition, U.S.-born students were

more likely than foreign-born students to report positive attitudes toward the

United States. There were no differences between male and female students or

among students from different socioeconomic levels as measured by the number

of books in the home.

84.3

84.8

91.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

The flag of the United

States is important to me

I have a great love for the

United States

The United States should

be proud of what it has

achieved

Percentage
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

75

Table 6.2.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

positive attitudes toward one’s country scale, by

selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 9.9

Sex

Male 48.7 9.9

Female 51.3 10.0

Race/ethnicity

White 63.6 10.2

Black 13.0 9.8

Hispanic 13.3 9.3

Asian 4.0 9.5

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

Multiracial 3.5 9.4

Country of birth

U.S.-born 89.7 10.0

Foreign-born 10.3 9.3

Number of books in the home

0–10 8.2 9.5

11–50 21.5 10.0

51–100 22.3 10.0

101–200 19.9 9.9

More than 200 28.1 10.0

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean does not differ significantly

from the international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

International relations

Although there is no composite scale for students’ perceptions of the United

States as compared with their perceptions of other countries, four items measure

students’ attitudes on the degree to which the United States should be influenced

by other countries. Figure 6.3 shows the percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students

who reported agreeing or strongly agreeing with various statements about the

United States.

Overall, students appeared to show a strong sense of nationalism, as well as

showing some evidence of being open to positive views of other countries.

Ninety-two percent of U.S. ninth-graders reported that we should always be alert

and stop threats from other countries to the political independence of the United

States. Fewer students—approximately two-thirds—agreed that we should

prevent other countries from trying to influence political decisions in the United

States. About 57 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students stated that to help protect

jobs in the United States, we should buy products made in the United States.

However, less than half of ninth-grade U.S. students agreed that we should stop

outsiders from influencing U.S. traditions and culture.
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

76

Figure 6.3.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree with various

statements about U.S. international relations:

1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

In summary, it appears that a majority of ninth-grade U.S. students are concerned

about protecting the nation’s political independence and are open to cultural

influences and new traditions.

Figures 6.4 and 6.5 show the percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students who

reported agreeing or strongly agreeing with these same statements, by sex and

country of birth. Male students differ from females on three of the four items,

and U.S.-born students differ from their foreign-born counterparts on two of the

four.

Approximately 90 percent of both male and female ninth-graders agreed that we

should always be on alert and stop threats from other countries to the United

States’ political independence. More males than females, however, agreed with

the remaining statements. For instance, approximately 71 percent of male ninthgraders compared with 65 percent of their female peers said that we should

prevent other countries from trying to influence political decisions in the United

States. A greater percentage of males (62 percent) than females (53 percent) also

thought that we should buy products made in the United States to help protect

U.S. jobs. Finally, more male than female U.S. ninth-grade students thought that

we should stop outsiders from influencing U.S. traditions and culture. About 50

percent of male U.S. ninth-graders agreed that we should stop outsiders from

influencing U.S. traditions and culture compared with about 35 percent of

females.

44.4

57.5

67.9

92.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

We should stop outsiders

from influencing the United

States' traditions and

culture

To help protect jobs in the

United States we should

buy products made in the

United States

We should prevent other

countries from trying to

influence political decisions

in the United States

We should always be alert

and stop threats from other

countries to the United

States' political

independence

Percentage
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

77

Figure 6.4.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree with various

statements about U.S. international relations, by

sex: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 6.5.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students

reporting that they agree or strongly agree with

various statements about U.S. international

relations, by country of birth: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

35.8

53.0

65.4

94.3

53.0

62.5

70.7

90.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

We should stop outsiders

from influencing the United

States' traditions and

culture

To help protect jobs in the

United States we should

buy products made in the

United States

We should prevent other

countries from trying to

influence political decisions

in the United States

We should always be alert

and stop threats from other

countries to the United

States' political

independence

Percentage

Male

Female

32.5

49.7

59.0

87.1

45.7

58.6

69.1

92.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

We should stop outsiders from

influencing the United States'

traditions and culture

To help protect jobs in the

United States we should buy

products made in the United

States

We should prevent other

countries from trying to

influence political decisions in

the United States

We should always be alert

and stop threats from other

countries to the United States'

political independence

Percentage

U.S.-born

Foreign-born
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

78

For country of birth, students born in the United States agreed more strongly

with controlling the influences of outsiders than those born in other countries.

A greater percentage of U.S.-born ninth-graders (69 percent) than foreignborn ninth-graders (59 percent) said that we should prevent other countries

from trying to influence political decisions in the United States.

Approximately 46 percent of U.S.-born ninth-graders agreed with the

statement about stopping outsiders from influencing U.S. traditions and

culture, whereas about 33 percent of foreign-born students did. Although it

appeared that more U.S.-born students agreed with buying products made in

the United States to help protect U.S. jobs and stopping threats from other

countries to the United States’ political independence, these differences were

not statistically significant.

Social cohesion and diversity

Previous studies have been conducted on students’ perceptions of social

diversity, especially in regard to females and immigrants (Hahn, Dilworth, and

Hughes, 1998). In one study of eleventh-graders in three countries, 37 percent of

U.S. students said that diversity is a source of cultural strength and only 14

percent said that it leads to disunity and conflict in the nation (Dash and Niemi,

1992).

There is also research on student attitudes about women’s opportunity and rights.

In the 1971 IEA Civic Education Study, researchers found that young people in

the United States were not very supportive of women holding political office. In

studies conducted in the 1980s and 1990s, however, students were found to be

more supportive of women in government, having observed more female

candidates and politicians than did their counterparts in earlier generations

(Gillespie and Spohn, 1987; Hahn, 1998). CivEd includes two social cohesion

scales: a scale on support for women’s political rights and a scale on positive

attitudes toward immigrants’ rights.

Support for women’s political rights

A five-item scale measures students’ support for women’s political rights. Figure

6.6 shows the five opinion items on women’s political rights and the percentage

of students who agreed or strongly agreed with each statement. Note that the

first three statements are positive toward women’s rights, while the last two are

framed negatively.

About 90 percent of ninth-grade U.S. students reported being supportive of

women’s rights. Students agreed that women should run for public office, have

the same rights as men, and receive equal pay for the same jobs. Seventeen

percent of U.S. ninth-graders thought that men were better qualified to be

political leaders than women, and an even smaller proportion, about 11 percent of

ninth-grade U.S. students, agreed that women should stay out of politics.
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

79

Figure 6.6.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree with various

statements about women’s political rights: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 6.3 shows the degree of support for women’s political rights from U.S.

ninth-graders with various background characteristics, based on the five-item

scale. The average score for the U.S. on the support for women’s rights scale

was higher than the international mean. A greater proportion of female ninthgraders supported women’s rights than did males. This finding supports previous

research, which shows that male adolescents tend to be less supportive of women

holding political office than are their female counterparts (Hahn, 1998; Torney,

Oppenheim, and Farnen, 1975).

Ninth-graders born in the United States were also more likely to support

women’s political rights than were their foreign-born peers. And U.S. white

ninth-graders were generally more positive toward issues of women’s political

rights than were U.S. black ninth-grade students. Asian students also appear to

be more positive than black or Hispanic students, but these differences are not

statistically significant. Finally, students from lower socioeconomic

backgrounds, as measured by the number of books in the home, were less likely

to support women’s rights than were students from higher socioeconomic

backgrounds. Ninth-grade U.S. students who live in households with 10 or fewer

books were less positive toward issues of women’s political rights than their

peers living in households with more than 100 books.

10.6

17.3

90.2

90.5

90.9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Women should stay out of

politics

Men are better qualified to

be political leaders than

women

Men and women should get

equal pay when they are in

the same jobs

Women should have the

same rights as men in

every way

Women should run for

public office and take part

in the government just as

men do

Percentage
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

80

Table 6.3.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

support for women’s political rights scale, by

selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.5

Sex

Male 48.4 9.6

Female 51.6 11.4

Race/ethnicity

White 64.0 10.7

Black 12.7 10.1

Hispanic 13.2 10.3

Asian 4.0 10.7

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

Multiracial 3.4 10.8

Country of birth

U.S.-born 89.6 10.6

Foreign-born 10.4 10.1

Number of books in the home

0–10 8.0 9.9

11–50 21.4 10.3

51–100 22.5 10.4

101–200 20.0 10.7

More than 200 28.1 10.8

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than the

international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights

Civic education attempts to educate students on such issues as discrimination. In

many countries, discrimination directed specifically toward immigrants or

foreign-born individuals is considered a problem relative to social cohesion and

diversity. CivEd assessed ninth-grade students’ attitudes toward immigrants’

rights through a five-item scale focusing on their rights and opportunities. Figure

6.7 shows U.S. ninth-graders’ attitudes on the five items that compose the

positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights scale.

Approximately 90 percent of U.S. ninth-graders agreed that immigrants’ children

should have the same opportunities for education that other children in the

country have. Slightly fewer students, but still close to 80 percent, agreed that

immigrants should have the same rights as everyone else. These rights include

allowing immigrants to keep their own customs, lifestyle, and language. In

addition, most U.S. ninth-graders (82 percent) agreed that immigrants should

have the opportunity to vote in elections after living in the country for several

years.
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

81

Figure 6.7.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they agree or strongly agree with various

statements about immigrants’ rights: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table 6.4 compares attitudes toward immigrants’ rights between males and

females, among racial/ethnic groups, between U.S.- and foreign-born students,

and among students from households of different socioeconomic levels. Overall,

the average score for the United States was higher than the international mean on

this scale.

U.S. ninth-graders who were born outside the United States were more likely to

have positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights than were U.S.-born ninthgraders. In addition, Hispanic, Asian, and multiracial students in the United

States were more likely than their white peers to report positive attitudes toward

immigrants’ rights. Black ninth-grade students’ attitudes toward immigrants’

rights did not differ from the attitudes of any other racial/ethnic groups. Female

ninth-grade students also demonstrated stronger positive attitudes toward

immigrants’ rights than did their male counterparts. There were no differences

among students from different socioeconomic backgrounds, as indicated by the

number of books in the home.

79.1

82.5

83.6

84.3

91.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Immigrants should have the

opportunity to keep their own

language

Immigrants who live in a country

for several years should have the

opportunity to vote in elections

Immigrants should have the

opportunity to keep their own

customs and lifestyle

Immigrants should have all the

same rights that everyone else in

a country has

Immigrants' children should have

the same opportunities for

education that other children in

the country have

Percentage
CHAPTER 6—U.S. ATTITUDES TOWARD CIVIC ISSUES

82

Table 6.4—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.3

Sex

Male 48.4 10.0

Female 51.6 10.7

Race/ethnicity

White 64.4 10.1

Black 12.2 10.4

Hispanic 13.3 11.0

Asian 4.0 11.1

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

Multiracial 3.4 11.0

Country of birth

U.S.-born 89.7 10.3

Foreign-born 10.3 10.9

Number of books in the home

0–10 8.0 10.1

11–50 21.2 10.5

51–100 22.5 10.2

101–200 20.0 10.3

More than 200 28.3 10.4

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than the

international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Summary

This chapter addressed questions of students’ trust in government-related

institutions, their perceptions of the ability of citizens to influence governmental

decisions, and their support for the rights of immigrants and women. A majority

of ninth-grade students reported that they trust local and national government

institutions in the United States. Female ninth-graders were more likely to report

that they trust government-related institutions than were their male counterparts.

