Abstract 

Civic education is a crucial component of democratic society. Civic education efforts continue to permeate secondary educational systems across the United States. Despite the ubiquity of these programs or courses, formal political participation among youth remains at a less-than-ideal level. Outcomes of civic education are traditionally classified into three observable categories: knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Existing literature and standardized testing data support the fact that civic education contributes to improved knowledge and skills; it remains to be seen whether the same programs ameliorate students’ dispositions. This project aims to measure the impacts of Louisiana’s secondary civic education course, Civics, on students’ attitudes toward various civic matters. I posit that Civics may contribute to lowered external political efficacy among students, ultimately leading to a lower propensity for voting. In addition to this critical finding, this project produced evidence that suggests the presence of other undesirable attitude-related outcomes of Civics. While this project does not identify the features of the Civics student standards that contribute to these outcomes, I identify various best practices for reversing trends of political apathy among Louisiana’s youngest voters. These practices include service learning requirements, classroom debates and discussion, and Nokes’ (2019) case study-based civic education framework.

Introduction 

It is paramount to a healthy democracy that citizens possess the appropriate civic virtue to actively participate in the functions of government. It is accordingly necessary that schools equip students with this sense of civic-mindedness that manifests itself through a life of political participation. Systemic attention to civic education has proven to be the most effective means through which youth become participants in democracy. In 2003, the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) published a foundational work to the scholarship in this discipline: The Civic Mission of Schools. This report on the state of American civic education offered direction for best practices in teaching for democracy. Additionally, the work outlined actionable goals for civic education, holding that competent and responsible citizens “are informed and thoughtful, participate in their communities, act politically, and have civic and moral virtues” (Carnegie Corporation of New York & CIRCLE, 2003, p. 10). Considering these aims, it is noteworthy that civic knowledge and public engagement among youth remain at an “all time low” (Shapiro & Brown, 2018, p. 1). 

This study takes aim at examining the efficacy of the Civics course in Louisiana secondary schools at equipping students with equitable, productive civic dispositions. This study identifies four categories in which students can demonstrate favorable civic dispositional outcomes: voting, political awareness, democracy, and civic virtues. Referencing these categories and the student standards for the Louisiana high school Civics course, a comprehensive answer will be provided to the question: To what extent is the high school Civics course, as standardized by the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE), effective in equipping students with dispositional outcomes conducive to a life of civic engagement?

Literature Review 

Historical Context 

Education in the United States has long existed as the catalyst through which youth learn the importance of democracy. The idea that a fragile American democracy exists only as a result of competent citizens is foundational to the establishment of American public education. The development of public schools in the United States sprouted from the desire to educate a civically-engaged citizenry (Kober & Rentner, 2020). This theme persisted through the era of Horace Mann and the Common Schools Movement. Mann, an educational statesman of the antebellum period, was a large figure in the movement to establish public schools across the United States. Mann’s advocacy for public schools was fueled by his view of schools as regulators of common and equal opportunity, equitably and comprehensively distributing civic knowledge to the American citizenry (Ford, 2020). This systemic focus on teaching for democracy, positing that public education should act as a purveyor of citizenship and public good, persisted through the early twentieth century (Ford, 2020). 

Systemic Educational Focuses 

Following the Cold War, educational focuses on science, mathematics, and vocational instruction swept across American schools (Lopez & de Mattos, 2024). This change in systemic priorities has had grave implications for the state of American civic education. A focus on STEM education has persisted into the 21st century, recently being illustrated on a governmental level by President Barack Obama’s 2009 Educate to Innovate campaign (Press Secretary, 2009). This campaign aimed to broaden access to advanced mathematics and science courses in American high schools. In practice, the initiative resulted in a larger availability of STEM educators, expanded access to technology, and provided underrepresented groups with greater opportunities to study STEM-related subject matter.

This change in educational focus represents shifting priorities for the future of the American citizenry. Social studies and civic education seem to have taken a backseat to disciplines that are viewed as being able to foster innovative or creative attitudes within students. On pace with these changes in educational focus, following the 2016 election—a year in which less than 25% of eighth-graders “performed at or above the proficient level on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) civics exam”—only 9 states required a full year of a U.S. Government or civics course (Shapiro & Brown, 2018, p. 5). 

