Ways U.S. Schools Can Tackle Political Polarization

(SeaPRwire) –   Polarization has emerged as one of the most defining threats to American democracy. Philosopher Robert B. Talisse differentiates between two types of polarization: political and belief-based polarization. 

Political polarization can be beneficial for democracy, he argues, as democracy “presupposes political disagreement” among citizens with firm convictions. “Any response to the challenge of sustaining democracy that asks citizens to set aside their differences is a dodge,” he writes. 

But belief polarization weakens democracy by fostering groupthink, pushing people to become dogmatic, “less responsive to counterevidence,” and hostile toward those with opposing views. This erodes the quality of our lives—ruining friendships, unsettling families, and amplifying anxiety. Polarization also hinders social progress, as it allows politicians to win elections by stoking toxic cultural tensions instead of tackling the hard work of solving complex societal issues.

To address these problems, some schools have turned to civics curricula, media literacy programs, and dialogue initiatives. These efforts are well-intentioned, and civics knowledge is essential. But they misdiagnose the issue. Polarization is more than a lack of knowledge—it’s a deficit in self-governance.

I believe citizenship requires habits that can only be developed through experience. People must coexist with disagreement while maintaining relationships within a shared community. You can’t lecture students into these abilities; they need to practice them consistently. 

Yet many students spend over a decade in schools that prioritize compliance over personal agency. In this context, more civics content—while valuable—leaves the underlying problem unaddressed. To tackle polarization and prepare students to be stewards of democratic life, we need to rethink the culture of schooling. 

The shift starts with how schools approach behavior. There’s a fundamental difference between managing students and teaching them to manage themselves. The first instills obedience; the second builds agency. “If we train our children to take orders, to do things simply because they are told to,” John and Evelyn Dewey wrote in 1915, “we are placing an almost insurmountable obstacle in the way of fixing the current flaws in our system and establishing the truth of democratic ideas.”

Agency and collective responsibility are core habits of democratic citizenship. One classroom solution is to invite students at the start of each school year to design behavioral norms: how they will treat one another and conduct themselves. This begins by asking students to share how they want to feel in school—for example, “protected,” “happy,” and “like I can be myself.” We then ask: if that’s your goal, how should you act? From these discussions, students can create a set of shared agreements. 

Students can reference these agreements throughout the year, including during daily acknowledgments and apologies at the end of the school day. One afternoon, I observed this in a fourth-grade classroom. “I want to apologize to Brandon,” one boy said. “In math class, I broke our commitment not to laugh when someone makes a mistake.” He looked at Brandon and said, “I’m sorry.” 

“That’s okay,” Brandon replied. It’s through such repeated daily actions that students begin to learn what it means to sustain a community.

Too often, civics education alone falls short if students learn how a bill becomes a law but spend 13 years in institutions that don’t ask them to exercise judgment, take responsibility, or maintain respectful relationships.  

Of course, every school needs rules and consequences, and students must be held accountable. But the deeper goal is to teach students to hold themselves accountable. This is how schools develop leaders, not followers: students capable of moral reasoning, reflection, and responsibility.

Students must be taught the value of thoughtful debate. They should be exposed to competing views and learn to articulate multiple sides of an issue. Instruction should also cultivate intellectual curiosity. When encountering a new idea, a well-educated student doesn’t immediately take a stance; instead, they approach it with humility and an interest in understanding its history, implications, and nuances. 

Schools must defend free inquiry, reject dogma, and prioritize the unencumbered search for truth. We need to teach students to reject the lazy path of conformity. We need to show them that citizenship requires standing by their views, regardless of popularity. Following the mob is neither cool nor sophisticated—and certainly not independent thinking.

I fear American public life has become more shallow, performative, and divided. But schools are one of the few places where democratic stewardship can still be intentionally cultivated. Failing to do so risks further eroding our politics, communities, and civic culture.

When the United States established public education, it did so with a clear belief: schools are essential incubators of democratic participation. As the nation approaches its 250th anniversary, we need our schools to live up to this grand vision.

To achieve this and build a less polarized country, we can’t simply add more civics courses. The real test isn’t whether students can describe democracy—it’s whether they’ve practiced it.