Nine out of 10 students supported women’s political rights and believed that

women should run for public office and have the same rights as men. A greater

proportion of female ninth-graders reported support for women’s rights than did

males. Hispanic, Asian, and multiracial ninth-graders reported having more

positive attitudes toward immigrants’ rights than did their white peers. A

majority of students also supported the rights of immigrants to educate their

children and vote.
CHAPTER 7

CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

RELATED TO POLITICS

Key Points

Teachers and parents are involved in discussing political issues

with ninth-grade U.S. students, but discussions of U.S. politics are

more likely to occur than discussions of international politics.

Male ninth-grade students are more likely than their female

counterparts to report discussing international politics with people

their own age.

Among the various media, television is the primary source for

ninth-grade students to obtain information about politics.

Students who use newspapers as a source of political information

are more likely to read about domestic politics than international

politics.

There is no difference by sex or country of birth in ninth-grade

U.S. students’ sources of media exposure to political news.

Female ninth-grade students are more likely than males to expect

to be politically active as adults.

CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

85

central goal of civic education is to prepare students to participate in the

political process of their country. Research has provided evidence that

when civic education is offered in the context of systematic study,

students acquire knowledge, abilities, and attitudes that may lead to later adult

community participation (Wade and Saxe, 1996). Past research also indicates

that students who participate in community and political activities, or in

extracurricular activities related to civic issues while in high school, are more

likely than nonparticipating peers to be community and political activists as

adults (Damico, Damico, and Conway, 1998).

This chapter examines U.S. ninth-graders’ current activities related to politics, as

well as their expected political actions as adults. It examines students’

involvement in discussions of national and international politics, followed by

their use of various media to obtain information about civic and political issues.

The chapter concludes by looking at the activities that ninth-grade U.S. students

expect to engage in as adults.

Participation in discussions of national and international politics

Past research has shown that political discussions are factors that can influence

future civic responsibility. In particular, political discussions in the home tend to

lead to an increased likelihood that adolescents will be informed about and accept

civic responsibilities (Szymanski, 1991). Additionally there is some indication

that students who discuss political issues at home anticipate being politically

active adults and that discussion in the home and adolescent expectations of

political activity predict later adult participation (Miller and Kimmel, 1997).

There is also some evidence that frequent discussion of current events in school

enhances students’ civic knowledge (Niemi and Junn, 1998).

Figure 7.1 begins to examine this issue by presenting results on U.S. ninth-grade

students’ reports of involvement in political discussions.

Overall, students were more likely to discuss national and international politics

with teachers or adult family members than with people their own age. About 60

percent of U.S. students reported that they sometimes or often participated in

discussions of what is happening in the United States government with teachers,

parents, or other adult family members. Furthermore, 52 percent of students also

reported frequent levels of discussions about international politics with teachers,

and 43 percent reported frequent discussions about international politics with

parents or adult family members. Finally, less than one-third of all students

reported participating sometimes or often in discussions of domestic or

international politics with people their own age. Overall, these results indicate

that ninth-grade students are involved in discussing U.S. political issues with

teachers and parents. However, although students were equally likely to discuss

domestic politics with their teachers and their parents or other adult family

members, they were less likely to discuss international politics at home with

parents or adult family members than at school with teachers.

A
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

86

Figure 7.1.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often have discussions

about national or international politics: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

To what extent did frequency of discussions of political issues among U.S. ninthgraders differ by sex and country of birth? These questions are answered in

figures 7.2 and 7.3.

As indicated in figure 7.2, the frequency of responses of male and female

students were very close on all six items. In fact, there were no differences on

frequency of discussions of political issues with either teachers or adult family

members among U.S. ninth-grade students by sex. However, male students were

more likely than their female counterparts to discuss international political issues

with people their own age. Foreign-born students were no more likely than their

U.S.-born counterparts to be involved in discussions of political issues with

teachers, family members, or people their own age, as indicated in figure 7.3.

18.0

30.1

43.3

52.0

59.3

60.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

About international politics

with people their own age

About the U.S. government

with people their own age

About international politics

with parents or other adult

family members

About international politics

with teachers

About the U.S. government

with parents or other adult

family members

About the U.S. government

with teachers

Percentage
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

87

Figure 7.2.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often have discussions

about national or international politics, by sex:

1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 7.3.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often have discussions

about national or international politics, by country

of birth: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

14.9

29.2

44.6

54.3

61.6

62.8

21.2

31.0

42.4

49.9

57.2

58.4

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

About international politics

with people their own age

About the U.S. government

with people their own age

About international politics

with parents or other adult

family members

About international politics

with teachers

About the U.S. government

with parents or other adult

family members

About the U.S. government

with teachers

Percentage

 Male

Female

23.7

36.3

50.4

56.8

59.6

62.9

17.3

29.3

42.7

51.5

59.4

60.3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

About international politics

with people their own age

About the U.S. government

with people their own age

About international politics

with parents or other adult

family members

About international politics

with teachers

About the U.S. government

with parents or other adult

family members

About the U.S. government

with teachers

Percentage



 U.S.-born

Foreign-born
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

88

Media exposure to current civic issues

The means through which students and young adolescents obtain information

about civic issues and politics has implications for the development of their

political attitudes and perceptions about the political behavior of adults. In

particular, research highlights the importance of recognizing the influence of the

mass media, especially television, in shaping students’ political roles and civic

understanding (Ehman, 1980; Hepburn, 1998). In this age of information

overload, television and other media have become either more important than or

equally as important as schools in creating political knowledge and awareness.

Figure 7.4 presents data on ninth-grade U.S. students’ reports of exposure to

politics through the media. Overall, the results indicate that television is the

primary media source that ninth-grade U.S. students relied on to obtain

information about politics. Close to 80 percent of students reported that they

sometimes or often watched news broadcasts on television. This percentage is

higher than the percentage of students who reported reading about domestic or

international news in newspapers or listening to news broadcast on the radio.

More than half of all students also reported that they sometimes or often read

articles in newspapers about what is happening in the United States as well as in

other countries. However, more students used newspapers to read about

domestic issues rather than about international issues. Students relied on the

radio less than on any other media source to obtain information about political

issues.

Figure 7.4.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often obtain news from

the newspaper, television, or radio: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

44.3

53.2

61.7

78.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

 Listen to news

broadcasts on the radio

 Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in other

countries

 Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in this country

 Watch news broadcasts

on television

Percentage
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

89

Figures 7.5 and 7.6 present data examining the extent to which ninth-grade U.S.

students’ reports of exposure to politics through the media differed by sex and

country of birth.

Figure 7.5.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often obtain news from

the newspaper, television, or radio, by sex: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Figure 7.6.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they sometimes or often obtain news from

the newspaper, television, or radio, by country of

birth: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

48.1

55.1

63.2

80.6

40.1

51.1

60.3

77.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Listen to news broadcasts

on the radio

Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in other

countries

Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in this country

Watch news broadcasts on

television

Percentage

 Male

Female

42.2

59.8

62.5

77.3

44.5

52.5

61.7

79.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Listen to news broadcasts

on the radio

Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in other

countries

Read articles in the

newspaper about what is

happening in this country

Watch news broadcasts

on television

Percentage



U.S.-born

Foreign-born
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

90

Female and male students and U.S.-born and foreign-born students all reported

television as their primary source of political news and radio as their least likely

source, and with similar levels of frequency. Although there appear to be

differences between males and females and between U.S.-born and foreign-born

students, none of these differences is statistically significant with the exception of

the last item in figure 7.5. More female ninth-graders than males listen to news

broadcasts on the radio.

Expected participatory political actions

Overall, U.S. parents and teachers were actively involved in discussing politics,

especially domestic political issues, with ninth-grade U.S. students. Active

political discussions during formative years are thought to be a good foundation

for later political activity. In this section, we examine the expected participatory

political actions of students as adults.

Expected participatory political action was measured by a three-item scale. The

three items making up the scale are presented in figure 7.7 along with the

percentage of students who reported that they probably or certainly expected to

engage in each of these activities as an adult.

It can be seen from these results that fewer than one-third of all ninth-grade U.S.

students reported that they probably or certainly expect to engage in any of the

three political activities as adults. Among these three activities, students reported

that they anticipate being more likely to join a political party or write letters to a

newspaper about social or political concerns than to be a candidate for a local or

city office.

Figure 7.7.—Percentage of ninth-grade U.S. students reporting

that they probably or certainly expect to participate in various political activities as adults: 1999

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

18.2

27.9

29.1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Be a candidate for a local

or city office

Write letters to a

newspaper about social

or political concerns

Join a political party

Percentage
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

91

Of greater interest, however, is the issue of whether there are differences among

various subgroups of students in terms of expected political participation. This

issue is addressed by the results presented in table 7.1. The U.S. mean on the

political activity scale was significantly higher than the international mean.

The results in table 7.1 show that female ninth-grade students are more likely

than their male counterparts to expect to be politically active as adults. This

finding illustrates the change in gender role expectations that has taken place in

the United States over the past three decades in general, as more female

candidates are being observed and supported in the U.S. political process. These

results indicate that the current process of political socialization leads female

ninth-grade students to expect to have greater political participation as adults

than their ninth-grade male counterparts.

In contrast, the results indicate no differences in expected political participation

by race or country of birth. This suggests that at least in ninth-grade, minority

students and those born abroad were no less likely than white and U.S.-born

students to expect to play a part in the political system of the United States.

Table 7.1.—Ninth-grade U.S. students’ average score on the

expected participation in political activities scale,

by selected background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total 100.0 10.5

Sex

 Male 48.6 10.3

 Female 51.4 10.6

Race/ethnicity

 White 65.1 10.5

 Black 11.7 10.5

 Hispanic 13.2 10.3

 Asian 4.1 10.5

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 3.3 10.5

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 89.7 10.5

 Foreign-born 10.3 10.5

Number of books in the home

 0–10 7.9 9.9

 11–50 20.7 10.2

 51–100 22.1 10.5

 101–200 20.1 10.5

 More than 200 29.2 10.8

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

NOTE: The international mean for this scale is 10.0. The U.S. mean is significantly higher than

the international mean. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
CHAPTER 7—CURRENT AND EXPECTED ACTIVITIES

92

Finally, an examination of the relationship between socioeconomic status,

measured as the number of books in the home, and expected political

participation indicates that students in households containing 100 or fewer books

were less likely to report expecting to participate in political life as adults than

students in households containing more than 200 books. This finding is

consistent with past research documenting a positive relationship between

socioeconomic status and political participation (Brady, Verba, and Scholzman,

1995).

Summary

This last chapter of the report examined U.S. ninth-graders’ current activities

related to politics as well as their expected political actions as adults. Ninthgrade U.S. students were involved in discussing political issues with teachers and

parents, but discussions of U.S. politics were more likely to occur than

discussions of international politics. Overall, the results indicated that television

was the primary media source that ninth-grade U.S. students relied on to obtain

information about politics. Although over 50 percent of students reported using

newspapers as a source of political information, they were more likely to read

about domestic politics than to read about international politics. Female ninthgrade students were more likely than their male counterparts to expect to be

politically active as adults. Students in households containing 100 or fewer

books were less likely to report that they expect to participate in political life as

adults than students in households containing more than 200 books. The results

indicate no differences in expected political participation by race and country of

birth.
LIST OF REFERENCES

95

LIST OF REFERENCES

Anderson, L., Jenkins, L., Leming, J., MacDonald, W., Mullis, I., and Turner, M.

1990. The Civic Report Card. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Education.

Angell, A. 1991. “Democratic climates in elementary classrooms: A review of

theory and research.” Theory and Research in Social Education 19:241–

266.

Arnold, C. and Kaufman, P. 1992. School Effects on Educational Achievement in

Mathematics and Science: 1985–86. Berkeley, CA: MPR Associates.

Barton, K. and Levstik, L. 1998. “‘It wasn’t a good part of history’: National

identity and students’ explanations of historical significance.” Teachers

College Record 99:478–513.