In 2011, the Carnegie Corporation of New York published Guardian of Democracy: The Civic Mission of Schools, a revision of the 2003 report, including revised policy recommendations for civic learning (Gould et al., 2011). The report's findings exist in the context of trends of reduced civic participation and poor civic knowledge that have persisted to the present (Wray-Lake & Ballard, 2023, p. 3). The report outlined “six proven practices for effective civic education” that have influenced civic education-related policy, curricula, and literature in recent years. With contempt for the trends of declining civic literacy during the period in which the report was authored, it postulates that “the country shortchanges the civic mission of its schools at its peril” (Gould et al., 2011, p. 4). 

Youth Participation and Civics in Louisiana 

The state of youth political participation in the United States is complex and characterized by geographic disparities. This fact is particularly relevant in the discussion of youth participation in the state of Louisiana. As of the 2022 midterm election, Louisiana 

is among the states in which the lowest youth voter turnout is observed, recording just 16% turnout among voting-eligible youth aged 18 to 29 (CIRCLE, 2023). As this lack of participation may be the result of political apathy, which is influenced by civic education, examining the extent to which Louisiana secondary schools affect youth’s propensity to vote is significant. The student standards for the high school Civics course in Louisiana, at a glance, seem to lack the intention of changing this low turnout (LDOE, 2022). The current student standards for high school Civics comprise five units, encompassing fourteen standards across topics including governmental structure, notable events in American history, civil rights and liberties, political processes, and financial literacy (LDOE, 2022). The Louisiana Commission on Civic Education, founded in 2004, promotes collaboration among organizations in the state that conduct civic education programs, aiming to educate citizens on the importance of citizen involvement in a representative democracy (La. Rev. Stat. § 24:971, n.d.). A 1976 amendment to Louisiana’s Title 25 provided requirements for Civics instruction in secondary schools, mandating that “all public high schools give instruction in a course in civics as a prerequisite to graduation” (La. Rev. Stat. § 17:274, n.d.). This provision demonstrated the first legislative effort to refine the state of Civics instruction on a state level. Alongside the mandate of the Civics course, the statute provides for a mandate of a “free enterprise” course, encompassing content in subject matters involving “income, money management, spending and credit, [and] savings and investing” (La. Rev. Stat. § 17:274.1 (C)(2), n.d.). Student standards with regard to free enterprise coursework are outlined in the most recent publication of the LDOE social studies standards, following another amendment to R.S. 17:274.1 that replaced the individual free enterprise course with a uniform unit of study as a supplement to the Civics curriculum (La. Rev. Stat. § 17:274.1 (C)(2)(a), n.d.). This same edition of the social studies student standards provides for a mandate that the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP) exam for high school Civics be taken by all students as a requirement for graduation, beginning in the 2024-2025 academic year. This initiative for further data collection indicates that changes in content and instruction for high school Civics may become a priority for the LDOE in future years.

The standards for high school Civics in Louisiana can be characterized as incredibly minimal with regard to alternative classroom activities. None of the fourteen student standards requires that students fulfill a community service requirement, participate in classroom debate, be informed on the current state of American politics, participate in simulations of democratic processes, or participate in school or classroom governance (LDOE, 2022). Nevertheless, each of these activities has been proven to favorably influence students’ civic outcomes. This somewhat antiquated aspect of the course reflects greater themes of antiquity throughout the entirety of Louisiana civic education. 

Contemporary Pedagogy and Controversy 

Traditionally, Civics courses have included instruction in the systems and foundation of the various levels of American government. As the state of civic education has developed, NAEP and state exam data have been the indicator to which education officials have most often referred in search of a more effective Civics curriculum. While these data sets offer a comprehensive understanding of the shortcomings and successes of Civics curricula, they fail to speak to the state of students’ civic attitudes. Since these courses typically exist to develop civic knowledge and skills, it has become difficult to draw conclusions regarding students’ dispositions. Existing literature irrefutably supports the notion that civic education leads to greater knowledge about politics and government (Campbell, 2019). A lack of scholarship on civic attitudes makes it difficult to draw the same conclusions. A study of attitudes toward government among secondary students in Brussels, Belgium, found that failing to address certain dispositions among pupils acts counterintuitively to the ethos of civic education. The project found that pupils who perceive themselves as being discriminated against by democratic institutions were far more likely to bear anti-democratic attitudes than adolescents who experienced fewer instances of self-perceived discrimination (Mansoury Babhoutak et al., 2020). In a representative democracy of a diverse citizenry, an aim of civic education is to promote pro-democratic citizenship to students of all origins. Despite this, the civic education curricula of today make, at best, a passive effort to develop these attitudes. The State of Louisiana is no exception to this fact. Though not unlike other student standards for civics courses across the nation, it is noteworthy that the LDOE’s standards for Civics make no mention of students’ dispositions. In truth, the nature of attitudes to be difficult to measure and seemingly subjective may be to blame for their widespread absence from student standards documents (Nokes, 2019, p. 7). 

