States across the United States have been implementing new requirements for civics education. Iowa recently enacted a law requiring students to pass a test based on the naturalization exam as a condition for graduation. Kentucky put into effect a law in 2024 mandating either a civic literacy course or a 100-question civics test. In Alaska, civics became a diploma requirement in June. Mississippi also passed a law in April that integrates civics into required coursework beginning in 2027. Meanwhile, the District of Columbia has opted for a distinct approach. Its social studies standards since 2024 focus on ‘engaging in civil discourse and taking informed action’ as key practices. The required government and civics course culminates in an advocacy capstone where students analyze a public policy issue and present a proposal defending a position or calling for action.
These initiatives aim to bolster civic knowledge and sometimes civic engagement. A survey conducted by the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute raises an important question about these formal requirements: whether they genuinely encourage students to engage in disagreements. The survey, which included recent high school graduates from 25 states and Washington, D.C., discussed how civics classes managed disagreements. Approximately 58% of respondents reported self-censoring their thoughts on political or civic topics due to concerns about peer reactions. Interestingly, 73% generally felt comfortable sharing their views, yet 51% admitted to self-censoring at least once, indicating that the silence is often context-specific.
Students cited classmates as their primary concern for self-censoring, with 91% pointing at their peers and 41% mentioning teachers. This shifts the focus of the debate away from adults like teachers, administrators, parents, and legislators, to the peers surrounding them. Similar concerns have been noted among young adults broadly. According to Harvard’s Fall 2025 Youth Poll, 47% of Americans aged 18 to 29 avoid political conversations due to fear of others’ reactions.
Self-censoring in civic education matters because understanding the American government and practicing citizenship involves forming views, explaining them, hearing opposing arguments, and working through disagreements. Suppressing opinions because of perceived social costs prevents students from testing their views against evidence or counterarguments, impeding the important aspect of citizenship practiced among peers.
Teachers remain crucial as they shape conditions where peer pressure influences classroom dynamics. According to the survey, 53% of respondents had witnessed teachers avoiding, abbreviating, or shutting down discussions about politics or current events. Furthermore, a separate 2025 survey targeting civics teachers revealed nearly 80% had self-censored or avoided topics to prevent pushback or controversy.
Various studies cited in the report provide insights into why peer influence is so significant. One study on 10th-grade social studies classes focused on controversial issues highlights that students’ perceptions of their peers often dictate participation more than teachers’ behavior. Other research indicates that students might misinterpret peer norms, assuming classmates’ thoughts differ from reality.
“The report’s recommendations are actionable in any classroom, including Washington D.C.’s capstone course. Teachers could use anonymous surveys to ask students if classmates who voice unpopular opinions deserve respectful treatment and if they believe most classmates would agree. Sharing results can mitigate misperceptions.”
Additional strategies involve assigning students to argue a position, anonymizing initial responses, and establishing rules against recording or sharing classmates’ remarks, especially given that 26% of self-censoring students feared social media repercussions. Training teachers in peer dynamics rather than purely discussion techniques could further create an inclusive environment.
A civics test verifies knowledge like the understanding of the three branches of government. However, proving a graduate’s willingness to defend an unpopular stance and maintain cordial relationships afterward is not guaranteed. The survey implies that such readiness is not assured.
Liam Julian, chief of programs and public policy at the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute, discusses these findings in the Institute’s new report, “Why Are Students Self-Censoring in Civics Class?” Available at oconnorinstitute.org/research2026.
© 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.