Battistoni, R. 2000. “Service learning in civic education.” In Education for

Civic Engagement in Democracy: Service Learning and Other

Promising Practices, edited by S. Mann and J. Patrick, 29-44.

Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science

Education.

Brady, H., Verba, S., and Scholzman, K. 1995. “Beyond SES: A resource model

of political participation.” The American Political Science Review

89:271–295.

Branson, M. 1985. “American youth: Their socio-civic beliefs, values, and

behavior.” Paper presented at the Conference on the Development of

Civic Competence and Civic Responsibility Among Youth, Irsee, West

Germany.

Branson, M. 1988. “The social and civic attitudes, beliefs and values of

American youth.” Paper presented at the International Conference on the

Development of Civic Responsibility Among Youth, Urbino, Italy.

Chaney, B., Burgdorf, K., and Atash, N. 1997. “Influencing achievement

through high school graduation requirements.” Educational Evaluation

and Policy Analysis 19:229–244.

Clarke, A. and Kurtz-Costes, B. 1997. “Television viewing, educational quality

of the home environment, and school readiness.” Journal of Educational

Research 90:279–285.

Cooper, H., Valentine, J., Nye, B., and Lindsay, J. 1999. “Relationships between

five after-school activities and academic achievement.” Journal of

Educational Psychology 91:369–378.

Damico, A., Damico, S., and Conway, M. 1998. “The democratic education of

women: High school and beyond.” Women in Politics 19:1–31.
REFERENCES

96

Dash, S. and Niemi, R. 1992. “Democratic attitudes in multicultural settings: A

cross national assessment of political socialization.” Youth and Society

23:313–334.

Ehman, L. 1980. “The American school in the political socialization process.”

Review of Educational Research 50:99–119.

Ehman, L. and Gillespie, J. 1974. “Political life in the hidden curriculum: Does

it make a difference?” Paper presented at the National Council for Social

Studies annual meeting.

Fetler, M. 1984. “Television viewing and school achievement.” Journal of

Communication 34:104–118.

Gillespie, D. and Spohn, C. 1987. “Adolescents’ attitudes toward women in

politics: The effects of gender and race.” Gender and Society 1:208–

218.

Hahn, C. 1996a. “Research on issues centered social studies.” In Handbook on

Issues Centered Social Studies, edited by R. Evans and D. Saxe, 25–41.

Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.

Hahn, C. 1996b. “Gender and political learning.” Theory and Research in

Social Education 24: 8–35.

Hahn, C. 1998. Becoming Political: Comparative Perspectives on Citizenship

Education. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Hahn, C. 1999. “Challenges to civic education in the United States.” In Civic

Education Across Countries: Twenty-Four National Case Studies from

the IEA Civic Education Project, edited by J. Torney-Purta, J. Schwille,

and J. Amadeo, 583–607. Amsterdam: The International Association

for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

Hahn, C., Dilworth, P., and Hughes, M. 1998. IEA Civic Education Project

Phase I: The United States—A Review of the Literature. Volume I.

Unpublished manuscript. ERIC Document Reproduction Service

ED444885.

Hahn, C., Dilworth, P., Hughes, M., and Sen, T. 1998. IEA Civic Education

Study Phase I: The United States—Responses to the Four Core

International Framing Questions. Volume III. Unpublished manuscript.

ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED444887.

Hahn, C., Hughes, M., and Sen, T. (eds.) 1998. IEA Civic Education Study

Phase I: The United States—Responses to 18 Framing Questions.

Volume II. Unpublished manuscript. ERIC Document Reproduction

Service ED444886.

Hambleton, R. and Swaminathan, H. 1985. Item Response Theory: Principles

and Applications. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
REFERENCES

97

Hepburn, M. 1983. “Can school teachers and administrators make a difference?

The research evidence.” In Democratic Education in Schools and

Classrooms, edited by M. Hepburn. Washington, DC: National Council

for the Social Studies.

Hepburn, M. 1998. “The power of the electronic media in the socialization of

young Americans: Implications for social studies education.” Social

Studies 89:71–76.

Hepburn, M. 2000. “Service learning and civic education in the schools: What

does recent research tell us?” In Education for Civic Engagement in

Democracy: Service Learning and Other Promising Practices, edited by

S. Mann and J. Patrick, 45–59. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Clearinghouse

for Social Studies/Social Science Education.

Hess, R. and Torney, J. 1967. The Development of Political Attitudes in

Children. Chicago: Aldine Press.

Jennings, M. and Niemi, R. 1974. The Political Character of Adolescence.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Johnson, V. 1986. “Anti-democratic attitudes of high school students.”

Dissertation Abstracts International 48-01A: 0098.

Lambert, W. and Klineberg, O. 1967. Children’s Views of Foreign Peoples.

New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Lee, V., Croninger, R., and Smith, J. 1997. “Course-taking, equity, and

mathematics learning: Testing and constrained curriculum hypothesis in

U.S. secondary schools.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

19:99–121.

Mahoney, J. and Cairns, R. 1997. “Do extracurricular activities protect against

early school dropout?” Developmental Psychology 33:241–253.

Marks, H. 1994. “The effect of participation in school-sponsored community

service programs on student attitudes towards social responsibility.”

Dissertation Abstracts International 55-04A: 0926.

Merelman, R. 1971. Political Socialization and Educational Climates: A Study

of Two School Districts. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Metzger, D. and Barr, R. 1978. “The impact of school political systems on

students’ political attitudes.” Theory and Research in Social Education

6:48–79.

Miller, J. and Kimmel, L. 1997. “The education of the 21st century citizens:

Crossing in the bridges to participation.” Paper presented to the Social

Science Education Consortium, Asilomar, CA.
REFERENCES

98

National Association of Secretaries of State. 1999. New Millennium Project:

American Youth Attitudes on Politics, Citizenship, Government, and

Voting. Lexington, KY: NASS.

National Center for Education Statistics. 1997. 1994 High School Transcript

Study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics. 1999. NAEP 1998 Civics Report Card

for the Nation. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Newmann, F. and Rutter, R. 1986. “A profile of high school community service

programs.” Educational Leadership 43(4):64–71.

Niemi, R. and Chapman, C. 1998. The Civic Development of 9th- through 12thGrade Students in the United States: 1996. Statistical Analysis Report.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, NCES.

Niemi, R. and Junn, J. 1998. Civic Education: What Makes Students Learn.

New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Niemi, R. and Smith, J. (in press). “Enrollments in high school government

classes: Are we short changing both citizenship and political science

training?” PS: Political Science and Politics.

Parker, W. and Kaltsounis, T. 1986. “Citizenship and law-related education.” In

Elementary School Social Studies: Research as a Guide to Practice,

edited by V. A. Atwood. Washington, DC: National Council for Social

Studies.

Patrick, J. and Hoge, J. 1991. “Teaching government, civics, and the law.” In

Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning, edited

by J. Shaver, 427–436. New York: Macmillan.

People for the American Way. 1989. Democracy’s Next Generation: A Study of

Youth and Teachers. Washington, DC: Author.

Pike, L. and Barrows, T. 1976. Other Nations, Other Peoples: A Survey of

Student Interests and Knowledge, Attitudes and Perceptions. Princeton,

NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Piven, F. and Cloward, R. 1977. Poor People’s Movements: Why They Succeed,

How They Fail. New York: Pantheon Books.

Raudenbush, S. and Bryk, A. 1986. “A hierarchical model for studying school

effects.” Sociology of Education 59:1–17.

Ridley-Johnson, R., Cooper, H., and Chance, J. 1983. “The relationship of

children’s television viewing to school achievement and I.Q.” The

Journal of Educational Research 76:294–297.
REFERENCES

99

Rose, L. and Gallup, A. 1998. “The 30th annual Phil Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of

the public’s attitude toward the public schools.” Phi Delta Kappan,

80:41–58.

Rose, L. and Gallup, A. 2000. “The 32nd annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup poll of

the public’s attitude toward the public schools.” Phi Delta Kappan, 82:

41–66.

Sigel, R. and Hoskin, M. 1981. The Political Involvement of Adolescents. New

Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Steinberg, L., Brown, B., Cider, M., Kaczmarek, N., and Lazzaro, C.. 1988.

Noninstructional Influences on High School Student Achievement: The

Contributions of Parents, Peers, Extracurricular Activities, and PartTime Work. Madison, WI: National Center on Effective Secondary

Schools.

Szymanski, S. 1991. “The influence of the home on social studies.” In

Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and Learning, edited

by J. Shaver, 290–299. New York: Macmillan.

Thornton, S. 1991. “Teacher as curricular-instructional gatekeeper in social

studies.” In Handbook of Research on Social Studies Teaching and

Learning, edited by J. P. Shaver, 237–248. New York: Macmillan.

Torney, J. Oppenheim, A. and Farnen, R. 1975. Civic Education in Ten

Countries. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Torney-Purta, J., Hahn, C., and Amadeo, J. 2001. “Principles of subject-specific

instruction in education for citizenship.” In J. Brophy (ed.) SubjectSpecific Instructional Methods and Activities, 371–408. Stamford, CT:

JAI Press.

Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., and Schulz, W. 2001. Citizenship

and Education in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and

Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amsterdam: The International

Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

Torney-Purta, J., Schwille, J., and Amadeo, J. 1999. Civic Education Across

Countries: Twenty-Four National Case Studies from the IEA Civic

Education Project. Amsterdam: The International Association for the

Evaluation of Educational Achievement.

Vanneman, R. and Cannon, L. 1987. The American Perception of Class.

Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Wade, R. and Saxe, D. 1996. “Community service learning in the social studies:

Historical roots, empirical evidence, critical issues.” Theory and

Research in Social Education 24:331–359.

APPENDIX A

CIVED FRAMING QUESTIONS

APPENDIX A—FRAMING QUESTIONS

103

he following 18 framing questions formed the central part of Phase 1 of

CivEd. Countries were asked to answer these questions to help define the

universe of domains considered relevant to the study.

1. What are young people expected or likely to have learned by age 14 or 15

from study of the nation’s history or literature (or the arts) as a guide to

understanding their country, their government, and the rights and

obligations of citizenship?

What are the texts, role models, historical events, and ideas that are widely

believed to be an important orienting force for all citizens to know about—for

example, constitutional principles; national liberators; decisive wars, revolutions,

or uprisings; national traumas or periods of oppression. Who are the heroes and

role models thought to be worthy of national pride, and how are they presented to

students?

2. What are young people expected or likely to have acquired as a sense of

national identity or national loyalty by age 14 or 15?

To what degree is loyalty or sense of belonging to the nation, to its various

communities, and to its traditions and institutions thought to be important to

develop among young people? What attitudes are students expected to develop

toward the institutions of government, authorities, and office holders? How

much and what kinds of criticism of or skepticism about monarchs or national

leaders are thought to be appropriate? What, if any, symbols (such as the

national flag) are thought particularly important for students to respect?

3. What are 14- or 15-year-olds expected or likely to have learned about

relations between their country and other countries?

Which countries or groups of countries do they learn about as past, present, or

future threats, and what is the nature of these threats? Which countries are allies?

What are young people likely to learn about the nature and appropriateness of the

role their country has played and continues to play in global and regional spheres

of influence? What supranational structures or international organizations are

thought to be important enough to have a place in the young person’s awareness

or loyalty? How important is it in this country to speak of young people

acquiring “a global perspective,” or an “international outlook,” and how are those

terms interpreted?

4. What are young people expected or likely to have learned by age 14 or 15

about the role of the military and the police as guardians of the nation’s

security?