Methodology 

Sample Selection 

To discern to what extent the high school Civics course contributes to favorable dispositional outcomes, one predictor variable was employed: students’ completion of the course. The participants (n=33) consisted of students in Louisiana secondary schools. Twenty-one participants were assigned to the control group on the basis that they had received no instruction in Civics or any similar government course. Twelve participants were assigned to the treatment group on the basis that they had completed the Civics course in its entirety. Students who received any instruction in any government course in a fashion that did not align with the two predictor groups did not participate. The results are accordingly indicative of the course's effectiveness in its entirety, limiting the influence of other educational factors where possible. 

Design and Operationalizations 

To measure the extent to which participants had productive civic dispositions, four suites of outcome items were employed. These four suites employed various Likert items to deduce a comprehensive view of participants’ attitudes. Likert items intend to measure opinions and attitudes toward the provided statements. The statements provided in this study outlined general declarations of various attitudes or instances in which attitudes can be put into practice. These items fulfill the study’s goal of deducing participants' dispositions toward civic matters as a result of taking the high school Civics course. See Appendix B for the reliability of outcome item suites. 

The first suite of outcome items measured the likelihood to vote using the following items: “It is incredibly important to vote in local (1.1.1), state (1.1.2), and federal (1.1.3) elections,” “My vote matters in determining the winner of a major election (1.2),” “I try, to the best of my ability, to convince others that they should vote (1.3),” “I care about the outcome of elections (1.4),” “I would vote even if it were inconvenient for me; e.g., bad weather, long lines, prior obligations (1.5),” “Elections in the United States are fair (1.6),” “I am confident that I know how to vote (1.7),” and “It is my duty as a citizen to vote (1.8).” The answer choices were “Strongly agree,” “Agree,” “Neutral,” “Disagree,” and “Strongly disagree.” 

The second suite of outcome items measured contemporary political awareness using the following items: “I know who the President (2.1.1), my Representative (2.1.2), my senators (2.1.3), my Governor (2.1.4), and my Mayor (2.1.5) is,” “I can explain the difference between the Democratic and Republican parties (2.2),” “I can explain the state of important political issues that are being debated in the United States; e.g., immigration, the economy, abortion, climate change (2.3),” “Decisions made by the government have a large impact on my life (2.4),” “I discuss political topics with my friends and family (2.5),” and “I can explain the policy positions of the Democratic and Republican parties on major political issues (2.6).” 

The third suite of outcome items measured participants’ attitudes toward democratic institutions and practices using the following items: “Civil disobedience—refusing to follow certain laws as a form of protest—is sometimes necessary to bring about change (3.1),” “Peaceful protests are an effective way to bring about change (3.2),” “I felt represented by one of the two candidates—Donald Trump or Kamala Harris—in the 2024 Presidential Election (3.3),” “The actions of the government benefit me in my daily life (3.4),” “The government does not try to serve people like me (3.5),” “Most politicians try to advance their own interests over mine (3.6),” and “The government is too powerful (3.7).” Items 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 were reverse-coded. 

The fourth and final suite of outcome items measured concern for the civil liberties and welfare of peers using the following items: “The wellbeing of disadvantaged groups is important to me (4.1),” “A society benefits from the prosperity of its most vulnerable members (4.2),” “I am willing to pay more taxes if it improves the quality of life of my peers (4.3),” “The government should ensure that all citizens have access to basic necessities like food, education, and housing (4.4),” “I would urge someone with whom I disagree that they should vote (4.5),” “The opinions' of my peers do not matter, especially when they are rooted in ignorance (4.6),” and “All Americans, regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, or any other factor, should be treated equally under the law (4.7).” Item 4.6 was reverse-coded. 

