The Annual Benefit dinner for Discovering Justice is this evening, and I’d like to take the opportunity to highlight the organization, on whose board I serve. It is the most significant and effective group in the US that supports the civic education of younger children, grades k-8.

Relatively little is known about the lasting effects of civics at the lower grades–or even about what works best. Certainly, “civics” for younger children overlaps with character education, interpersonal skills, and personal behavior. It’s not all about laws, systems, and social issues. Discovering Justice takes a holistic approach. Still, even if we define “civics” narrowly, it is an appropriate topic for elementary students. The C3 (College, Career, and Citizenship) Framework identifies fairly specific civics content for grades k-2, shown at the right.

Kids are definitely able to learn these things. I cannot demonstrate that if they do, it will make a difference once they’re 30–especially if they get no reinforcement in between. But I’d be willing to bet that teaching these topics in elementary school is one component of an effective civic education. And the only way to find out is to develop, refine, improve, and test k-8 civics, which is the role that Discovering Justice has taken on.

I have an op-ed on FoxNews.com against the recent wave of state laws that require students to pass the US citizenship test. It begins:

Quick: how many amendments to the U.S. Constitution have been ratified?

The answer is 27. The question comes from the federal test required for new citizens. Arizona and North Dakota recently made passing that test a graduation requirement for all their high school students, and several other states are considering the idea.  I fear imposing this test will actually reduce the amount of civics our young people study and remember.

The federal citizenship test consists of 100 multiple-choice questions; individuals see a random sample of 10. The easiest way to prepare for it is to memorize the 100 right answers. When you see the key word “amendment,” you remember to choose “27.”

I argue against this test as a tool for improving civics. But the idea is well-intentioned and may do good if it prompts a discussion about what our kids should learn and how we should test them. Civics doesn’t get a lot of attention; those of us who try to raise its profile are rarely successful. This year’s debate about the citizenship test in high schools may have brought more visibility to the topic than anything that’s happened in all the years I’ve been involved with civics. In my Fox News piece, I ask readers to consider what a better assessment would look like. If legislators and other leaders ask themselves that question, we may see better policies–and then we should thank the proponents of the citizenship test for prompting this conversation.