Is military service mandatory (for both genders)? Is it viewed as a normal and

important part of preparation for adulthood and citizenship? Under what

conditions is the young person expected or likely to learn to be compliant and not

to question these authorities (trusting in fair treatment), as opposed to learning

ways to deal with perceived misuse of power by the military or police? Are there

likely to be differences in the ways in which individuals of different social

classes or ethnic groups view these authorities?

T
APPENDIX A—FRAMING QUESTIONS

104

5. What are young people expected or likely to have learned by age 14 or 15

about those belonging to “minority groups” or other groups which see

themselves as disadvantaged or disenfranchised (as defined by ethnicity,

race, immigrant status, or other characteristics) in relation to the rights

and obligations of citizenship?

What groups, if any, are viewed as most subject to discrimination? What can be

said about the social identities advocated for young people from minority groups,

on a continuum ranging from assimilation to pluralism? How are instances of

past discrimination or oppression to be dealt with? Are attitudes and behaviors

of respect and tolerance toward some or all of these groups encouraged explicitly

or implicitly, and how?

6. What are young people in their role as citizens expected or likely to have

acquired with regard to the understanding of religion or the acquisition of

religious-based values by age 14 or 15?

What is expected of young people from families who do not share the dominant

religions(s) or moral beliefs? Is the treatment of religious minorities or

nonbelievers an issue in citizenship education?

7. What are young people expected or likely to have learned concerning the

use of a particular official language or languages within the nation by age

14 or 15?

Are young people expected to respect the use of languages other than the national

language(s)? What are they expected to learn about whether and when

individuals should be able to use other languages in public settings (including

schools and businesses) and in private settings such as the home?

8. What are young people by age 14 or 15 expected or likely to have learned

about whether the rights and obligations of citizenship differ (in law or in

fact) according to gender?

Are young people taught that men and women have different rights and

responsibilities of citizenship? If differences exist between men and women in

the society in actual levels of political participation or if there are very few

women in positions of national leadership, are these matters discussed as

problems or issues with young people, or are they largely ignored?

9. What are young people of age 14 or 15 expected or likely to have learned

about the rights of the family relative to the State?

To what extent is the young person to be taught that the rights of the family

supersede those of the State and to what extent is he/she taught that they are

subordinate?

10. To what extent are young people expected or likely to have learned by 14 or

15 that economic principles (such as free market principles vs. state

intervention and control over the provision of goods and services) are

connected with government or political issues?

Are young people to be taught that it is the State’s responsibility to give

protection from such threats as unemployment, illness, homelessness, or hunger,
APPENDIX A—FRAMING QUESTIONS

105

or are they to be taught that these are private matters, which are not the

responsibility of the State? If youth unemployment is high, is this dealt with as a

political issue in school?

11. If “democracy” is a central concept, what does it mean within the national

context and what are young people expected or likely to learn about it by

age 14 or 15?

Is the concept presented primarily in an idealized form? Is the practice of the

democratic values included every day in the school or community (e.g., the right

to appeal decisions thought to be unjust, or to participate in decision making in

schools or classrooms)? With what alternatives (e.g., totalitarianism,

authoritarianism) is this conception of democracy contrasted? Are young people

expected or likely to learn mainly about one particular conception of democracy

(e.g., about representative democracy with its emphasis on leaders chosen

through contested elections; or about more participatory or direct forms of

democracy; or about substantive views of democracy in which economic and

social equality are argued to be of great importance)?

12. If “human rights” are a central concept, how are they defined and what do

they mean, and what are young people expected to have learned about them

by age 14 or 15?

Are they defined primarily in a national context (with references to rights

guaranteed by the State) or an international context (with reference to documents

such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights)? Are distinctions made

between civil/political rights and social/economic/cultural rights? Is there

attention to children’s rights?

13. What are young people expected or likely to have learned about law and

the rule of law, the constitution (written or unwritten), the courts, the

national/regional legislature, elections, and other institutions of

government by 14 or 15?

What sort of understanding of these matters are young people expected to

achieve—one that is largely limited to the memorization of facts about the

structure and processes of government or one that is analytical in addressing

questions of how well these structures and processes operate? Are issues such as

the relations between different parts of the government, including separation of

powers, important? What civic responsibilities are stressed—for example,

obeying the law, paying taxes?

14. What sorts of political communication and active political participation are

encouraged or likely for those aged 14 or 15 and what sorts are

discouraged or unlikely?

Are there certain topics or opinions that students are discouraged from discussing

in their classes? To what extent are young people expected to know about and

participate in election campaigns and political parties? Are they encouraged,

allowed, or not allowed to discuss in school the disagreements that exist between

candidates or parties? Are they expected to learn to compare positions on

political issues? How are they to be prepared to vote in an informed way when

they are of an age to do so? Are young people expected or likely to believe that
APPENDIX A—FRAMING QUESTIONS

106

the government is responsive to citizens’ expressions of political views and to

feel confident or efficacious about their ability to make their opinions heard?

15. What are young people of 14 or 15 expected or likely to know and believe

about dissent or protest as a way of changing government policy?

Are they expected to learn that conflict between groups about issues is normal,

exceptional, or deviant? Are students allowed to express dissent openly in the

classroom? More broadly, what kinds of dissent or criticism of the government

are to be encouraged and what kinds are to go ignored or suppressed? For

example, what is taught about participation in political protests of different

types?

16. What are young people of 14 or 15 expected or likely to believe about the

mass media as sources of information about politics and government?

Is more emphasis put on the media as reliable and to be trusted, or are the media

more likely to be thought of as biased or unreliable? To which media sources are

students encouraged to pay attention, and to which are they likely to attend?

What are young people expected or likely to learn about freedom of expression

and the conditions (if any) under which it can be restricted, and who can invoke

such censorship?

17. What are young people of 14 or 15 expected or likely to know and believe

about the source and nature of specific local problems, especially those

existing in their own communities?

Is there special concern about environmental problems, problems relating to

poverty, or problems of violence and disregard for laws (for example)? Does the

school provide for or encourage the involvement of students in community action

or service to ameliorate such problems in their local community? Are young

people likely to be optimistic or pessimistic about their ability to contribute to

solving these problems? Are they encouraged to think about these problems in a

broader context (e.g., the global nature of environmental problems or the national

economic structure as it relates to poverty), or is that level of analysis ignored or

discouraged?

18. What are young people of 14 or 15 expected or likely to have learned about

the role and influence of extragovernmental groups in governmental and

political processes?

For example, what is to be learned about the role of organized interest groups?

To what extent are young people expected or likely to believe that elites in the

nation (e.g., people of great wealth or high levels of education) possess or

deserve special influence or power? Are business organizations, professional

organizations, or trade unions thought to possess or deserve special influence or

power? What other nongovernmental organizations are young people likely to

believe to be important or powerful? Are there social groups that are widely

recognized as lacking in power or as disenfranchised?
APPENDIX B

THE CIVED STUDENT INSTRUMENT

APPENDIX B—THE CIVED STUDENT INSTRUMENT

109

o ensure that the student instrument conformed as closely as possible to

the framework specifications, the development of items was guided by the

IEA International Steering Committee (ISC), a committee of civic

education teachers, teacher educators, and leading scholars in the field.

Because no pools of available items existed that seemed to yield the number or

kind of items needed, items were developed by working across the framework

matrix (figure 1.1). Beginning in 1996, cognitive items were developed (Types

1 and 2), followed by concepts items (Type 3), attitudes and actions (Types 4 and

5), and classroom climate and student background variables. All members of the

ISC along with the National Research Coordinators (NRC) from about half the

participating countries were involved either in writing items or in reviewing them

in small groups. All items were reviewed for relevance, developmental

appropriateness, and fairness.

Approximately 140 Type 1 and Type 2 items (content and skills) were

developed. All items were suitable for administration in countries that are

democracies or striving to become democracies. The Type 1/Domain 1

(Democracy) items cover the principles of democracy, democratic institutions

(e.g., functions of elections), and citizenship, not the details of political

arrangements in any one country. The Type 1/Domain 2 (National identity and

international relations) and 3 (Social cohesion and diversity) items likewise deal

with internationally relevant or generalized issues, not with particular country

matters. Some of the items of Type 2 (skills items) ask students to distinguish

between fact and opinion. Others are based on a short article from a mock

newspaper, political leaflet, or political cartoon.

Eighty Type 1 and 2 items were prepiloted in 1997 across 20 countries, and their

performance was analyzed. On the basis of their psychometric properties, 62 of

them were retained and 6 new items were developed. These 68 items were sorted

into two forms and, along with Type 3 through 5 items, were piloted in 25

countries between April and October 1998. From the 68 Type 1 and 2 items

piloted, 38 were retained for the final assessment on the basis of their psychometric

properties (i.e., difficulty, discrimination index, and differential item functioning).

The final instrument includes a total of 38 cognitive items, 25 Type 1 content

items, and 13 Type 2 skills items. The final test reliabilities for the 38-item scale

and the two subscales are above .85 in all participating countries.

Overall, the test items are well spread across the content subdomain of

Democracy and democratic institutions, and they include some items in the

domains of National identity and international issues and Social cohesion and

diversity. The item ratios (written to piloted to accepted) are similar to student

assessments conducted by the National Assessment of Educational Progress

(NAEP).

Pilot results for the survey items were examined in a way similar to assessment

items, with the goal of eliminating poorly performing items. All of these items take

the form of Likert scale items and are to be used as multiple indicators of latent

constructs for scale construction. Item deletion at the pilot stage was based on the

reliability of the scales constructed from these items, using a Cronbach’s alpha level

of below .70 as a criterion for deletion. The final instrument includes 52 Type 3

T
APPENDIX B—THE CIVED STUDENT INSTRUMENT

110

items, 70 Type 4 items, and 24 Type 5 items. Items assessing student background,

school experience, and organizational membership were also included.
APPENDIX C

OVERVIEW OF CIVED METHODS AND

PROCEDURES

APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

113

his appendix provides information about the methods and procedures used

in CivEd. A forthcoming CivEd Technical Report to be released by

NCES will contain more extensive information about these procedures.

Sampling and data collection

The CivEd school sample was drawn for the United States in October 1998,

following international requirements as given in the IEA Civic Education Study

School Sampling Manual. The U.S. sample was a three-stage, stratified,

clustered sample similar to the ones used for TIMSS, TIMSS-Repeat, and other

national school samples. The first stage included defining geographic primary

sampling units (PSUs), which are typically groups of contiguous counties, but

sometimes a single county; classifying the PSUs into strata defined by region and

community type; then selecting PSUs with probability proportional to size. In

the second stage, both public and private schools were selected within each PSU

that was selected at the first stage. The third stage involved randomly selecting

intact classrooms within the selected schools. A small number of students

selected for participation were excluded because of limited English proficiency

or severe disability.

Because of the likelihood that some originally sampled schools would refuse to

participate in CivEd, replacement schools for noncooperating sampled schools

were identified, assigning the two schools immediately following the sampled

school on the frame. The sorting by implicit stratification variables, and the

subsequent ordering of the school sampling frame by size, ensured that any

sampled school’s replacements had similar characteristics. There were several

constraints on the assignment of substitutes. A sampled school was not allowed

to substitute for another, and a given school could not be assigned to substitute

for more than one sampled school. Furthermore, substitutes were required to be

in the same PSU as the sampled school. Finally, private schools had to be of the

same school type, and public schools had to be in the same minority enrollment

category. Under these rules, it was possible to identify at least one substitute for

most sampled schools. CivEd participation rates were computed first using only

the originally sampled schools. The final participation rate was computed using

both originally sampled and replacement schools. The overall school and student

participation rates for the United States are presented in table C.1 below.