Procedure 

All items were compiled into a digital form that was provided to participants. The form began by collecting participants’ contact information, name, and age, and ensuring informed consent. Following the gathering of identifying information, participants were given the first item suite, then the second, third, and fourth. Following the final item set, participants were identified as belonging to either the control or treatment group: having not yet begun Civics or having completed Civics, respectively. Participants self-identified their educational history and the academic term in which they completed the course, if applicable. 

Analysis 

Each response was designated a numerical value one through five: “Strongly agree (=5),” “Agree (=4),” “Neutral (=3),” “Disagree (=2),” and “Strongly disagree (=1).” For reverse-coded items—3.5, 3.6, 3.7, and 4.6—each response was designated the inverse value: “Strongly agree (=1),” “Agree (=2),” “Neutral (=3),” “Disagree (=4),” and “Strongly disagree (=5).” A mean score for each outcome variable was calculated for each predictor group. The difference between the mean scores of each predictor variable was calculated by subtracting the mean score of the control group from the mean score of the treatment group. 

Findings 

Figure 1 

Mean Scores for Outcome Suites by Predictor Groups

The differences in mean scores for the various items of the first suite may represent a greater propensity for voting among students who have not taken Civics than students who have completed the course (see Appendix A). On a smaller scale, the difference in mean scores for the second suite may be indicative of Civics students' lack of political awareness. Students who have not taken Civics may demonstrate a greater faith in the effectiveness of civil disobedience, supported by the data of item 3.1. Finally, as suggested by the data of item 4.2, students who have not taken Civics may place a greater importance on the well-being of vulnerable people. 

Discussion

External Political Efficacy 

Generally, it is the goal of civic education to leave students as active participants, and specifically, it is the goal of civic education to equip students with attitudes conducive to formal political expression. The data suggest that high school Civics, as it exists in the state of Louisiana, fails in this respect. Participants who never received instruction in Civics demonstrated a greater likelihood to vote than participants who completed Civics. This difference may be the result of a form of disillusionment that develops throughout the course. Students, beginning the course with minimal knowledge of governmental functions, seem to complete the course feeling as though their voice is insignificant. This learned disenfranchisement manifests itself through apathy toward civic matters. Where civic education is intended to address negative dispositions and foster beneficial, productive citizenship, the Louisiana high school Civics course seemingly does the opposite. 

Seeing as though students leave the Civics course with some greater degree of political disenchantment, it may be the case that the course contributes to some poorer degree of external political efficacy—the extent to which citizens believe that the government responds to their demands. Students who completed Civics seem to believe to a lesser extent that democratic practices can influence change. The literature supports the idea that political disenchantment persists in the youth of Western democracies despite continued efforts to expand civic education programs (Print, 2007). It remains to be seen, though, whether traditional civic education contributes directly to weakened external political efficacy. It may be the traditional nature of Louisiana’s Civics curriculum—its lack of comprehensive civic socialization strategies—that contributes to students’ missing sense of political efficacy. Political efficacy can be ameliorated through comprehensive class debates, political discussions outside of the classroom, and civic engagement in school activities (Kudrnáč & Lyons, 2018). The LDOE’s standards for Civics do not explicitly provide for a single one of these activities. The absence of these proven best practices for mitigating the impact of unproductive civic attitudes may contribute to Civics students' apathy toward formal political expression. 

Contemporary American Democracy 

Other literature argues that issues of unproductive dispositional outcomes and poor external political efficacy are the result of a governmental system that is “less responsive to African Americans and Latinos than to European Americans” (Kahne & Westheimer, 2006). Though rather outdated, this study offers valid conclusions regarding the state of youth external political efficacy. Given that large strides have not been made in the government’s responsiveness to historically underrepresented groups, the contention remains valid that lower external political efficacy among certain racial groups is, to an extent, rational. Kahne and Westheimer argue that civic education should not aim to improve the external political efficacy of students, as that would amount to an attempt “to try and convince a disempowered group that mainstream institutions want to respond to their concerns” (p. 292). Attitudes of disenchantment among these disempowered groups, per Kahne and Westheimer, represent the “underlying ills” of an otherwise healthy democracy (p. 293). The results of this project cannot speak to these contentions, as this project is limited by its lack of racial data. The sole predictors of this project were the participants’ completion of a unit of study of civic education in Louisiana. Considering this, it is difficult to suggest that a curricular change to the Civics course would result in a mass amelioration of civic dispositions across students of all backgrounds. Instead, it is more likely that more effective means of civic socialization, like debates or service learning, would improve external political efficacy and civic dispositions to an extent that is appropriate under the current state of American democracy. 