Table C.1.— CivEd school, student, and overall participation

rates (weighted) for the United States: 1999

Participation rate

before replacement

Participation rate

after replacement

Total number that

participated

School 65% 83% 124

Student --- 93% 2,811

Overall 61% 77% ---

SOURCE: Torney-Purta, J., Lehman, R., Oswald, H., and Schulz, W. (2001). Citizenship and Education in Twenty-Eight

Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amsterdam: The International Association for the

Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).

T
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

114

Students with disabilities (SD) and limited English proficiency (LEP)

students

No particular testing accommodations were provided to facilitate inclusion of

students with disabilities and limited English proficiency (LEP) students in

CivEd. As a result, decisions regarding exclusions were made by someone at the

school who was knowledgeable about the students. The following guidelines

were provided to the school coordinator to help determine which students should

be excluded from CivEd:

1. Student is functionally disabled. These are students who are permanently

physically disabled in such a way that they cannot perform in the testing

situation. Functionally disabled students who can respond should be

included in the testing. Any sampled student who is temporarily disabled

such that she or he cannot participate in the assessment will be considered

absent from the assessment.

2. Student is educable mentally retarded. These are students who are

considered in the professional opinion of the school principal or other

qualified staff members to be educable mentally retarded or who have been

psychologically tested as such. These include students who are emotionally

or mentally unable to follow even the general instructions of the test.

Students should not be excluded solely because of a poor academic

performance or normal disciplinary problems.

3. Nonnative language speakers. These are students who are actually unable

to read or speak the language of the test and would be unable to overcome

the language barrier in the test situation. Typically, a student who has

received less than one year of instruction in the language of the test should be

excluded; all others should be included.

Overall, 0.5 percent of sampled students were excluded from CivEd for reasons

related to disabilities and limited English proficiency.

Item response theory (IRT) scaling

Item response theory (IRT) methods were used to estimate average scale scores

in CivEd for the nation as a whole and for various subgroups of interest. IRT

models the probability of answering a question correctly as a mathematical

function of proficiency or skill. The main purpose of IRT analysis is to provide a

common scale on which performance (or some other trait) can be compared

across groups, such as those defined by sex, race/ethnicity, or place of birth.

IRT models assume that an examinee’s performance on each item reflects

characteristics of the item and characteristics of the examinee. Although an

infinite variety of models is possible, those most commonly used characterize

items by the level of proficiency that they require and the precision with which

item performance reflects proficiency along that trait. Examinees are

characterized by their proficiency. An examinee’s performance on a particular

item reflects item difficulty, his or her proficiency, and the effects of other forces

that are not correlated across items or individuals.
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

115

All models assume that all items on a scale measure a common ability or

proficiency (e.g., civic knowledge) and that the probability of a correct response

on an item is uncorrelated with the probability of a correct response on another

item, an assumption known as conditional independence. Items are measured in

terms of their difficulty as well as their ability to discriminate among examinees

of varying ability and the probability that examinees with low ability will obtain

a correct response through guessing.

CivEd used two types of IRT models to estimate scale scores: the one-parameter

Rasch model for the three civic achievement scales, and the Generalized Partial

Credit model (GPC) for the attitudinal scales. The one-parameter Rasch model

specifies the probability of a correct response as a logistic distribution in which

items vary only in terms of their difficulty. This model is used on items that are

scored correct or incorrect. The GPC model was developed for situations where

item responses are contained in two or more ordered categories (such as “agree”

and “strongly agree”). Items are conceptualized as a series of ordered steps

where examinees receive partial credit for successfully completing a step (i.e., for

answering “strongly agree” rather than “agree”). The GPC is formulated based

on the assumption that each probability of choosing the k

th category over the (k –

1)

th category is governed by the dichotomous (i.e., Rasch) response model.

Weighting and variance estimation

A complex sample design was used to select the students who were assessed.

The properties of a sample selected through a complex design could be very

different from those of a simple random sample, in which every student in the

target population has an equal chance of selection and in which the observations

from different sampled students can be considered to be statistically independent

of one another. Therefore, the properties of the sample for the complex data

collection design were taken into account during the analysis of the CivEd data.

Standard errors calculated as though the data had been collected from a simple

random sample would generally underestimate sampling errors.

One way that the properties of the sample design were addressed was by using

sampling weights to account for the fact that the probabilities of selection were

not identical for all students. All population and subpopulation characteristics

based on the CivEd data used sampling weights in their estimation.

The statistics presented in this report are estimates of group and subgroup

performance based on a sample of students, rather than the values that could be

calculated if every student in the nation answered every question on the

instrument. It is therefore important to have measures of the degree of

uncertainty of the estimates. Accordingly, in addition to providing estimates of

percentages of students and their average scale score, this report provides

information about the uncertainty of each statistic.

Because CivEd uses complex sampling procedures, conventional formulas for

estimating sampling variablity that assume simple random sampling are

inappropriate. For this reason, CivEd uses a Taylor series procedure to estimate

standard errors. The Taylor series linearization method provides a reasonable

measure of uncertainty for any information about students or schools. Results
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

116

using Taylor series are consistent with those using a jackknife replication

procedure, with an advantage of the Taylor series procedures being that it is

computationally more efficient.

Interpreting results from survey samples

Confidence intervals around means and percentages

Results from CivEd are based on a random sample of students. Because data on

the entire population were not collected, the resulting estimates may differ

somewhat from estimates that would have been obtained from the whole

population using the same instruments, instructions, and procedures.

The CivEd sample was selected from a large number of possible samples of the

same size that could have been selected using the same sample design. Estimates

derived from the different samples would differ from one another. The

difference between a sample estimate and the average of all possible samples is

called the sampling deviation. The standard (or sampling) error of a survey

estimate is a measure of the variation among the estimates from all possible

samples and, thus, is a measure of the precision with which an estimate from a

particular sample approximates the average result of all possible samples.

The estimated standard errors from two sample statistics can be used to estimate

the precision of the difference between the two statistics and to avoid concluding

that there is an actual difference when the difference in sample estimates may be

due only to sampling error. The need to be aware of the precision of differences

arises, for example, when comparing mean achievement scores between

subgroups in CivEd, such as between racial/ethnic groups. The standard error,

SA−B, of the difference between sample estimate A and sample estimate B (when

A and B do not overlap) is

 

2 2

S A − B = S A + S B

where SA S Band are the standard error of sample estimates A and B,

respectively. When the ratio (called a t-statistic) of the difference between the

two sample statistics and the standard error of the difference as calculated above

is less than 2, we cannot be sure that the difference is not due only to sampling

error, and we should be cautious in concluding that there is a difference. In this

report, for example, if the t-statistic is less than 1.96, we would not conclude that

there is a difference.

To illustrate this further, consider the data on civic achievement by race/ethnicity

from table 4.1 and the associated standard error table D.4.1. The estimated

average civic achievement score on the total civic knowledge scale is 111.6 for

whites and 92.7 for blacks. Is there enough evidence to safely conclude that this

difference is not due only to sampling error and that the actual average civic

achievement of black ninth-grade U.S. students is lower than that of their white

counterparts? The standard errors for these two estimates are 1.24 and 1.73,

respectively. Using the formula above, we calculate the standard error of the

difference as 2.1. The ratio of the estimated difference of 18.9 to the standard

error of the difference of 2.1 is 9. Using the table below, we can see that there is
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

117

less than a 5 percent chance that the 18.9 point difference is due only to sampling

error. Therefore, we may safely conclude that the average civic achievement of

blacks on the total civic knowledge scale is lower than that of whites.

Percent chance that a difference is due only to sampling error:

t-statistic 1.00 1.64 1.96 2.00 2.57

Percent chance (two-tailed) 32 10 5 4.5 1

The procedure above applies only if we are comparing one group of students to a

second group (e.g., whites to blacks). However, most readers draw conclusions

after making multiple comparisons within a table (e.g., whites to Hispanics,

whites to Asians, blacks to Hispanics, etc.). In these circumstances, the chance

that one of the many differences examined is a result only of sampling error

increases as the number of comparisons also increases. The Bonferroni

procedure can be used to ensure that the likelihood of any of the comparisons

being a result only of sampling error stays less than 5 percent. The Bonferroni

procedure reduces this risk for each comparison being made. If N comparisons

are being made, then dividing 5 percent by N ensures that the risk of a difference

being due only to sampling error is less than 5/N for each comparison. The table

below provides critical values for the t-statistic for each comparison when it is a

part of N comparisons.

Number of

comparisons 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 40

Critical value

(two-tailed) 1.96 2.24 2.39 2.50 2.58 2.81 3.02 3.23

For example, a reader might use table 4.1 to compare whites to blacks, Hispanics,

and Asians, thus making three comparisons. After making three comparisons,

the reader may want to draw the conclusion that blacks scored below whites on

the total civic achievement scale. However, because the reader is now making

three comparisons and not just one, the critical value of the t-statistic is 2.39 and

not 1.96. Since 9 is still higher than 2.39, the conclusion is safe to make.

Effective degrees of freedom for the t-statistic

Because of the clustered nature of the CivEd sample, the effective degrees of

freedom for t-tests when performing tests of significance is considerably less

than the number of students entering into the comparison, and less than the

number of primary sampling unit (PSU) pairs that go into the computation. The

number of degrees of freedom for the variance equals the number of independent

pieces of information used to generate the variance. In the case of data from

CivEd, a good approximation of the pieces of information are the 40 jackknife

replicate zones within which the variance components are estimated. (See the

forthcoming CivEd Technical Report for more details). However, not all 40

replicate zones necessarily provide information when computing the variance.

For example, if the replicates were formed by geographic area, and Asians are

found in ten of these areas, then we would have at most only 9 degrees of

freedom when computing estimates for this subpopulation.
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

118

To address this issue we examined the number of distinct replicate estimates for

some of the smallest subpopulations reported (e.g., blacks, Asians, multiracial).

This number ranged between 25 and 30. Because keeping track of the number of

distinct replicate estimates for each subgroup for all reported results would

involve too heavy a computational burden to be implemented in practice, it was

decided to use 26 as the effective degrees of freedom for the t-statistic throughout

the report. This decision will tend to produce slightly conservative estimates,

which has been considered advisable, for situations in which more than 26

distinct replicate estimates enter into the variance computation.

Treatment of missing data

The analyses presented in this report are based on data that have not been

imputed for missing responses. This was done so that the estimates would be

consistent with those presented in the IEA International Release Report. In

effect, this procedure is equivalent to substituting the sample mean for missing

cases. As a result of this non-imputation, percentage distributions of various

subgroups may differ across tables. Below, we provide the list of variables used

in this report for which 5 percent or more of responses were missing.

Table C.2.—CivEd report variables with 5 percent or more

missing data

Item Label

Percent

missing

BS3B10 Adult shows respect for government 5.00

BS4D4 Trust in the police 5.02

BSGAS14 Participated in a sports organization 5.11

BSGADU2 Father/stepfather/guardian lives at home all the time 5.17

BS3B13 Activities to protect the environment 5.80

BS4E9 Country should be proud about what it has achieved 5.90

BSGAS01 Participated in a student council 5.91

BSGAS13 Participated in an art, music, drama organization 6.00

BS3C3 Provide basic health care for everyone 6.07

BS3B8 Follows the political issues in the newspaper 6.09

BS4G1 Women should run for public office 6.55

BS3C8 Provide free basic education for all 6.61

BS4G4 Women should have the same rights as men 6.67

BS3C4 Adequate standard of living for old people 6.71

BSGAS10 Participated in Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts 6.74

BSGAS15 Participated in an organization sponsored by a religious group 6.80

BS3C9 Ensure equal political opportunities for men and women 6.80

BS3B11 Takes part in activities promoting human rights 6.91

BS3C11 Guarantee peace and order within the country 7.01

BS3C2 Keep prices under control 7.02

BS4H2 Children should have the same opportunity for education 7.17

BSGAS08 Participated in a group conducting voluntary activities 7.21

BSGAS09 Participated in a charity collecting money 7.34

BSGAS03 Participated in a group to prepare school newspaper 7.40

BSGAS04 Participated in an environmental organization 7.48

BS3C10 Control pollution of the environment 7.54

BS4E3 The flag of this country is important 7.74
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

119

Table C.2.—continued

Item Label

Percent

missing

BS4D3 Trust in the courts 7.86

BSGAS02 Participated in a youth organization 7.87

BSGAS12 Participated in a computer club 8.05

BSGAS05 Participated in a U.N. or UNESCO club 8.08

BSGAS07 Participated in a human rights organization 8.10

BSGAS06 Participated in a student exchange 8.14

BS3C1 Guarantee a job for everyone 8.34

BSGAS11 Participated in a cultural association 8.37

BS3B3 Adult joins a political party 8.39

BS4G11 Men and women should get equal pay 8.52

BS4G6 Women should stay out of politics 8.89

BS3C12 Promote honesty and morality 9.12

BS3C6 Adequate standard of living for the unemployed 9.42

BS4H1 Have opportunity to keep their own language 9.53

BS3B12 Engages in political discussions 9.85

BS3C5 Industries with support need to grow 10.46

BS4H4 Keep their own customs and lifestyle 10.64

BS4H5 Have the same rights that everyone else does 10.66

BS4E7 I have great love for this country 10.70

BS4J2 Positive changes happen when students work together 10.80

BS4G13 Men are better qualified to be political leaders 10.83

BS4D2 Trust in local council or government of your town 11.15

BS4J1 How the school is run makes school better 11.35

BS4E4 Be alert and stop threats from other countries 11.38

BS4G9 Jobs are scarce when men have more rights 11.40

BS5M1 Vote in national elections 11.46

BS4N3 Teachers respect our opinion 11.48

BS4N2 Encouraged to make up their own minds 11.68

BS4J3 Student group helps solve problems in school 11.93

BS4J5 Students acting together can have influence 12.67

BS4N1 Feel free to disagree openly with teachers 12.89

BS4H3 Have the opportunity to vote 12.90

BS4D1 Trust in the national government 12.95

BS4D8 Trust in political parties 13.14

BSNATP6 How much time spent on homework 13.38

BS4N5 Feel free to express opinions in class 13.51

BS3C7 Reduce differences in income and wealth 13.56

BSNATP7 How many pages do you read in school 13.63

BS4D11 Trust in Congress 13.79

BS4E1 Help to protect jobs in this country 13.84

BSNATP8 How many days absent from school 13.85

BSNATP9 How many times you changed schools 13.87

BSNATP10 How often you discuss things you studied 13.93

BSNATP11 How often you use a computer at home 13.98

BS4N8 Teachers present several sides of an issue 14.69

BS4E2 Keep other countries from trying to influence the U.S. 14.70

BS4E12 Should stop outsiders from influencing the U.S. 14.98

BS5M4 Letters about social/political concerns 15.51

BS4N7 Discuss political/social issues 15.77
APPENDIX C—METHODS AND PROCEDURES

120

Table C.2.—continued

Item Label

Percent

missing

BS5M3 Join a political party 17.04

BSGEDUM Highest level of mother’s education 17.24

BS5M5 Be a candidate for a local/city office 17.52

BSGEDUF Highest level of father’s education 18.21

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D

STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

123

Table D.3.1.—Standard errors for percentage of U.S. schools

with policies related to civic education in ninth

grade, by policy: 1999

Percentage

Require civic-related subject 7.09

Participate in program(s) related to civic education 7.12

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table D.3.2.—Standard errors for percentage of U.S. schools

with a ninth grade participating in various civic

education programs, by program: 1999

Percentage

Service clubs 9.58

Conflict-resolution or peer-mediation program 9.72

Girls/Boys State, Junior Statesmen 9.32

Character or values education program 8.93

Stock market game 9.26

Mock trial competitions 7.00

Project Citizen or other service learning or community service program 9.33

Close Up, Presidential Classroom, or other program that takes students to

 Washington, D.C. 8.77

Program in which students work in state legislature 7.78

History Day 7.40

Debate team or program 3.94

Kids Voting USA or other mock election program 5.80

Junior Achievement 3.11

Model United Nations 1.84

We the People competition 0.62

Other civic education programs or service organizations 7.75

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

124

Table D.3.3.—Standard errors for U.S. principals’ reports on

the number of class periods per week that ninthgrade students are required to take in various

civic-related subjects*: 1999

Percentage

 Less than one period 6.67

 One to two periods 2.16

 Three to four periods 6.98

 Five to six periods 9.51

* Civic-related subjects include social studies, civics, citizenship, history, law, and economics.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table D.3.4.—Standard errors for percentage of U.S. principals

who agree or strongly agree with various

statements about how civic education should be

taught: 1999

Percentage

Integrated into subjects related to human and social sciences 2.77

Integrated into all subjects taught at school 5.87

Taught as a specific subject 9.98

Extracurricular activity 7.07

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

125

Table D.3.5.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

reports on school activities related to civic

education: 1999

Percentage

Time spent studying social studies in school

 Never or hardly ever 1.62

 Once or twice a month 0.75

 Once or twice a week 1.44

 Almost every day 2.44

Time spent weekly on social studies homework

 Not assigned 1.94

 Does not do it 0.98

 Less than 1 hour 1.41

 1 to 2 hours 1.49

 3 to 4 hours 0.78

 5 hours or more 0.63

Time spent writing long social studies answers

 Never 0.79

 Once or twice a year 0.86

 Once or twice a month 1.33

 At least once a week 1.71

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

126

Table D.3.6.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by schoollevel characteristics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Total — 1.54 1.56 0.95

Civic-related subject required

 Yes 5.21 1.48 1.40 1.31

 No 5.21 1.90 1.82 1.57

School participation in

programs related to civic

education

 Yes 2.59 1.52 1.41 1.30

 No 2.59 3.20 3.08 2.67

School type

 Public 2.11 1.45 1.39 1.17

 Private 2.11 3.65 2.62 5.16

School size

 500 or fewer 4.10 2.44 2.38 1.87

 501–1,000 5.06 2.38 2.28 2.29

 1,001–1,500 4.84 2.75 2.46 2.68

 1,501–2,000 5.71 2.62 2.36 2.21

 More than 2,000 5.57 3.75 3.62 2.89

Percent of students eligible for

free lunch

 1st quartile (0–13) 6.33 2.16 2.02 1.89

 2nd quartile (14–25) 5.88 2.62 2.39 2.28

 3rd quartile (26–48) 3.54 2.06 1.90 2.04

 4th quartile (49–100) 4.16 2.76 2.58 2.50

Class size

 20 or fewer 4.98 1.87 1.66 1.96

 21 to 25 5.93 2.41 2.27 2.04

 26 to 29 5.13 1.76 1.60 1.53

 More than 29 4.01 4.30 3.95 3.95

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

127

Table D.3.7.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by

instructional practices: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Time spent studying social studies

in school

 Never or hardly ever 1.62 1.48 1.50 1.59

 Once or twice a month 0.74 2.64 2.52 2.43

 Once or twice a week 1.45 1.82 1.69 1.98

 Almost every day 2.44 1.33 1.23 1.14

Time spent each week on social

studies homework

 Not assigned 1.95 1.87 1.74 1.89

 Does not do it 0.98 2.13 2.06 2.31

 Less than 1 hour 1.41 1.38 1.36 1.14

 1 to 2 hours 1.49 1.73 1.55 1.62

 3 to 4 hours 0.78 2.26 2.02 1.80

 5 hours or more 0.64 2.32 2.14 2.07

Time spent writing long answers to

social studies questions

 Never 0.80 1.90 1.83 1.88

 Once or twice a year 0.85 1.76 1.78 1.40

 Once or twice a month 1.34 1.42 1.33 1.22

 At least once a week 1.71 1.09 1.02 1.10

Time spent each day on homework

 Not assigned 1.00 1.94 1.95 1.80

 Does not do it 0.78 2.62 2.48 2.67

 1/2 hour or less 1.30 1.65 1.52 1.69

 1 hour 1.36 1.56 1.54 1.15

 More than 1 hour 2.80 1.27 1.16 1.23

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

128

Table D.3.8.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the open classroom climate

for discussion scale, by selected background

characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.09

Sex

 Male 1.57 0.10

 Female 1.57 0.09

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.54 0.10

 Black 1.98 0.13

 Hispanic 1.79 0.14

 Asian 0.89 0.16

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.51 0.40

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.95 0.09

 Foreign-born 0.95 0.17

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.84 0.23

 11–50 1.28 0.11

 51–100 0.79 0.11

 101–200 1.07 0.16

 More than 200 1.46 0.12

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

129

Table D.4.1.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by

background demographics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Sex

 Male 1.50 1.30 1.22 1.16

 Female 1.50 1.24 1.21 1.07

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.61 1.24 1.18 1.04

 Black 1.98 1.73 1.54 2.04

 Hispanic 1.89 1.58 1.42 1.60

 Asian 0.85 3.77 3.46 3.24

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial 0.58 3.23 3.25 2.27

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.95 1.14 1.10 0.95

 Foreign-born 0.95 1.73 1.53 1.84

Region

 Northeast 3.38 2.87 2.69 2.50

 Southeast 2.99 2.62 2.53 2.31

 Central 4.35 1.65 1.54 1.48

 West 4.16 1.86 1.63 1.80

Frequency of changing schools in the

past 2 years as a result of moving

 Never 1.21 1.15 1.09 1.06

 Once 0.71 1.97 1.75 1.95

 Twice or more 0.83 2.31 2.17 1.94

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

130

Table D.4.2.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by sex and

race/ethnicity: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Male

 White 1.47 1.62 1.51 1.39

 Black 0.93 1.97 1.81 2.19

 Hispanic 1.06 1.85 1.67 1.90

 Asian *** *** *** ***

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial *** *** *** ***

Female

 White 1.93 1.16 1.16 1.01

 Black 1.18 1.89 1.67 2.41

 Hispanic 0.99 1.70 1.55 1.76

 Asian *** *** *** ***

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** *** *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** *** *** ***

 Multiracial *** *** *** ***

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table D.4.3.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by home

literacy: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.88 1.25 1.12 1.37

 11–50 1.17 0.93 0.87 1.05

 51–100 0.77 1.33 1.21 1.41

 101–200 1.04 1.53 1.49 1.23

 More than 200 1.43 1.71 1.56 1.36

Receives a daily newspaper

 Yes 1.63 1.30 1.24 1.05

 No 1.63 1.18 1.13 1.11

Parents’ highest level of education

 Elementary or less 0.71 2.17 1.89 2.74

 Some high school 0.79 1.78 1.69 2.06

 Finished high school 1.53 1.22 1.21 1.25

 Some vocational/technical education 0.73 2.40 2.24 2.35

 Some college 1.31 1.32 1.23 1.25

 Completed a bachelor’s degree 2.24 1.71 1.71 1.12

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

131

Table D.4.4.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by expected

years of further education and school

absenteeism: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Expected years of further

education

 0–2 0.49 2.36 2.03 2.89

 3–4 1.03 1.03 0.94 1.22

 5–6 1.12 1.29 1.23 1.30

 7–8 1.27 1.09 1.05 0.99

 9–10 0.92 1.50 1.59 1.03

 More than 11 0.59 2.37 2.18 1.85

Number of days absent

from school last month

 0 1.49 1.39 1.34 1.11

 1–2 1.00 1.36 1.23 1.31

 3–4 0.79 2.00 1.87 1.87

 5–9 0.50 2.34 2.18 2.32

 More than 10 0.54 3.38 2.87 4.30

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table D.4.5.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by family and

home environment characteristics: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Number of parents in the home