Furthering the discussion of disparities in dispositional outcomes, it is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach will not improve the state of this issue. A 2020 study of political efficacy and applied political participation interventions suggests that attitudes can indeed be improved with all-encompassing civic socialization efforts, but disparities still exist across socioeconomic lines (Padilla et al., 2022). Results of the study indicate that combining traditional instruction in a civic education program with opportunities for applied political participation can influence desirable attitudes among students. This finding applies to the state of secondary civic education in Louisiana, considering that most Louisiana students do not receive opportunities to engage in applied political participation. Nevertheless, even in the presence of these well-designed programs, disparities in students’ attitudes persisted. In other words, disparities in students’ attitudes will exist so long as there are disparities in the government’s treatment of its citizens. Civic education should not aim to influence dispositions as they apply to true, observable instances of unjust governance. The state of the current American government is an additional contributing factor to students’ dispositions.

The Future of Civics in Louisiana 

Course Rigor 

Practically, the answer to civic apathy may not be more rigorous or all-encompassing civic education, particularly not as it exists in Louisiana (Hilmer, 2015). Hilmer describes continued apathy as a result of a “conceptual disconnect between the ideal of democracy and the reality of the American state” (p. 62). Expectedly, the coursework and content of the Civics course largely allow students to study the many facets of the United States government. This traditional Civics focus may be what contributes to students’ poor dispositional outcomes toward voting and being informed. As the course fails to focus on the citizen as an empowered individual under the liberatory nature of the government, its portrayal of the government as a seemingly alien, far-removed institution leaves students with attitudes of apathy toward an institution that they believe does not greatly influence their lives. Students place little importance on the actions of the government, making them accordingly unlikely to place great importance on the issue of voting. 

Civic Socialization Strategies 

Service Learning. This pedagogical approach intends to integrate relevant service activities into a discussion of classroom material. Service learning, a proven best practice for ameliorating students’ civic outcomes, is absent from the student standards for Civics in Louisiana (Carnegie Corporation of New York & CIRCLE, 2003, p. 26). This fact once again highlights the incredibly traditional or barebones approach to high school civic education in the state. Considering it has been demonstrated that the current state of this course contributes to lowered external political efficacy among students, it is notable that service learning initiatives have been proven to contribute to greater political efficacy (Barnett, 2018). If the Civics course were to incorporate alternate methods of instruction, like service learning, it is reasonable to contend that students’ propensity for formal political participation would be greater. Rather, in the presence of solely traditional means of delivering course content, students’ external political efficacy is diminished, and so is their likelihood of voting. 

Debates and Discussion. The student standards for high school Civics also do not mandate the inclusion of classroom debates or discussions regarding contemporary issues or, for that matter, any issues. CIRCLE (2011) identifies this strategy to be among other best practices in developing virtuous, multi-dimensional attitudes within students. Their report holds that a practice such as this becomes more significant in the context of “ideologically homogeneous communities” (p. 28). To instill positive attitudes toward government and limit disparities in dispositional outcomes, the implementation of debates and classroom discussions can be used, fostering an environment in which multiple perspectives are offered. 