 Two parents 1.27 1.16 1.12 0.96

 One parent 1.18 1.43 1.33 1.39

 No parents 0.32 2.77 2.31 3.76

Number of people in the home

 1 or 2 0.39 2.23 2.19 2.10

 3 0.65 1.65 1.61 1.33

 4 1.22 1.63 1.54 1.39

 5 0.93 1.28 1.28 1.14

 6 0.71 1.72 1.59 1.54

 More than 6 0.69 1.44 1.22 1.71

Frequency of English spoken in the

home

 Never *** *** *** ***

 Sometimes 0.82 2.01 1.89 2.21

 Always or almost always 0.88 1.18 1.12 0.99

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

132

Table D.4.6.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by frequency

of participation in organized extracurricular

activities: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Never or almost never 0.74 1.62 1.56 1.45

A few times each month 1.02 1.74 1.58 1.48

Several days a week 0.97 1.31 1.25 1.16

Almost every day 1.20 1.31 1.26 1.19

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table D.4.7.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students who reported ever participating in

various organized extracurricular activities, by

organization: 1999

Percentage

Student council or student government 1.50

Youth organization affiliated with a political party or union 0.86

School newspaper 0.97

Environmental organization 1.16

United Nations or UNESCO Club 0.29

Student exchange or school partnership program 0.79

Human rights organization 0.62

Group conducting voluntary activities to help the community 1.36

Charity collecting money for a social cause 1.47

Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts 1.30

Cultural organization based on ethnicity 0.83

Computer club 1.10

Art, music, or drama organization 1.43

Sports organization or team 1.13

Organization sponsored by a religious group 1.55

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

133

Table D.4.8.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by whether

they reported participating in various

organizations: 1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Student council or government

 Yes 1.50 1.40 1.33 1.31

 No 1.50 1.20 1.12 1.08

School newspaper

 Yes 0.97 1.58 1.50 1.40

 No 0.97 1.25 1.19 1.09

Environmental organization

 Yes 1.16 1.24 1.22 1.09

 No 1.16 1.25 1.17 1.09

Group conducting voluntary

activities to help the community

 Yes 1.36 1.35 1.29 1.07

 No 1.36 1.14 1.07 1.08

Charity collecting money for a social

cause

 Yes 1.47 1.22 1.21 1.05

 No 1.47 1.32 1.21 1.15

Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts

 Yes 1.30 1.17 1.13 0.98

 No 1.30 1.31 1.22 1.18

Art, music, or drama organization

 Yes 1.43 1.27 1.24 1.03

 No 1.43 1.22 1.11 1.17

Sports organization or team

 Yes 1.13 1.12 1.07 0.95

 No 1.13 1.90 1.79 1.65

Organization sponsored by a

religious group

 Yes 1.55 1.27 1.26 0.95

 No 1.55 1.24 1.13 1.15

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

134

Table D.4.9.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by frequency

of time spent in various out-of-school activities:

1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Time spent after school talking or

“hanging out” with friends

 Never or almost never 0.72 1.99 1.75 2.23

 A few times each month 0.87 1.71 1.65 1.50

 Several days a week 1.01 1.52 1.47 1.25

 Almost every day 1.52 1.21 1.15 1.12

Time spent outside the home

with friends in the evening

 Never or almost never 0.81 1.79 1.68 1.50

 A few times each month 1.33 1.75 1.63 1.43

 Several days a week 1.37 1.36 1.33 1.00

 Almost every day 1.63 1.15 1.04 1.34

Time spent watching television

or videos on school days

 No time 0.38 2.73 2.48 2.68

 Less than 1 hour 1.41 1.77 1.66 1.49

 1–2 hours 1.29 1.11 1.10 0.99

 3–5 hours 1.23 1.26 1.21 1.06

 More than 5 hours 1.04 1.35 1.16 1.54

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

135

Table D.4.10.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average civic achievement scores, by

nonschool activities related to academics:

1999

Percentage

Total civic

knowledge

Civic

content

Civic

skills

Frequency of computer use at home for

schoolwork

 No computer in the home 1.19 1.46 1.33 1.71

 Never or hardly ever 1.23 1.31 1.18 1.55

 Once or twice a month 1.09 1.48 1.28 1.53

 Once or twice a week 1.37 1.44 1.47 1.00

 Almost every day 1.62 1.67 1.55 1.48

Time spent on homework each day

 Not assigned 1.00 1.94 1.95 1.80

 Does not do homework 0.78 2.62 2.48 2.67

 1/2 hour or less 1.30 1.65 1.52 1.69

 1 hour 1.36 1.56 1.54 1.15

 More than 1 hour 2.80 1.27 1.16 1.23

Frequency of discussing things studied

in school with someone at home

 Never or hardly ever 1.07 1.53 1.49 1.50

 Once or twice a month 0.90 1.46 1.38 1.46

 Once or twice a week 1.16 1.36 1.32 1.12

 Almost every day 1.19 1.39 1.25 1.41

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

136

Table D.5.1.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the importance of

conventional citizenship scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.06

Sex

 Male 1.49 0.09

 Female 1.49 0.08

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.68 0.09

 Black 2.02 0.13

 Hispanic 1.82 0.12

 Asian 0.85 0.21

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.58 0.24

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.94 0.06

 Foreign-born 0.94 0.20

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.88 0.27

 11–50 1.17 0.12

 51–100 0.76 0.08

 101–200 1.04 0.13

 More than 200 1.43 0.14

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

137

Table D.5.2.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the importance of social

movement-related citizenship scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.06

Sex

 Male 1.47 0.08

 Female 1.47 0.07

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.68 0.07

 Black 2.03 0.13

 Hispanic 1.83 0.14

 Asian 0.86 0.26

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.59 0.21

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.97 0.06

 Foreign-born 0.97 0.15

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.89 0.18

 11–50 1.18 0.12

 51–100 0.76 0.11

 101–200 1.06 0.11

 More than 200 1.44 0.12

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

138

Table D.5.3.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the economy-related

government responsibilities scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.04

Sex

 Male 1.48 0.06

 Female 1.48 0.05

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.70 0.05

 Black 2.02 0.10

 Hispanic 1.85 0.13

 Asian 0.85 0.21

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.58 0.21

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.95 0.05

 Foreign-born 0.95 0.15

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.86 0.16

 11–50 1.19 0.09

 51–100 0.78 0.09

 101–200 1.06 0.08

 More than 200 1.42 0.07

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

139

Table D.5.4.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the society-related

government responsibilities scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.05

Sex

 Male 1.47 0.07

 Female 1.47 0.07

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.69 0.06

 Black 2.02 0.09

 Hispanic 1.84 0.11

 Asian 0.85 0.18

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.59 0.22

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.94 0.05

 Foreign-born 0.94 0.15

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.87 0.18

 11–50 1.20 0.08

 51–100 0.78 0.08

 101–200 1.06 0.13

 More than 200 1.44 0.09

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

140

Table D.6.1.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the trust in governmentrelated institutions scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.07

Sex

 Male 1.47 0.09

 Female 1.47 0.07

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.68 0.07

 Black 2.02 0.11

 Hispanic 1.81 0.19

 Asian 0.85 0.15

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.59 0.25

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.91 0.06

 Foreign-born 0.91 0.17

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.86 0.20

 11–50 1.19 0.09

 51–100 0.78 0.08

 101–200 1.03 0.09

 More than 200 1.44 0.11

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

141

Table D.6.2.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the positive attitudes toward

one’s country scale, by selected background

characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.06

Sex

 Male 1.50 0.09

 Female 1.50 0.06

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.68 0.06

 Black 2.00 0.14

 Hispanic 1.85 0.19

 Asian 0.86 0.24

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.58 0.27

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.92 0.06

 Foreign-born 0.92 0.17

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.85 0.19

 11–50 1.20 0.10

 51–100 0.79 0.10

 101–200 1.03 0.09

 More than 200 1.44 0.11

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

142

Table D.6.3.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the support for women’s

political rights scale, by selected background

characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.09

Sex

 Male 1.48 0.11

 Female 1.48 0.07

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.65 0.11

 Black 2.01 0.15

 Hispanic 1.82 0.15

 Asian 0.86 0.24

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.59 0.21

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.91 0.09

 Foreign-born 0.91 0.15

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.84 0.14

 11–50 1.19 0.11

 51–100 0.78 0.11

 101–200 1.04 0.14

 More than 200 1.44 0.11

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

143

Table D.6.4.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the positive attitudes toward

immigrants’ rights scale, by selected

background characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.06

Sex

 Male 1.48 0.11

 Female 1.48 0.06

Race/ethnicity

 White 2.63 0.07

 Black 2.01 0.15

 Hispanic 1.89 0.17

 Asian 0.88 0.29

 Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

 American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

 Multiracial 0.57 0.26

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.89 0.06

 Foreign-born 0.89 0.21

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.80 0.22

 11–50 1.21 0.10

 51–100 0.82 0.08

 101–200 1.04 0.11

 More than 200 1.46 0.12

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX D—STANDARD ERRORS FOR TABLES

144

Table D.7.1.—Standard errors for ninth-grade U.S. students’

average score on the expected participation in

political activities scale, by selected background

characteristics: 1999

Percentage Average score

Total — 0.05

Sex

Male 1.61 0.07

Female 1.61 0.06

Race/ethnicity

White 2.63 0.07

Black 2.01 0.10

Hispanic 1.80 0.10

Asian 0.93 0.14

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander *** ***

American Indian/Alaska Native *** ***

Multiracial 0.53 0.20

Country of birth

 U.S.-born 0.97 0.05

 Foreign-born 0.97 0.16

Number of books in the home

 0–10 0.88 0.20

 11–50 1.27 0.08

 51–100 0.82 0.07

 101–200 1.10 0.09

 More than 200 1.43 0.08

— Standard error not derived because it is based on a statistic estimated at 100 percent.