Case Study-Based Learning 

Nokes (2019) offers a curriculum of civic education that intends to identify and provide instruction for various dispositions that are necessary for the longevity of American democracy. Understanding that “teaching civics must be more than understanding the structures and functions of government,” Nokes intends to demonstrate an approach to civic education that is more oriented to developing historically-based attitudes (p. ix). Ellsworth (2020) summarizes and provides commentary on Nokes’ civic-focused history framework. The framework identifies crucial dispositions for democratic participation: “defending the rights of others, uniting with like-minded peers, compromise, diplomacy and working with adversaries, demonstrating disapproval, and civil disobedience” (Ellsworth, 2020, p. 2). An example provided by Nokes is the attitude of civil disobedience and accompanying historical narratives. Nokes “presents the disposition” through telling the story of Susan B. Anthony, who, in the struggle for women’s suffrage,was arrested, convicted, and fined as a result of her illegal voting in the Election of 1872 (Ellsworth, 2020, p. 2). Alternatively, the same disposition is presented through telling the story of the Freedom Riders—a civil rights group that was met with violence for protesting the non-enforcement of progressive Supreme Court decisions. This sort of instruction allows students to realize the historical influence of these dispositions. The inclusion of multiple case studies for a single disposition “affords students with not only a juxtaposition, but also the chance to examine multiple perspectives of the same disposition across time” (Ellsworth, 2020, p. 2). The example of civil disobedience is particularly notable in the context of this study. Students who completed Civics seem to believe to a much lesser degree that civil disobedience is occasionally necessary to spark change (see item 3.1 in Appendix A). Had these Civics students experienced a lesson in which they multidimensionally studied the application of civil disobedience to real social issues, it would be difficult to contend that they would exhibit the same attitude toward civil disobedience. This case study-based learning has real potential to positively influence students’ dispositional outcomes in Louisiana’s secondary schools. 

Limitations 

This study, like many other projects in the discipline of civic education, finds itself limited by its lack of longitudinal data. The conclusions drawn from this study assume that taking a Civics course in secondary school is the single largest predictor of dispositional outcomes. In practice, this is not the case. Student attitudes toward government are shaped by the many social studies programs that they experience throughout their schooling. Without taking into account the social studies curricula of primary and lower secondary courses, a holistic view of American civic education is missing. 

It is reasonable to contend that this study is most notably limited by its lack of consideration of socioeconomic factors. Attitudes toward government and the status quo are wildly different between two citizens of wildly different socioeconomic origins (Manstead, 2018). Even in the presence of the most comprehensive, well-developed civic education programs, it is likely that differences in dispositional outcomes will persist, suggesting that education has a less-than-ideal impact on productive citizenship. Despite the existence of this limitation, the study’s conclusions remain valid as there is statistically significant data to support the contention that civic education in Louisiana contributes to a lower degree of external political efficacy among students. Since racial information was not gathered, it cannot be proven that the distribution of races among participants reflects the distribution of races in Louisiana. This limitation becomes even more significant in the context of improving the Civics course. As the course should instill productive dispositions into students, it is necessary that instruction accounts for differences in students’ backgrounds; service learning, debates, and other civic socialization tactics allow for this to occur. 

It must be noted that this study is limited by the absence of consideration for classroom differences. Members of the treatment group—students who took Civics—were taught by various teachers. These teachers are likely to foster different attitudes within students by virtue of their own attitudes. Additionally, these teachers have some level of control over the pedagogical approaches and activities used in their classrooms. In other words, all members of the treatment group did not necessarily receive the same treatment. Differences in treatment among Civics students are problematic as they remove the ability to deduce whether the standards of the class are the biggest influence on dispositional outcomes. 

Implications and Best Practices 

Having observed the effect of civic education on dispositions among Louisiana's secondary students, it is clear that the high school Civics course may not achieve its end of fostering beneficial civic attitudes within students. It is accordingly implied that the course should be reformed in order to produce more preferable dispositional outcomes. It has been established that extensive civic socialization strategies can influence these more preferable dispositions. With the aim of improving students’ attitudes by the end of the Civics course, the LDOE should enforce alternative pedagogical approaches within the course. This study 

has discussed service learning, classroom debates, and case study-based instruction as means of delivering course content in ways that are more favorable to developing virtuous attitudes. This study’s results imply that action is necessary to implement more complete pedagogical approaches for the sake of developing attitudes. The literature strongly supports the notion that, in practice, these attitudes would be effectively developed through the employment of these aforementioned pedagogical approaches. 

Directions for Future Research 

Attitudes toward government and participation are developed by a variety of factors in students’ formative years. These factors include primary and secondary social studies education, pedagogical, socioeconomic origin, parental socialization, geography, and more than would be appropriate to list. A majority of existing literature fails in the regard that longitudinal data is not present. Students’ dispositions change throughout the course of their education, and, less frequently, into adulthood. Future research should aim to gather data at various benchmarks in the education of Louisiana students. Additionally, the education that these students receive should be uniform in delivery; pedagogical approaches, class activities, and chosen curricula should be identical. Furthermore, future research should account for students’ demographic characteristics. Seeing as students bear different attitudes based on their race or economic status, it is worth researching the extent to which civic education can influence the dispositions of students of various origins.