*** Sample size is insufficient to permit a reliable estimate.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E

STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

147

Table E.2.2.—Standard errors for average total civic

knowledge achievement of ninth-grade

students, by nation: 1999

Nation Average

Poland 1.7

Finland 0.7

Cyprus 0.5

Greece 0.8

Hong Kong (SAR) 1.1

United States 1.2

Italy 0.8

Slovak Republic 0.7

Norway 0.5

Czech Republic 0.8

Hungary 0.6

Australia 0.8

Slovenia 0.5

Denmark 0.5

Germany 0.5

Russian Federation 1.3

England 0.6

Sweden 0.8

Switzerland 0.8

Bulgaria 1.3

Portugal 0.7

Belgium (French) 0.9

Estonia 0.5

Lithuania 0.7

Romania 0.9

Latvia 0.9

Chile 0.7

Colombia 0.9

SOURCE: Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., and Schulz, W., 2001. Citizenship and Education

in Twenty-Eight Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amsterdam: The

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

148

Table E.2.3.—Standard errors for average civic knowledge

achievement of ninth-grade students, by subscale

and nation: 1999

Civic content Civic skills

Nation Average Nation Average

Poland 1.3 United States 1.0

Greece 0.7 Finland 0.6

Finland 0.7 Cyprus 0.5

Cyprus 0.5 Australia 0.8

Hong Kong (SAR) 1.0 Poland 1.7

Slovak Republic 0.7 Greece 0.7

Italy 0.8 Italy 0.7

Norway 0.5 England 0.7

Czech Republic 0.8 Hong Kong (SAR) 1.0

United States 1.1 Slovak Republic 0.7

Hungary 0.6 Norway 0.4

Slovenia 0.5 Czech Republic 0.8

Russian Federation 1.3 Sweden 0.7

Denmark 0.5 Switzerland 0.8

Australia 0.7 Hungary 0.7

Germany 0.5 Germany 0.5

Bulgaria 1.1 Denmark 0.5

Sweden 0.8 Slovenia 0.4

Portugal 0.7 Russian Federation 1.3

England 0.6 Belgium (French) 1.0

Switzerland 0.8 Bulgaria 1.3

Belgium (French) 0.9 Portugal 0.7

Estonia 0.5 Estonia 0.5

Lithuania 0.7 Lithuania 0.7

Romania 1.0 Latvia 0.8

Latvia 0.9 Romania 0.7

Chile 0.6 Chile 0.8

Colombia 0.8 Colombia 1.2

SOURCE: Torney-Purta, J., Lehmann, R., Oswald, H., and Schulz, W., 2001. Citizenship and Education in Twenty-Eight

Countries: Civic Knowledge and Engagement at Age Fourteen. Amsterdam: The International Association for the

Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

149

Table E.3.1.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they studied

various topics over the previous year: 1999

Percentage

U.S. Constitution 1.70

How laws are made 1.67

Congress 1.86

Political parties, etc. 1.74

Court system 1.53

State and local government 1.85

President and the cabinet 1.80

Other countries’ governments 1.88

International organizations 1.29

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic Education

Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.3.2.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree that they have learned various

issues in school: 1999

Percentage

To cooperate in groups of students 0.92

To understand people with different ideas 1.13

To protect the environment 1.16

To be concerned for events in other countries 1.04

To contribute to solving community problems 1.03

The importance of voting 1.41

To be a patriotic and loyal citizen 1.32

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

150

Table E.3.3.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting doing various activities

when they study social studies: 1999

Percentage

Read from textbook 1.13

Fill out worksheets 1.21

Watch television/videos 1.70

Write reports 1.66

Discuss current events 1.50

Memorize reading material 1.54

Discuss television/videos 1.58

Read extra material 1.61

Debate and discuss 2.02

Role play, mock trials, etc. 2.08

Receive visits from leaders 1.15

Write letters to give their opinion 1.19

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.3.4.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various statements

apply sometimes or often to the climate in their

classrooms: 1999

Percentage

Students are encouraged to make up their own minds about issues 1.13

Teachers respect our opinions and encourage us to express them during class 1.36

Teachers present several sides of an issue when explaining it in class 1.14

Students feel free to express opinions in class even when their opinions are

different from most of the other students 1.15

Students feel free to disagree openly with their teachers about political and

social issues during class 1.33

Teachers encourage us to discuss political or social issues about which

people have different opinions 1.56

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

151

Table E.5.1.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various citizen

rights and freedoms are somewhat good or very

good for democracy: 1999

Percentage

Everyone has the right to express their opinions freely 0.71

Citizens have the right to elect political leaders freely 0.80

Many different organizations are available for people who wish to belong to

them 1.14

Political parties have rules that support women to become political leaders 0.95

People peacefully protest against a law they believe to be unjust 1.29

Laws that women claim are unfair to them are changed 1.17

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.2.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various citizen

rights and freedoms are somewhat good or very

good for democracy, by sex: 1999

Male Female

Everyone has the right to express their opinions freely 1.03 0.86

Citizens have the right to elect political leaders freely 1.18 0.70

Many different organizations are available for people who

wish to belong to them 1.24 1.42

Political parties have rules that support women to become

political leaders 1.47 0.92

People peacefully protest against a law they believe to be

unjust 1.47 1.49

Laws that women claim are unfair to them are changed 1.64 1.54

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

152

Table E.5.3.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various citizen

rights and freedoms are somewhat good or very

good for democracy, by country of birth: 1999

U.S.-born Foreign-born

Everyone has the right to express their opinions freely 0.69 2.84

Citizens have the right to elect political leaders freely 0.87 2.48

Many different organizations are available for people who

wish to belong to them 1.13 2.96

Political parties have rules that support women to become

political leaders 0.87 3.45

People peacefully protest against a law they believe to be

unjust 1.29 3.05

Laws that women claim are unfair to them are changed 1.22 3.63

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.4.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various types of

negative influence are somewhat bad or very

bad for democracy: 1999

Percentage

Wealthy business people have more influence on government than others 1.17

One company owns all the newspapers 0.98

All the television stations present the same opinion about politics 1.16

Political leaders in power give jobs in the government to members of their

family 1.55

Courts and judges are influenced by politicians 1.32

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.5.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various types of

negative influence are somewhat bad or very

bad for democracy, by sex: 1999

Male Female

Wealthy business people have more influence on government than

others 1.66 1.31

One company owns all the newspapers 1.42 1.35

Political leaders in power give jobs in the government to members of

their family 1.56 2.08

All the television stations present the same opinion about politics 1.51 1.22

Courts and judges are influenced by politicians 1.27 1.96

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

153

Table E.5.6.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various types of

negative influence are somewhat bad or very

bad for democracy, by country of birth: 1999

U.S.-born Foreign-born

Wealthy business people have more influence on

government than others 1.25 2.23

One company owns all the newspapers 1.09 2.46

Political leaders in power give jobs in the government to

members of their family 1.60 2.95

All the television stations present the same opinion about

politics 1.19 2.44

Courts and judges are influenced by politicians 1.37 4.12

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.7.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various civic

behaviors are somewhat important or very

important for good citizenship: 1999

Percentage

To vote in every election 0.90

To show respect for government leaders 1.06

To know about the country’s history 1.10

To follow political issues in the newspaper, on the radio, or on television 1.15

To engage in political discussion 1.05

To join a political party 1.42

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.8.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that participation in

various social movement-related activities is

somewhat important or very important for good

citizenship: 1999

Percentage

To participate in activities to help people in the community 0.83

To take part in activities promoting human rights 0.93

To take part in activities to protect the environment 0.81

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

154

Table E.5.9.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various economyrelated actions probably or definitely should be

the government’s responsibility: 1999

Percentage

Keeping prices under control 0.93

Providing industries with the support they need to grow 0.93

Guaranteeing a job for everyone who wants one 1.09

Reducing differences in income and wealth among people 1.02

Providing an adequate standard of living for the unemployed 1.23

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.5.10.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that various societyrelated actions probably or definitely should be

the government’s responsibility: 1999

Percentage

Being sure there are equal political opportunities for men and women 0.71

Providing free basic education for all 0.66

Guaranteeing peace and order within the country 0.95

Providing basic health care for everyone 0.87

Providing an adequate standard of living for old people 0.85

Controlling pollution of the environment 0.70

Promoting honesty and moral behavior among people in the country 1.12

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

155

Table E.6.1.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they trust various

institutions most of the time or always: 1999

Percentage

The local council or government of your town or city 1.26

Courts 1.31

Congress 1.40

The police 1.75

The national government in Washington, D.C. 1.43

Political parties 1.40

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.6.2.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

the United States: 1999

Percentage

The United States should be proud of what it has achieved 1.03

I have a great love for the United States 1.21

The flag of the United States is important to me 1.20

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.6.3.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations: 1999

Percentage

We should always be alert and stop threats from other countries to the United

States’ political independence 0.88

We should prevent other countries from trying to influence political decisions in

the United States 0.96

To help protect jobs in the United States we should buy products made in the

United States 1.42

We should stop outsiders from influencing the United States’ traditions and

culture 1.22

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

156

Table E.6.4.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations, by sex: 1999

Male Female

We should always be alert and stop threats from other countries to

the United States’ political independence 1.15 1.05

We should prevent other countries from trying to influence political

decisions in the United States 1.32 1.29

To help protect jobs in the United States we should buy products

made in the United States 2.05 1.94

We should stop outsiders from influencing the United States’

traditions and culture 1.92 1.65

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.6.5.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

U.S. international relations, by country of birth:

1999

U.S.-born Foreign-born

We should always be alert and stop threats from other

countries to the United States’ political independence 0.80 2.64

We should prevent other countries from trying to influence

political decisions in the United States 0.94 3.42

To help protect jobs in the United States we should buy

products made in the United States 1.55 3.65

We should stop outsiders from influencing the United

States’ traditions and culture 1.30 2.98

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.6.6.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

women’s political rights: 1999

Percentage

Women should run for public office and take part in the government just as

men do 0.93

Women should have the same rights as men in every way 0.81

Men and women should get equal pay when they are in the same jobs 0.97

Men are better qualified to be political leaders than women 1.30

Women should stay out of politics 0.94

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

157

Table E.6.7.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they agree or

strongly agree with various statements about

immigrants’ rights: 1999

Percentage

Immigrants’ children should have the same opportunities for education that

other children in the country have 0.81

Immigrants should have all the same rights that everyone else in a country

has 0.96

Immigrants should have the opportunity to keep their own customs and

lifestyle 0.73

Immigrants who live in a country for several years should have the

opportunity to vote in elections 0.98

Immigrants should have the opportunity to keep their own language 0.94

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.7.1.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often have discussions about national or

international politics: 1999

Percentage

About the U.S. government with teachers 1.66

About the U.S. government with parents or other adult family members 1.22

About international politics with teachers 1.69

About international politics with parents or other adult family members 1.17

About the U.S. government with people their own age 0.95

About international politics with people their own age 0.70

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.7.2.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often have discussions about national or

international politics, by sex: 1999

Male Female

About the U.S. government with teachers 2.09 1.91

About the U.S. government with parents or other adult

family members 1.74 1.35

About international politics with teachers 2.13 1.84

About international politics with parents or other adult

family members 1.77 1.43

About the U.S. government with people their own age 1.66 1.26

About international politics with people their own age 0.95 0.95

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

158

Table E.7.3.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often have discussions about national or

international politics, by country of birth: 1999

U.S.-born Foreign-born

About the U.S. government with teachers 1.67 3.52

About the U.S. government with parents or other adult

family members 1.25 3.55

About international politics with teachers 1.68 4.50

About international politics with parents or other adult

family members 1.22 4.73

About the U.S. government with people their own age 0.92 3.06

About international politics with people their own age 0.62 3.16

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.7.4.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often obtain news from the newspaper,

television, or radio: 1999

Percentage

Watch news broadcasts on television 1.07

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in this country 1.29

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in other countries 1.23

Listen to news broadcasts on the radio 1.59

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.7.5.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often obtain news from the newspaper,

television, or radio, by sex: 1999

Male Female

Watch news broadcasts on television 1.23 1.45

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in this

country 1.79 1.57

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in other

countries 1.57 2.05

Listen to news broadcasts on the radio 1.68 1.88

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.
APPENDIX E—STANDARD ERRORS FOR FIGURES

159

Table E.7.6.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they sometimes or

often obtain news from the newspaper,

television, or radio, by country of birth: 1999

U.S.-born Foreign-born

Watch news broadcasts on television 1.20 1.83

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in

this country 1.35 4.09

Read articles in the newspaper about what is happening in

other countries 1.19 5.03

Listen to news broadcasts on the radio 1.66 3.24

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.

Table E.7.7.—Standard errors for percentage of ninth-grade

U.S. students reporting that they probably or

certainly expect to participate in various

political activities as adults: 1999

Percentage

Join a political party 1.55

Write letters to a newspaper about social or political concerns 1.17

Be a candidate for a local or city office 1.02

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Civic

Education Study (CivEd), 1999.



United States

Department of Education

ED Pubs

8242–B Sandy Court

Jessup, MD 20794–1398

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Postage and Fees Paid

U.S. Department of Education

Permit No. G–17

Standard Mail (B)